19 Quality Improvement bundled approach reduces the use of inotropes in extremely premature babies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Consensus on definition and management of hypotension in preterm neonates is lacking. Owing to this, there are wide variations in the reported incidence of hypotension in premature infants, especially during first week of life. Inotropes can often cause vasoconstriction, which may alter brain perfusion especially in the absence of established cerebral autoregulation. Use of these drugs is associated with multiple short- and long-term morbidities. Objectives To evaluate the effect of quality improvement (QI) bundle on rate of inotrope use and associated morbidities. Design/Methods Inborn preterm neonates born at <29weeks gestational age (GA) and admitted to level III NICU were included. Neonates with major congenital malformations, congenital heart diseases, antenatal diagnosed genetic defects, and neonates admitted after 72 hours of age were excluded from the study. We implemented a QI bundle (Figure 1) focussing on first 72hours from birth which included delayed cord clamping, avoidance of routine echocardiography, addition of clinical criteria to define hypotension, factoring iatrogenic causes of hypotension (ruling out lung hyperinflation), and standardization of respiratory management. Rate of use of inotropes in the first 72hours of life along with acute brain injury and mortality before and after implementation of the QI bundle were compared. The balancing measure was the rate of ischemic lesions in the form of cPVL. Cranial ultrasound was performed to screen for brain injury. Study was approved by the local research ethics board (REB14-1466). Results We included 671 neonates (301 before and 364 after the implementation of the bundle) among which 6 neonates were excluded based on the criteria. QI bundle implementation was associated with significant reduction in overall use of inotropes (24% vs 7%, p<0.001), dopamine (18% vs 5%, p<0.001), and dobutamine (17% vs 4%, p<0.001). Rate of acute brain injury decreased significantly: Acute brain injury of any grade (34% vs 20%, p<0.001) and severe brain injury (15% vs 6%, p<0.001). There was no difference in incidence of cPVL (1% vs 1.4%, p=0.66). Associations remained significant after adjusting for confounding factors. The QI bundle implementation was associated with a significant reduction in the use of inotropes when analyzed based on the 6 monthly time intervals (p = 0.006) (Figure 2) Conclusion Our QI bundled approach resulted in reduction in inotrope use and associated brain morbidities in premature babies. Follow-up studies evaluating the impact of this initiative on long-term outcomes in survivors are required to complement findings of improved short-term outcomes seen in this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".