OBJECTIVES: To measure the feasibility, reach, and potential impact of a virtual family-centered rounds (FCR) intervention in the neonatal intensive care unit. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled pilot trial with a 2:1 intervention-to-control arm allocation ratio. Caregivers of intervention arm neonates were invited to participate in virtual FCR plus standard of care. We specified 5 feasibility objectives. We profiled intervention usage by neonatal and maternal characteristics. Exploratory outcomes included FCR caregiver attendance, length of stay, breast milk feeding at discharge, caregiver experience, and medical errors. We performed descriptive analyses to calculate proportions, means, and rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We included 74 intervention and 36 control subjects. Three of the five feasibility objectives were met based on the point estimates. The recruitment and intervention uptake objectives were not achieved. Among intervention arm subjects, recruitment of a caregiver occurred for 47 (63.5%, 95% CI 51.5%-74.4%) neonates. Caregiver use of the intervention occurred for 36 (48.6%, 95% CI 36.8%-60.6%) neonates in the intervention arm. Feasibility objectives assessing technical issues, burden, and data collection were achieved. Among the attempted virtual encounters, 95.0% (95% CI 91.5%-97.3%) had no technical issues. The survey response rate was 87.5% (95% CI 78.2%-93.8%). Intervention arm neonates had 3.36 (95% CI 2.66%-4.23) times the FCR caregiver attendance rate of subjects in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS: A randomized trial to compare virtual FCR to standard of care in neonatal subjects is feasible and has potential to improve patient and caregiver outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To measure the feasibility, reach, and potential impact of a virtual family-centered rounds (FCR) intervention in the neonatal intensive care unit. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled pilot trial with a 2:1 intervention-to-control arm allocation ratio. Caregivers of intervention arm neonates were invited to participate in virtual FCR plus standard of care. We specified 5 feasibility objectives. We profiled intervention usage by neonatal and maternal characteristics. Exploratory outcomes included FCR caregiver attendance, length of stay, breast milk feeding at discharge, caregiver experience, and medical errors. We performed descriptive analyses to calculate proportions, means, and rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We included 74 intervention and 36 control subjects. Three of the five feasibility objectives were met based on the point estimates. The recruitment and intervention uptake objectives were not achieved. Among intervention arm subjects, recruitment of a caregiver occurred for 47 (63.5%, 95% CI 51.5%-74.4%) neonates. Caregiver use of the intervention occurred for 36 (48.6%, 95% CI 36.8%-60.6%) neonates in the intervention arm. Feasibility objectives assessing technical issues, burden, and data collection were achieved. Among the attempted virtual encounters, 95.0% (95% CI 91.5%-97.3%) had no technical issues. The survey response rate was 87.5% (95% CI 78.2%-93.8%). Intervention arm neonates had 3.36 (95% CI 2.66%-4.23) times the FCR caregiver attendance rate of subjects in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS: A randomized trial to compare virtual FCR to standard of care in neonatal subjects is feasible and has potential to improve patient and caregiver outcomes.
Authors: Dennis Z Kuo; Laura L Sisterhen; Ted E Sigrest; James M Biazo; Mary E Aitken; Christopher E Smith Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-07-09 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Amy J Starmer; Nancy D Spector; Rajendu Srivastava; Daniel C West; Glenn Rosenbluth; April D Allen; Elizabeth L Noble; Lisa L Tse; Anuj K Dalal; Carol A Keohane; Stuart R Lipsitz; Jeffrey M Rothschild; Matthew F Wien; Catherine S Yoon; Katherine R Zigmont; Karen M Wilson; Jennifer K O'Toole; Lauren G Solan; Megan Aylor; Zia Bismilla; Maitreya Coffey; Sanjay Mahant; Rebecca L Blankenburg; Lauren A Destino; Jennifer L Everhart; Shilpa J Patel; James F Bale; Jaime B Spackman; Adam T Stevenson; Sharon Calaman; F Sessions Cole; Dorene F Balmer; Jennifer H Hepps; Joseph O Lopreiato; Clifton E Yu; Theodore C Sectish; Christopher P Landrigan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sara L Toomey; Alan M Zaslavsky; Marc N Elliott; Patricia M Gallagher; Floyd J Fowler; David J Klein; Shanna Shulman; Jessica Ratner; Caitriona McGovern; Jessica L LeBlanc; Mark A Schuster Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Sandra M Eldridge; Claire L Chan; Michael J Campbell; Christine M Bond; Sally Hopewell; Lehana Thabane; Gillian A Lancaster Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-10-24
Authors: Rachel A Umoren; Megan M Gray; Sarah Handley; Nathaniel Johnson; Christina Kunimura; Ulrike Mietzsch; Zeenia Billimoria; Mark D Lo Journal: Am J Perinatol Date: 2020-04-08 Impact factor: 1.862