RESUMO
Introduction: Many studies have evaluated the Neonatal Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP), but few studies have assessed changes in infant- and family-centered developmental care (IFCDC) practices during its implementation. Objectives: The primary objective of this single center study was to investigate the impact of the implementation of the NIDCAP program on IFCDC practices used for management of extremely preterm infants (EPIs). The secondary objective was to determine during implementation the impact of this program on the short-term medical outcomes of all EPIs hospitalized at our center. Methods: All EPIs (<28 weeks gestational age) who were hospitalized at Strasbourg University Hospital from 2007 to 2014 were initially included. Outborn infants were excluded. The data of EPIs were compared for three time periods: 2007 to 2008 (pre-NIDCAP), 2010 to 2011, and 2013 to 2014 (during-NIDCAP implementation) using appropriate statistical tests. The clinical and caring procedures used during the first 14 days of life were analyzed, with a focus on components of individualized developmental care (NIDCAP observations), infant pain management (number of painful procedures, clinical pain assessment), skin-to-skin contact (SSC; frequency, day of initiation, and duration), and family access and involvement in the care of their children (duration of parental presence, parental participation in care). The short-term mortality and morbidity at discharge were evaluated. Results: We examined 228 EPIs who received care during the three time periods. Over time, painful procedures decreased, but pain evaluations, parental involvement in care, individualized observations, and SSC increased (all p < 0.01). In addition, the first SSC was performed earlier (p = 0.03) and lasted longer (p < 0.01). There were no differences in mortality and morbidity, but there were reductions in the duration of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.02) and the time from birth to first extubation (p = 0.02), and an increase of weight gain at discharge (p = 0.02). Conclusion: NIDCAP implementation was accompanied by progressive, measurable, and significant changes in IFCDC strategies. There were, concomitantly, moderate but statistically significant improvements in multiple important outcome measures of all hospitalized EPI.
RESUMO
AIM: Hospital light may affect neonatal neurosensory development and the well-being of parents and caregivers. We aimed to issue practical recommendations regarding the optimal light environment for neonatal units. METHODS: A systematic evaluation was performed using PubMed to identify relevant papers published in English or French up to July 2018, and the different grades of evidence were evaluated. RESULTS: We identified 89 studies and one meta-analysis and examined 31 eligible studies. The major results were that natural or artificial light should not exceed 1000 lux and that all changes in light level should be gradual. Light protection should be used for infants of <32 weeks of postmenstrual age and but must be individualised to each infant. Infants should not be exposed to continuous high light levels regardless of their term and postnatal age. Cycled light before discharge seemed to be safe and beneficial. For medical caregivers' well-being, higher light levels and access to natural light are recommended. Special attention should be given to protecting neonatal patients from high light levels that may be necessary when performing specific care procedures. CONCLUSION: Consideration of general principles and practical applications can improve the neonatal light environment for newborn infants, parents and caregivers.
