Managing Home Oxygen and Nasogastric Feeds Post-NICU Discharge: PCP Practices and Perspectives.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American journal of perinatology Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1055/a-2522-1708
Lauren A Beard, Blair W Weikel, Kathleen E Hannan, Amanda I Messinger, Stephanie L Bourque
{"title":"Managing Home Oxygen and Nasogastric Feeds Post-NICU Discharge: PCP Practices and Perspectives.","authors":"Lauren A Beard, Blair W Weikel, Kathleen E Hannan, Amanda I Messinger, Stephanie L Bourque","doi":"10.1055/a-2522-1708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>NICU graduates are frequently technology dependent including home oxygen, pulse oximetry, and/or nasogastric (NG) feedings. Primary care provider (PCP) perceptions, practices, and barriers to managing these infants are not well described, especially at altitude. We sought to 1) describe PCP comfort and 2) determine practices and barriers in managing this technology at higher altitudes.This cross-sectional survey assessed Colorado and Wyoming PCP perceptions and practices surrounding technology in NICU graduates. We explored bivariate analysis between clinic altitude, location, and provider's experience with comfort caring for infants discharged with technology using chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. Significant relationships were modeled using logistic regression for odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.Among 203 respondents, 82% were pediatricians, and 86% practiced in urban/suburban environments. Clinic altitude ranged 2,500-9,000 ft. PCPs endorsed comfort managing oxygen in term (92%) and moderately/late preterm infants (82%), versus 52% comfort in very/extremely preterm infants. 62% utilized an oxygen-weaning algorithm. Comfort managing oxygen was greater in suburban versus urban locations (odds ratio [OR] = 4.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-11.7) and providers practicing for >10 versus <5 years (OR = 3.5, 95% CI: 1.5, 8.4). 60% found pulse oximetry useful, though 70% perceived caregiver stress. 69% accepted infants on NG feeds, though 61% endorsed discomfort with management.PCPs are comfortable managing home oxygen in moderately preterm to term infants but find caring for most preterm infants challenging. Discomfort in managing NG feeds is prevalent. This highlights peridischarge barriers and improvement opportunities for high-risk, technology-dependent infants. · PCPs are uncomfortable managing very/extremely preterm infants on home oxygen after NICU discharge.. · PCPs perceive frequent commercial pulse oximetry use in NICU graduates.. · Most PCPs are uncomfortable managing home NG feedings..</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":"1638-1646"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2522-1708","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

NICU graduates are frequently technology dependent including home oxygen, pulse oximetry, and/or nasogastric (NG) feedings. Primary care provider (PCP) perceptions, practices, and barriers to managing these infants are not well described, especially at altitude. We sought to 1) describe PCP comfort and 2) determine practices and barriers in managing this technology at higher altitudes.This cross-sectional survey assessed Colorado and Wyoming PCP perceptions and practices surrounding technology in NICU graduates. We explored bivariate analysis between clinic altitude, location, and provider's experience with comfort caring for infants discharged with technology using chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. Significant relationships were modeled using logistic regression for odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.Among 203 respondents, 82% were pediatricians, and 86% practiced in urban/suburban environments. Clinic altitude ranged 2,500-9,000 ft. PCPs endorsed comfort managing oxygen in term (92%) and moderately/late preterm infants (82%), versus 52% comfort in very/extremely preterm infants. 62% utilized an oxygen-weaning algorithm. Comfort managing oxygen was greater in suburban versus urban locations (odds ratio [OR] = 4.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-11.7) and providers practicing for >10 versus <5 years (OR = 3.5, 95% CI: 1.5, 8.4). 60% found pulse oximetry useful, though 70% perceived caregiver stress. 69% accepted infants on NG feeds, though 61% endorsed discomfort with management.PCPs are comfortable managing home oxygen in moderately preterm to term infants but find caring for most preterm infants challenging. Discomfort in managing NG feeds is prevalent. This highlights peridischarge barriers and improvement opportunities for high-risk, technology-dependent infants. · PCPs are uncomfortable managing very/extremely preterm infants on home oxygen after NICU discharge.. · PCPs perceive frequent commercial pulse oximetry use in NICU graduates.. · Most PCPs are uncomfortable managing home NG feedings..

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
nicu出院后管理家庭氧气和鼻胃喂养:PCP的实践和观点。
目的:新生儿重症监护室毕业生经常依赖于技术,包括家庭氧气,脉搏血氧仪和/或鼻胃(NG)喂养。初级保健提供者(PCP)的观念、做法和管理这些婴儿的障碍没有很好地描述,特别是在高原地区。我们试图1)描述PCP的舒适性,2)确定在高海拔地区管理该技术的实践和障碍。研究设计:这项横断面调查评估了科罗拉多州和怀俄明州新生儿重症监护室毕业生对PCP技术的认知和实践。我们使用卡方检验或fisher精确检验探讨了诊所海拔、地点和提供者对出院婴儿的舒适护理经验之间的双变量分析。采用logistic回归对优势比和95%置信区间进行显著关系建模。结果:在200名受访者中,82%是儿科医生,86%在城市/郊区环境中执业。门诊高度在2500 - 9000英尺之间。pcp支持足月(92%)和中度/晚期早产儿(82%)管理氧气的舒适度,而非常/极度早产儿的舒适度为52%。62%的人使用了氧气脱机算法。与城市地区相比,郊区地区管理氧气的舒适度更高(OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.6-11.7),医疗服务提供者执业时间为10年与5年以下(OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.5, 8.4)。60%的人认为脉搏血氧仪很有用,但70%的人感到了照顾者的压力。69%的人接受婴儿喂食NG饲料,尽管61%的人对管理感到不适。结论:pcp在中度早产至足月婴儿的家庭氧气管理中是舒适的,但对大多数早产儿的护理具有挑战性。管理NG提要的不适是普遍存在的。这突出了高风险、依赖技术的婴儿的围出院期障碍和改善机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
期刊最新文献
Optimal Timing of Delivery in Pregnant Individuals with Pregestational Diabetes Mellitus. Predictive Factors of Fetal Cardiac Manifestations of Neonatal Lupus in Anti-SSA/Ro and/or SSB/La Antibody-Positive Pregnant Women. Perinatal Outcomes in Pregnancies Immediately following Stillbirth: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study. Association of Placental Pathology and Antibiotic Exposure after Birth with the Severity of Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Preterm Infants: A Case-Control Study. Effect of the 2022 AAP Guideline for Managing Hyperbilirubinemia in the Newborn.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1