Cargando…

Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting

BACKGROUND: Delayed umbilical cord clamping (DCC) permits placental-to-newborn transfusion and results in an increased neonatal blood volume at birth. Despite endorsement by numerous medical governing bodies, DCC in preterm newborns has been slow to be adopted into practice. The purpose of this arti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McAdams, Ryan M, Backes, Carl H, Hutchon, David J R
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4823694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27057327
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40748-015-0011-8
_version_ 1782425964495503360
author McAdams, Ryan M
Backes, Carl H
Hutchon, David J R
author_facet McAdams, Ryan M
Backes, Carl H
Hutchon, David J R
author_sort McAdams, Ryan M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Delayed umbilical cord clamping (DCC) permits placental-to-newborn transfusion and results in an increased neonatal blood volume at birth. Despite endorsement by numerous medical governing bodies, DCC in preterm newborns has been slow to be adopted into practice. The purpose of this article is to provide a framework to guide medical providers interested in implementing DCC in a hospital setting. A descriptive implementation guideline is presented based on the author’s personal experiences and the steps taken at the University of Washington (UW) to implement DCC in premature newborns <37 weeks’ gestational age. Quality improvement data was obtained to assess compliance with DCC performance over the initial six months following initiation of the treatment protocol in July 2014. An anonymous electronic survey was administered to obstetrical providers in January 2015 to assess DCC policy awareness and adherence. RESULTS: Important steps to consider regarding implementation of DCC in a hospital settings include applying a multidisciplinary educational approach aimed at motivating potential stakeholders potentially impacted by DCC, addressing safety concerns regarding DCC, and developing a standardized DCC treatment protocol. In the first month following DCC protocol implementation at UW, 79.2% (19/24) of premature newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit received DCC, but compliance decreased over time, with DCC documented in only 40.1% (61/150) of newborns during the 6-month period following implementation. The majority of obstetrician survey respondents (90.9%, 20/22) were aware of the UW DCC policy for preterm deliveries, had performed DCC in the past 6 months (95.5%, 21/22), felt that they had sufficient understanding of the risks and benefits of DCC (90.9%, 20/22) and cited concerns for maternal hemorrhage and the need to resuscitate the baby as the main reasons to perform immediate cord clamping instead of DCC. CONCLUSION: Healthcare providers interested in implementing DCC may benefit from a procedural practice plan that includes an assessment of organizational readiness to adopt a DCC protocol, methods to measure and encourage staff compliance, and ways to track outcome data of infants who underwent DCC. Strategies to improve protocol awareness after DCC has been implemented are recommended since compliance may decrease over time.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4823694
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48236942016-04-07 Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting McAdams, Ryan M Backes, Carl H Hutchon, David J R Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol Research Article BACKGROUND: Delayed umbilical cord clamping (DCC) permits placental-to-newborn transfusion and results in an increased neonatal blood volume at birth. Despite endorsement by numerous medical governing bodies, DCC in preterm newborns has been slow to be adopted into practice. The purpose of this article is to provide a framework to guide medical providers interested in implementing DCC in a hospital setting. A descriptive implementation guideline is presented based on the author’s personal experiences and the steps taken at the University of Washington (UW) to implement DCC in premature newborns <37 weeks’ gestational age. Quality improvement data was obtained to assess compliance with DCC performance over the initial six months following initiation of the treatment protocol in July 2014. An anonymous electronic survey was administered to obstetrical providers in January 2015 to assess DCC policy awareness and adherence. RESULTS: Important steps to consider regarding implementation of DCC in a hospital settings include applying a multidisciplinary educational approach aimed at motivating potential stakeholders potentially impacted by DCC, addressing safety concerns regarding DCC, and developing a standardized DCC treatment protocol. In the first month following DCC protocol implementation at UW, 79.2% (19/24) of premature newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit received DCC, but compliance decreased over time, with DCC documented in only 40.1% (61/150) of newborns during the 6-month period following implementation. The majority of obstetrician survey respondents (90.9%, 20/22) were aware of the UW DCC policy for preterm deliveries, had performed DCC in the past 6 months (95.5%, 21/22), felt that they had sufficient understanding of the risks and benefits of DCC (90.9%, 20/22) and cited concerns for maternal hemorrhage and the need to resuscitate the baby as the main reasons to perform immediate cord clamping instead of DCC. CONCLUSION: Healthcare providers interested in implementing DCC may benefit from a procedural practice plan that includes an assessment of organizational readiness to adopt a DCC protocol, methods to measure and encourage staff compliance, and ways to track outcome data of infants who underwent DCC. Strategies to improve protocol awareness after DCC has been implemented are recommended since compliance may decrease over time. BioMed Central 2015-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4823694/ /pubmed/27057327 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40748-015-0011-8 Text en © McAdams et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
McAdams, Ryan M
Backes, Carl H
Hutchon, David J R
Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
title Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
title_full Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
title_fullStr Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
title_full_unstemmed Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
title_short Steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
title_sort steps for implementing delayed cord clamping in a hospital setting
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4823694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27057327
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40748-015-0011-8
work_keys_str_mv AT mcadamsryanm stepsforimplementingdelayedcordclampinginahospitalsetting
AT backescarlh stepsforimplementingdelayedcordclampinginahospitalsetting
AT hutchondavidjr stepsforimplementingdelayedcordclampinginahospitalsetting