Katie Murphy1, Helen Coo1, Ruth Warre2, Vibhuti Shah3, Kimberly Dow1. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario. 2. Maternal-Infant Care Research Centre, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario. 3. Department of Pediatrics and Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are no evidence-based national guidelines for managing neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) and surveys from other countries have demonstrated considerable variations in practice. OBJECTIVE: To describe NAS management practices in Canada. METHOD: The directors of all Level 2 and Level 3 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) were contacted to request their participation in a structured telephone survey. Frequency distributions were generated and associations between practice variations and unit type (Level 2 or 3) and size were examined. RESULTS: Personnel at 65 of 103 sites (63.1%) participated. Most (92.3%) stated their hospital has a written NAS practice guideline. The majority (89.5%) use a version of Finnegan's scoring system to monitor signs. If pharmacological treatment is required, 89.2% admit infants to the NICU and 93.8% routinely use cardiorespiratory monitors when treatment is initiated. Morphine is the first-line medication at most sites (96.9%). There was greater variability in terms of other practices: 44.6% observe at-risk infants in the NICU, while 52.3% allow them to room-in with their mothers; 65.1% use adjunct medications; 36.9% and 38.9% will discharge infants on the first-line and adjunct medications respectively, and 53.8% reported that breastfeeding is always encouraged, while 44.6% discourage breastfeeding if the mother continues to use illicit drugs and 1.5% make recommendations on an individual basis. Few practice variations were associated with unit type or size. CONCLUSION: While most NICUs surveyed have an NAS practice guideline, there are some notable differences in how NAS is managed. This underscores the need for research that can be translated into best practices.
BACKGROUND: There are no evidence-based national guidelines for managing neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) and surveys from other countries have demonstrated considerable variations in practice. OBJECTIVE: To describe NAS management practices in Canada. METHOD: The directors of all Level 2 and Level 3 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) were contacted to request their participation in a structured telephone survey. Frequency distributions were generated and associations between practice variations and unit type (Level 2 or 3) and size were examined. RESULTS: Personnel at 65 of 103 sites (63.1%) participated. Most (92.3%) stated their hospital has a written NAS practice guideline. The majority (89.5%) use a version of Finnegan's scoring system to monitor signs. If pharmacological treatment is required, 89.2% admit infants to the NICU and 93.8% routinely use cardiorespiratory monitors when treatment is initiated. Morphine is the first-line medication at most sites (96.9%). There was greater variability in terms of other practices: 44.6% observe at-risk infants in the NICU, while 52.3% allow them to room-in with their mothers; 65.1% use adjunct medications; 36.9% and 38.9% will discharge infants on the first-line and adjunct medications respectively, and 53.8% reported that breastfeeding is always encouraged, while 44.6% discourage breastfeeding if the mother continues to use illicit drugs and 1.5% make recommendations on an individual basis. Few practice variations were associated with unit type or size. CONCLUSION: While most NICUs surveyed have an NAS practice guideline, there are some notable differences in how NAS is managed. This underscores the need for research that can be translated into best practices.
Authors: Suzanne D Turner; Tara Gomes; Ximena Camacho; Zhan Yao; Astrid Guttmann; Muhammad M Mamdani; David N Juurlink; Irfan A Dhalla Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2015-01-13
Authors: Ronald R Abrahams; S Ann Kelly; Sarah Payne; Paul N Thiessen; Jessica Mackintosh; Patricia A Janssen Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Jessica N Snowden; A Akshatha; Robert D Annett; Margaret M Crawford; Abhik Das; Lori A Devlin; Rosemary D Higgins; Zhuopei Hu; Elizabeth Lindsay; Stephanie Merhar; Clare Campbell Nesmith; Heather Pratt-Chavez; Judith Ross; Alan E Simon; M Cody Smith; Christine B Turley; Anita Walden; Leslie Young; Bonny Whalen Journal: Hosp Pediatr Date: 2019-07-19
Authors: Shikhar Shrestha; Melissa H Roberts; Jessie R Maxwell; Lawrence M Leeman; Ludmila N Bakhireva Journal: Neurotoxicol Teratol Date: 2021-03-23 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Flora Shan; Sonya MacVicar; Karel Allegaert; Martin Offringa; Lauren M Jansson; Sarah Simpson; Wendy Moulsdale; Lauren E Kelly Journal: Trials Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 2.279