The Power of Language in Hospital Care for Pregnant and Birthing People: A Vision for Change.

Language is commonly defined as the principal method of human communication made up of words and conveyed by writing, speech, or nonverbal expression. In the context of clinical care, language has power and meaning and reflects priorities, beliefs, values, and culture. Stigmatizing language can communicate unintended meanings that perpetuate socially constructed power dynamics and result in bias. This bias may harm pregnant and birthing people by centering positions of power and privilege and by reflecting cultural priorities in the United States, including judgments of demographic and reproductive health characteristics. This commentary builds on relationship-centered care and reproductive justice frameworks to analyze the role and use of language in pregnancy and birth care in the United States, particularly regarding people with marginalized identities. We describe the use of language in written documentation, verbal communication, and behaviors associated with caring for pregnant people. We also present recommendations for change, including alternative language at the individual, clinician, hospital, health systems, and policy levels. We define birth as the emergence of a new individual from the body of its parent, no matter what intervention or pathology may be involved. Thus, we propose a cultural shift in hospital-based care for birthing people that centers the birthing person and reconceptualizes all births as physiologic events, approached with a spirit of care, partnership, and support.

Just-in-Time Video Laryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Neonatal Intubation.

As neonatal endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a low-frequency, high-consequence event, it is essential that providers have access to resources to aid in ETI. We sought to determine the impact of video laryngoscopy (VL) with just-in-time training on intubation outcomes over direct laryngoscopy (DL) when performed by neonatal nurses. We conducted a prospective, randomized, crossover study with neonatal nurses employed at a level 2 neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Nurses performed both DL and VL on a neonatal mannequin using a CMAC (Karl Storz Corp, Tuttlingen, Germany) either with the assistance of the screen (VL) or without (DL). Before performing the intubation, providers were given a just-in-time, brief education presentation and allowed to practice with the device. Each ETI attempt was reviewed to obtain the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, time to intubation (TTI, time from insertion of the blade into the mouth until the first breath was delivered), and time from blade insertion until the best POGO score. We enrolled 19 participants, with a median (interquartile range) of 20 (9-26) years of experience and having a median of 2 (1-3) intubations within the past year. None had used VL in the NICU previously. Median TTI did not differ between DL and VL: 19.9 (15.3-41.5) vs 20.3 (17.9-24.4) (P = 1). POGO scores and the number of attempts also did not differ between DL and VL. In our simulated setting, just-in-time VL training provided similar intubation outcomes compared with DL in ETI performed by neonatal nurses. Just-in-time VL education may be an alternative to traditional DL for neonatal intubations.