Search

Background: Neonatal care is provided by various levels of healthcare facilities in South Africa. Intensive care for neonates is only provided at the higher levels, hence the need for transfers from lower-level to higher-level facilities (e.g. primary hospitals to tertiary hospitals) or across levels of facilities, particularly when life-threatening situations arise (e.g. cardiac deterioration, respiratory deterioration and desaturation). Aim: The aim of the study was to explore neonatologists' views regarding the neonatal transfer process and to describe the preparedness of advanced life support (ALS) paramedics to undertake such transfers. Setting: The setting consisted of neonatologists from three provinces i.e. KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng and Western cape. Method: A qualitative descriptive design was utilised in this study. Semistructured interviews were conducted on the public health hospitals in three provinces (N = 9; n = 3) with neonatologists (N = 7; n = 7) who were involved in the transfers of critically ill neonates. The process of thematic analysis was used. Results: The themes that emerged in this study were: an awareness of local contextual realities related to neonatal transfers, challenges evident within the context of neonatal transfers, decision-making around the transfer of ill neonates, ALS paramedic preparedness for transfers and good clinical governance Conclusion: The study found that there was a need to be aware of local contextual realities confronting neonatal transfers, a need for greater preparedness for paramedics to undertake these transfers, a need for a sound referral processes and a need for coordinated transfer effort between paramedics, hospital staff and transport team members for the successful transfer of critically ill neonates. Contribution: The findings highlight the challenges confronting the neonatal transfer process in South Africa through the lens of neonatologist at public hospitals. Hence, the study reinforces the preparedness and coordination of the transfer process, along with more efficient communication between paramedics, hospital staff and the transfer team. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The safe transfer of critically ill neonates is important for their survival. This calls for greater preparedness on the part of paramedics to effect these transfers safely. Aim: To understand the experiences and the challenges faced by advanced life support (ALS) paramedics during neonatal transfers. Setting: The study setting consisted of advanced life support paramedics from urban and rural areas in KwaZulu-Natal. It comprised of a network of district hospitals as well air and ground transfer facilities, both public and private. Method: Using a qualitative research approach, the study sought the views of ALS paramedics who were involved in neonatal transfers in KwaZulu-Natal. A purposive sample of n = 8 ALS paramedics was selected. Data were collected using in-depth semi-structured interviews. The data were analysed through the process of thematic analysis. Results: The study found that paramedics faced multiple complex challenges related to neonatal transfers. Poor pre-transfer preparation of the neonate, equipment related challenges, lack of clinical support available during transfers and pressure to effect inappropriate transfers were some of the challenges they faced. These challenges coupled with insufficient education and the lack of sub-speciality programmes to capacitate, rendered them unprepared to deal with neonatal transfers effectively. Conclusion: Emergency medicine needs to provide greater attention towards preparing all stakeholders for successful neonatal transfers. Contribution: The findings provide recommendations for a programme that will limit risks involved with, and support the inter-healthcare facility transfer of critically ill neonates in South Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Critically ill patients frequently require intrahospital transfer for diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, or transfer to the intensive care unit. Intrahospital transfer exposes patients to an increased risk of adverse events. The reported rate of adverse events ranges from 4.2% to 79% based on data from high income countries. There is limited data available on intrahospital transfers in the South African context. This study aimed to determine the incidence of adverse events during intrahospital transfer, the physiological effects of intrahospital transfer, identify potential risk factors for adverse events and determine if adverse events were associated with poor clinical outcomes. Methods: The study was a single-centre, prospective, observational study of adult patients undergoing transport between the operating theatre and the intensive care unit (or vice versa) of a tertiary academic hospital in South Africa. Demographic data, transfer data (including adverse events, and the physiological parameters of the patients before and after transfer), and intensive care unit outcome data was collected between September 2018 and May 2019. Results: Data on 94 transfers was collected. Adverse events occurred in 23.4% (95% CI 14.7-32.1%) of transfers. Clinical adverse events, namely hypotension requiring management, made up 55% of the adverse events, while the remaining were technical adverse events (32% monitor failure, 9% ventilator failure and 4% infusion pump failure). The median transfer time was 10 minutes. Patients who developed adverse events during transfer were significantly older (median age 48 years versus 37 years, p = 0.037) and were significantly more likely to be receiving inotropic support (81.8% versus 51.4%, OR 4.26; 95% CI 1.31-13.82, p = 0.011) than those who did not have adverse events. Only the association with inotropic support remained on multivariable analysis. Patients who suffered an adverse event during transfer had a significantly higher mortality than those who did not have an adverse event (63.6% versus 30.6%, OR 3.98; 95% CI 1.46-10.84, p = 0.005) on univariate analysis, however this association was no longer significant on multivariable analysis. Increasing age, inotropic support and transfer by a medical officer as opposed to a registrar remained significant predictors on multivariable analysis. Significant physiological changes were noted in 80.9% of patients, with 64.9% of patients showing deterioration in at least one physiological parameter. Conclusion: Adverse events are common during the transfer of critically ill patients between the operating theatre and the intensive care unit. Even in the absence of adverse events, physiological changes occur in the majority of patients undergoing transfer. Patients receiving inotropic support are at increased risk of adverse events during transfer and enhanced attention to pre-transfer preparation and intratransfer management is warranted in these patients. The potential associations between adverse events during transfer and transferring personnel and ICU mortality needs to be explored in further studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]