Explore the vast range of titles available.

Abstract The survival of babies born extremely preterm (EP, <28 weeks gestation) has improved over time, and many have good outcomes and quality of life. They remain at risk for health issues, including neurosensory and neurodevelopmental difficulties requiring monitoring by primary physicians, paediatricians, and specialty clinics. This statement reviews potential medical and neurodevelopmental consequences for EP infants in the first 2 years after discharge and provides strategies for counselling, early detection, and intervention. EP-related conditions to assess for early include bronchopulmonary dysplasia or respiratory morbidity, feeding and growth concerns, neurosensory development (vision and hearing), cerebral palsy, and autism spectrum disorder. Correction for gestational age should be used for growth and development until 36 months of age. Integral to quality care of the child born EP is attention to the emotional well-being of parents and caregivers.

ObjectivesIdentify determinants of neurodevelopmental outcome in preterm children.MethodsProspective national cohort study of children born between 2009 and 2011 at <29 weeks gestational age, admitted to one of 28 Canadian neonatal intensive care units and assessed at a Canadian Neonatal Follow-up Network site at 21 months corrected age for cerebral palsy (CP), visual, hearing and developmental status using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-Third Edition (Bayley-III). Stepwise regression analyses evaluated the effect of (1) prenatal and neonatal characteristics, (2) admission severity of illness, (3) major neonatal morbidities, (4) neonatal neuroimaging abnormalities, and (5) site on neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) (Bayley-III score < 85, any CP, visual or hearing impairment), significant neurodevelopmental impairment (sNDI) (Bayley-III < 70, severe CP, blind or hearing aided and sNDI or death.ResultsOf the 3700 admissions without severe congenital anomalies, 84% survived to discharge and of the 2340 admissions, 46% (IQR site variation 38%–51%) had a NDI, 17% (11%–23%) had a sNDI, 6.4% (3.1%–8.6%) had CP, 2.6% (2.5%–13.3%) had hearing aids or cochlear implants and 1.6% (0%–3.1%) had a bilateral visual impairment. Bayley-III composite scores of <70 for cognitive, language and motor domains were 3.3%, 10.9% and 6.7%, respectively. Gestational age, sex, outborn, illness severity, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotising enterocolitis, late-onset sepsis, retinopathy of prematurity, abnormal neuroimaging and site were significantly associated with NDI or sNDI. Site variation ORs for NDI, sNDI and sNDI/death ranged from 0.3–4.3, 0.04–3.5 and 0.12–1.96, respectively.ConclusionMost preterm survivors are free of sNDI. The risk factors, including site, associated with neurodevelopmental status suggest opportunities for improving outcomes.

IntroductionHearing aids are the gold standard treatment to help manage hearing loss. However, not everyone who needs them has them, and of those who do, a significant proportion of people do not use them at all, or use them infrequently. Despite literature reviews listing key barriers and enablers to the uptake and use of hearing aids, there is little evidence to describe how this varies by population and context. This review will describe what factors are important to whom in what context when considering the provision of hearing aids for hearing loss in adults.Methods and analysisThe aims of this review are as follows: (1) To iteratively review and synthesise evidence surrounding the provision of hearing aids for hearing loss in adults. (2) To generate a theory-driven understanding of factors that are important, for whom, and in what context. (3) To develop a programme theory describing contexts that can support the provision of hearing aids to result in improved outcomes for adults with hearing loss. A scoping literature search will aid the development of programme theories, to explain how the intervention is expect to work, for whom, in what circumstances and in which contexts. We will locate evidence in the following databases: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMED, Web of Science with no date restrictions. A realist analytic approach will be used to refute and refine these initial programme theories. Throughout the review, relevant key stakeholders (eg, patients and clinicians) will be consulted to test and refine the programme theories.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the University of Nottingham Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee: (FMHS 95-0820) and the London Brent NHS Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 21/PR/0259). The review will be reported according to the RAMESES guidelines and published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021282049.

Advances in neuroimaging of the preterm infant have enhanced the ability to detect brain injury. This added information has been a blessing and a curse. Neuroimaging, particularly with magnetic resonance imaging, has provided greater insight into the patterns of injury and specific vulnerabilities. It has also provided a better understanding of the microscopic and functional impacts of subtle and significant injuries. While the ability to detect injury is important and irresistible, the evidence for how these injuries link to specific long-term outcomes is less clear. In addition, the impact on parents can be profound. This narrative summary will review the history and current state of brain imaging, focusing on magnetic resonance imaging in the preterm population and the current state of the evidence for how these patterns relate to long-term outcomes.

The General Movements Assessment requires extensive training. As an alternative, a novel automated movement analysis was developed and validated in preterm infants. Infants < 31 weeks’ gestational age or birthweight ≤ 1500 g evaluated at 3–5 months using the general movements assessment were included in this ambispective cohort study. The C-statistic, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated for a predictive model. A total of 252 participants were included. The median gestational age and birthweight were 274/7 weeks (range 256/7–292/7 weeks) and 960 g (range 769–1215 g), respectively. There were 29 cases of cerebral palsy (11.5%) at 18–24 months, the majority of which (n = 22) were from the retrospective cohort. Mean velocity in the vertical direction, median, standard deviation, and minimum quantity of motion constituted the multivariable model used to predict cerebral palsy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were 55%, 80%, 26%, and 93%, respectively. C-statistic indicated good fit (C = 0.74). A cluster of four variables describing quantity of motion and variability of motion was able to predict cerebral palsy with high specificity and negative predictive value. This technology may be useful for screening purposes in very preterm infants; although, the technology likely requires further validation in preterm and high-risk term populations.

Résumé La survie des extrêmes prématurés (moins de 28 semaines d’âge gestationnel) s’est améliorée au fil du temps. Bon nombre s’en sortent bien et ont une bonne qualité de vie. Ils demeurent toutefois vulnérables à des problèmes de santé, y compris des difficultés neurosensorielles et neurodéveloppementales, que les médecins de première ligne, les pédiatres et les cliniques spécialisées doivent surveiller. Le présent document de principes passe en revue les conséquences médicales et neurodéveloppementales potentielles pour les extrêmes prématurés dans les deux ans suivant leur congé et fournit des stratégies de counseling, de dépistage précoce et d’intervention. Parce qu’ils sont tous liés à l’extrême prématurité, la dysplasie bronchopulmonaire ou les troubles respiratoires, les problèmes d’alimentation et de croissance, le développement neurosensoriel (vision et audition), la paralysie cérébrale et le trouble du spectre de l’autisme doivent faire rapidement l’objet d’une évaluation. Pour évaluer la croissance et le développement, il faut corriger l’âge chronologique en fonction de l’âge gestationnel jusqu’à 36 mois de vie. Par ailleurs, l’attention au bien-être émotionnel des parents et des proches fait partie intégrante des soins de qualité de l’extrême prématuré.

Objective: To determine the association between postnatal age (PNA) at first administration of systemic postnatal steroids (sPNS) for bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and mortality or significant neurodevelopmental impairment (sNDI) at 18–24 months corrected age (CA) in infants < 29 weeks’ gestation. Methods: Data from the Canadian Neonatal Network and Canadian Neonatal Follow-up Network databases were used to conduct this retrospective cohort study. Infants exposed to sPNS for BPD after the 1st week of age were included and categorized into 8 groups based on the postnatal week of the exposure. The primary outcome was a composite of mortality or sNDI. A multivariable logistic regression model adjusting for potential confounders was used to determine the association between the sPNS and ND outcomes. Results: Of the 10,448 eligible infants, follow-up data were available for 6200 (59.3%) infants. The proportion of infants at first sPNS administration was: 8%, 17.5%, 23.1%, 18.7%, 12.6%, 8.3%, 5.8%, and 6% in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8–9th, and ≥10th week of PNA respectively. No significant association between the timing of sPNS administration and the composite outcome of mortality or sNDI was observed. The odds of sNDI and Bayley-III motor composite < 70 increased by 1.5% (95% CI 0.4, 2.9%) and 2.6% (95% CI 0.9, 4.4%), respectively, with each one-week delay in the age of initiation of sPNS. Conclusions: No significant association was observed between the composite outcome of mortality or sNDI and PNA of sPNS. Among survivors, each week’s delay in initiation of sPNS may increase the odds of sNDI and motor delay.

Open spina bifida (OSB) is one of the most common congenital central nervous system defects and leads to long-term physical and cognitive disabilities. Open fetal surgery for OSB improves neurological outcomes and reduces the need for ventriculoperitoneal shunting, compared to postnatal surgery, but is associated with a significant risk of prematurity and maternal morbidity. Fetoscopic surgery comes with less maternal morbidity, yet the question remains whether the procedure is neuroprotective and reduces prematurity. Comparison of outcomes between different treatment options is challenging due to inconsistent outcome reporting. We aim to develop and disseminate a core outcome set (COS) for fetal OSB, to ensure that outcomes relevant to all stakeholders are collected and reported in a standardised fashion in future studies. The COS will be developed using a validated Delphi methodology. A systematic literature review will be performed to identify outcomes previously reported for prenatally diagnosed OSB. We will assess maternal (primary and subsequent pregnancies), fetal, neonatal and childhood outcomes until adolescence. In a second phase, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, to ensure representation of additional relevant outcomes that may not have been reported in the literature. We will include patients and parents, as well as health professionals involved in the care of these pregnancies and children (fetal medicine specialists, fetal surgeons, neonatologists/paediatricians and allied health). Subsequently, an international group of key stakeholders will rate the importance of the identified outcomes using three sequential online rounds of a modified Delphi Survey. Final agreement on outcomes to be included in the COS, their definition and measurement will be achieved through a face-to-face consensus meeting with all stakeholder groups. Dissemination of the final COS will be ensured through different media and relevant societies. Development and implementation of a COS for fetal OSB will ensure consistent outcome reporting in future clinical trials, systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines. This will lead to higher quality research, better evidence-based clinical practice and ultimately improved maternal, fetal and long-term childhood outcomes.

Our primary objective for this follow-up study was to compare the neurodevelopmental outcomes of a surviving cohort of infants using a split-week gestational model (early versus late) gestational age (GA) and the standard completed GA categorization. Neurodevelopmental outcomes using a split-week GA model defined as early (X, 0–3) and late (X, 4–6), with X being 23–26 weeks GA, were compared to outcomes using completed weeks GA. In total, 1012 infants were included in the study. Statistically significant differences were noted in outcomes between the early and late split of the gestational week at 23 weeks (early vs. late), with 13.3% vs. 54.5% for no neurodevelopmental impairment, and 53.3% vs. 22.7% for significant impairment (p = 0.034), respectively. There were no differences seen in the split week model for 24, 25, and 26 weeks. A trend towards improved neurodevelopmental outcomes was seen with each increasing gestation week. The split-week model did not provide additional information for pregnancies and infants between 24 and 26 weeks gestation. It did, however, provide information for counsel for infants at 23 weeks gestation, showing benefits in the late versus early half of the week.