Physiological responses to retinopathy of prematurity screening: indirect ophthalmoscopy versus ultra-widefield retinal imaging.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Ravi Purohit, Fatima Usman, Amanda Ie, Marianne van der Vaart, Shellie Robinson, Miranda Buckle, Luke Baxter, Michelle Clee, Amanda Clifford, Eleri Adams, Rebeccah Slater, Chetan K Patel, Caroline Hartley, Kanmin Xue
{"title":"Physiological responses to retinopathy of prematurity screening: indirect ophthalmoscopy versus ultra-widefield retinal imaging.","authors":"Ravi Purohit, Fatima Usman, Amanda Ie, Marianne van der Vaart, Shellie Robinson, Miranda Buckle, Luke Baxter, Michelle Clee, Amanda Clifford, Eleri Adams, Rebeccah Slater, Chetan K Patel, Caroline Hartley, Kanmin Xue","doi":"10.1038/s41390-025-03906-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening is vital for early disease detection in very premature infants but can cause physiological instability. This study compares the physiological response to binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO) with indentation and non-contact ultra-widefield (UWF) retinal imaging in non-ventilated neonates. The impact of the Dandle WRAP, a specialised swaddling aid, on UWF imaging was also assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 86 ROP screening events in 66 non-ventilated infants aged 35.3 weeks (range 30.6-44.6). Vital signs were continuously recorded, evaluating immediate (within 15 min) and longer-term (within 12 h) physiological responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ROP screening significantly increased heart and respiratory rates and decreased oxygen saturation within 15 min of screening. No significant differences in physiological responses were found between BIO and UWF imaging, although there was a trend towards lower maximum heart rate with UWF imaging. The Dandle WRAP did not significantly alter physiological responses but improved the ease and speed of UWF imaging.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>UWF imaging does not increase physiological instability compared to BIO in non-ventilated infants. Specialised swaddling aids may facilitate the imaging procedure.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>ROP screening can be distressing for premature infants and induce physiological instability during and after the examination. We deployed non-contact ultra-widefield retinal imaging as the default method of ROP screening and show that it induces comparable physiological responses as traditional indirect ophthalmoscopy in non-ventilated babies. Dandle WRAP swaddling facilitated handling and speed of retinal imaging. The study demonstrates that imaging-based ROP screening is safe and efficacious in non-ventilated neonates, and continuous multimodal physiological recordings can provide detailed assessment of the effects of procedures and medications.</p>","PeriodicalId":19829,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-025-03906-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening is vital for early disease detection in very premature infants but can cause physiological instability. This study compares the physiological response to binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO) with indentation and non-contact ultra-widefield (UWF) retinal imaging in non-ventilated neonates. The impact of the Dandle WRAP, a specialised swaddling aid, on UWF imaging was also assessed.

Methods: This retrospective study included 86 ROP screening events in 66 non-ventilated infants aged 35.3 weeks (range 30.6-44.6). Vital signs were continuously recorded, evaluating immediate (within 15 min) and longer-term (within 12 h) physiological responses.

Results: ROP screening significantly increased heart and respiratory rates and decreased oxygen saturation within 15 min of screening. No significant differences in physiological responses were found between BIO and UWF imaging, although there was a trend towards lower maximum heart rate with UWF imaging. The Dandle WRAP did not significantly alter physiological responses but improved the ease and speed of UWF imaging.

Conclusion: UWF imaging does not increase physiological instability compared to BIO in non-ventilated infants. Specialised swaddling aids may facilitate the imaging procedure.

Impact: ROP screening can be distressing for premature infants and induce physiological instability during and after the examination. We deployed non-contact ultra-widefield retinal imaging as the default method of ROP screening and show that it induces comparable physiological responses as traditional indirect ophthalmoscopy in non-ventilated babies. Dandle WRAP swaddling facilitated handling and speed of retinal imaging. The study demonstrates that imaging-based ROP screening is safe and efficacious in non-ventilated neonates, and continuous multimodal physiological recordings can provide detailed assessment of the effects of procedures and medications.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pediatric Research
Pediatric Research 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
473
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Pediatric Research publishes original papers, invited reviews, and commentaries on the etiologies of children''s diseases and disorders of development, extending from molecular biology to epidemiology. Use of model organisms and in vitro techniques relevant to developmental biology and medicine are acceptable, as are translational human studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信