Search

Objective: This study sought to determine the incidence and severity of respiratory morbidity among late preterm and term babies born by elective Caesarean section (CS) in London, Ontario., Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted of all elective CSs performed at or beyond 36 0 weeks gestation from June 2010 to June 2014 at London Health Sciences Centre and St. Joseph's Health Care (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2)., Results: The main indications for elective CS were previous CS (59.3%) and malpresentation (24.2%). The majority of elective CSs were performed at 38 weeks (34.1%) and 39 weeks (40.1%). Although only 3.7% of babies born by elective CS were found to have respiratory morbidity, 85% of these babies were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and 15% required additional observation through a triage period. The relative risk of respiratory morbidity with elective CS at ≤38 6 weeks compared with ≥39 0 weeks was 2.14 (P = 0.0110). Only 3.5% of patients received antenatal steroids. There was an increased level of intervention among the babies admitted to the NICU for respiratory morbidity; 47.8%, 19.6%, 60.8%, and 15.25% required oxygen supplement, bag and mask, continuous positive airway pressure, and intubation with mechanical ventilation, respectively., Conclusion: The risk of respiratory morbidity was significantly higher following elective CS before 39 weeks gestation. This resulted in increased length of stay and increased requirements for intravenous lines, blood draws, and exposure to antibiotics. This study provides further evidence that uncomplicated elective CS should be performed at ≥39 weeks, and interventions, such as preoperative antenatal steroid administration, may be considered if elective CS is medically indicated before 39 weeks., (Copyright © 2018 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To increase our understanding of moral distress experienced by neonatal registered nurses when directly or indirectly involved in the decision-making process of resuscitating infants who are born extremely premature., Design: A secondary qualitative analysis was conducted on a portion of the data collected from an earlier study which explored the ethical decision-making process among health professionals and parents concerning resuscitation of extremely premature infants., Setting: A regional, tertiary academic referral hospital in Ontario offering a perinatal program., Participants: A total of 15 registered nurses were directly or indirectly involved in the resuscitation of extremely premature infants., Methods: Interview transcripts of nurses from the original study were purposefully selected from the original 42 transcripts of health professionals. Inductive content analysis was conducted to identify themes describing factors and situations contributing to moral distress experienced by nurses regarding resuscitation of extremely premature infants., Ethical Considerations: Ethical approval was obtained from the research ethics review board for both the initial study and this secondary data analysis., Results: Five themes, uncertainty, questioning of informed consent, differing perspectives, perceptions of harm and suffering, and being with the family, contribute to the moral distress felt by nurses when exposed to neonatal resuscitation of extremely premature infants. An interesting finding was the nurses' perceived lack of power and influence in the neonatal resuscitation decision-making process., Conclusion: Moral distress continues to be a significant issue for nursing practice, particularly among neonatal nurses. Strategies are needed to help mediate the moral distress experienced by nurses, such as debriefing sessions, effective communication, role clarification, and interprofessional education and collaboration., (© The Author(s) 2014.)

The purpose of this study was to identify supplementary criteria to provide direction when the Ontario Health Plan for an Influenza Pandemic (OHPIP) critical care triage protocol is rendered insufficient by its inability to discriminate among patients assessed as urgent, and there are insufficient critical care resources available to treat those in that category. To accomplish this task, a Supplementary Criteria Task Force for Critical Care Triage was struck at the University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics. The task force reviewed publically available protocols and policies on pandemic flu planning, identified 13 potential triage criteria and determined a set of eight key ethical, legal and practical considerations against which it assessed each criterion. An online questionnaire was distributed to clinical, policy and community stakeholders across Canada to obtain feedback on the 13 potential triage criteria toward selecting those that best met the eight considerations. The task force concluded that the balance of arguments favoured only two of the 13 criteria it had identified for consideration: first come, first served and random selection. The two criteria were chosen in part based on a need to balance the clearly utilitarian approach employed in the OHPIP with equity considerations. These criteria serve as a defensible "fail safe" mechanism for any triage protocol., (Copyright © 2014 Longwoods Publishing.)