OBJECTIVE: A mandate exists that all level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) provide a means to assess and follow their high-risk neonates after discharge. However, no standardized guidelines exist for the follow-up services provided. To determine trends of structure and care provided in NICU follow-up clinics in both the academic and private clinical setting. STUDY DESIGN: We sent an Internet survey to NICU follow-up clinic directors at both academically affiliated and private centers. This study received institutional review board exemption. RESULT: We received 89 surveys from academic institutions and 94 from private level III follow-up programs. These responses represent 55% of academic programs and 40% of private programs in the United States. Similar to academic institutions, 18% of private NICU follow-up clinics provide primary care services to patients. In both settings, the hospital supports 60% of the funding required for clinic activities. Forty-five percent of NICU graduates seen in both private and academic follow-up clinics have public aid as their primary insurance. Eighty-five percent of NICUs in both settings have guidelines outlining requirements for referrals to the follow-up clinic. Academic programs find feeding difficulties the most difficult, whereas private programs find bronchopulmonary dysplasia and feeding difficulties equally as difficult. CONCLUSION: The care and struggles of NICU follow-up clinics are similar in both the academic affiliated and private settings. Similar referrals, clinical evaluation and medical care occur with varying struggles.
OBJECTIVE: A mandate exists that all level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) provide a means to assess and follow their high-risk neonates after discharge. However, no standardized guidelines exist for the follow-up services provided. To determine trends of structure and care provided in NICU follow-up clinics in both the academic and private clinical setting. STUDY DESIGN: We sent an Internet survey to NICU follow-up clinic directors at both academically affiliated and private centers. This study received institutional review board exemption. RESULT: We received 89 surveys from academic institutions and 94 from private level III follow-up programs. These responses represent 55% of academic programs and 40% of private programs in the United States. Similar to academic institutions, 18% of private NICU follow-up clinics provide primary care services to patients. In both settings, the hospital supports 60% of the funding required for clinic activities. Forty-five percent of NICU graduates seen in both private and academic follow-up clinics have public aid as their primary insurance. Eighty-five percent of NICUs in both settings have guidelines outlining requirements for referrals to the follow-up clinic. Academic programs find feeding difficulties the most difficult, whereas private programs find bronchopulmonary dysplasia and feeding difficulties equally as difficult. CONCLUSION: The care and struggles of NICU follow-up clinics are similar in both the academic affiliated and private settings. Similar referrals, clinical evaluation and medical care occur with varying struggles.
Authors: Marilyn Ballantyne; Bonnie Stevens; Astrid Guttmann; Andrew R Willan; Peter Rosenbaum Journal: J Perinat Neonatal Nurs Date: 2012 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 1.638
Authors: Steve Berman; Michael Rannie; Laurie Moore; Ellen Elias; Leonard J Dryer; M Douglas Jones Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: R S Broyles; J E Tyson; E T Heyne; R J Heyne; J F Hickman; M Swint; S S Adams; L A West; N Pomeroy; P J Hicks; C Ahn Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-10-25 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Amery Treble-Barna; Sue R Beers; Amy J Houtrow; Roberto Ortiz-Aguayo; Cynthia Valenta; Meg Stanger; Maddie Chrisman; Maxine Orringer; Craig M Smith; Dorothy Pollon; Mark Duffett; Karen Choong; R Scott Watson; Patrick M Kochanek; Ericka L Fink Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Michelle M Greene; M E Schoeny; Julia Berteletti; Sarah A Keim; Mary Lauren Neel; Kousiki Patra; Shea Smoske; Susan Breitenstein Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Fawaz Albaghli; Paige Church; Marilyn Ballantyne; Alberta Girardi; Anne Synnes Journal: Paediatr Child Health Date: 2019-11-29 Impact factor: 2.253
Authors: Joseph M Collaco; Michael C Tracy; Catherine A Sheils; Jessica L Rice; Lawrence M Rhein; Leif D Nelin; Paul E Moore; Winston M Manimtim; Jonathan C Levin; Khanh Lai; Lystra P Hayden; Julie L Fierro; Eric D Austin; Stamatia Alexiou; Amit Agarwal; Natalie Villafranco; Roopa Siddaiah; Antonia P Popova; Ioana A Cristea; Christopher D Baker; Manvi Bansal; Sharon A McGrath-Morrow Journal: Pediatr Pulmonol Date: 2022-04-26
Authors: Joseph M Collaco; Brianna C Aoyama; Jessica L Rice; Sharon A McGrath-Morrow Journal: Expert Rev Respir Med Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 3.772
Authors: Julie C Fitzgerald; Nancy-Ann Kelly; Christopher Hickey; Fran Balamuth; Nina H Thomas; Annique Hogan; Noelle J Stack; Tara Trimarchi; Scott L Weiss Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 3.418