Skip to main content
Archives of Disease in Childhood logoLink to Archives of Disease in Childhood
. 1984 Oct;59(10):957–961. doi: 10.1136/adc.59.10.957

Handling during neonatal intensive care.

D R Murdoch, B A Darlow
PMCID: PMC1628870  PMID: 6497433

Abstract

The handling received by very low birthweight newborns undergoing intensive care in the first few days of life and the effects of this were studied. Infants were handled an average of 4.3 hours (18%) of the total 24 hour observation time and received a mean 234 handling procedures. Parental handling contributed 35% of the total time but was usually benign except in that it could interfere with the infant's rest. Many procedures were associated with undesirable consequences. Endotracheal suctioning was invariably associated with hypoxaemia and was often carried out more frequently, or took longer, than was optimal. Transcutaneous oxygen monitoring, although considered routine for all intensive care infants, was only carried out for 50% of the observation time and often did not accompany periods of likely intensive handling. Increasing technology in neonatal intensive care often results in increased handling of sick infants. Each new innovation, as well as routine procedures, should be viewed in the light of the continuum of neonatal intensive care events, and handling kept to a minimum.

Full text

PDF
957

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Danford D. A., Miske S., Headley J., Nelson R. M. Effects of routine care procedures on transcutaneous oxygen in neonates: a quantitative approach. Arch Dis Child. 1983 Jan;58(1):20–23. doi: 10.1136/adc.58.1.20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Is intensive care becoming too intensive? Pediatrics. 1977 Jun;59 (Suppl)(6 Pt 2):1064–1065. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kitchen W. H., Yu V. Y., Lissenden J. V., Bajuk B. Collaborative study of very-low-birthweight infants: Techniques of perinatal care and mortality. Lancet. 1982 Jun 26;1(8287):1454–1457. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(82)92463-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Kitchen W. H., Yu V. Y., Orgill A., Ford G. W., Rickards A., Astbury J., Ryan M. M., Russo W., Lissenden J. V., Bajuk B. Collaborative study of very-low-birthweight infants: Outcome of two-year-old survivors. Lancet. 1982 Jun 26;1(8287):1457–1460. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(82)92464-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Long J. G., Lucey J. F., Philip A. G. Noise and hypoxemia in the intensive care nursery. Pediatrics. 1980 Jan;65(1):143–145. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Long J. G., Philip A. G., Lucey J. F. Excessive handling as a cause of hypoxemia. Pediatrics. 1980 Feb;65(2):203–207. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Perlman J. M., Volpe J. J. Suctioning in the preterm infant: effects on cerebral blood flow velocity, intracranial pressure, and arterial blood pressure. Pediatrics. 1983 Sep;72(3):329–334. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Simbruner G., Coradello H., Fodor M., Havelec L., Lubec G., Pollak A. Effect of tracheal suction on oxygenation, circulation, and lung mechanics in newborn infants. Arch Dis Child. 1981 May;56(5):326–330. doi: 10.1136/adc.56.5.326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Speidel B. D. Adverse effects of routine procedures on preterm infants. Lancet. 1978 Apr 22;1(8069):864–866. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(78)90204-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Stewart A. L., Reynolds E. O., Lipscomb A. P. Outcome for infants of very low birthweight: survey of world literature. Lancet. 1981 May 9;1(8228):1038–1040. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(81)92198-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Archives of Disease in Childhood are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES