Management decisions in extremely premature infants

John M Lorenz
{"title":"Management decisions in extremely premature infants","authors":"John M Lorenz","doi":"10.1016/S1084-2756(03)00118-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Survival rates in excess of 25% at 23 weeks' gestation and in excess of 50% at 24 weeks' gestation have been reported among live births in the 1990s within tertiary perinatal care centres in the USA and Australia. Decisions about medical management at these gestational ages can no longer be based merely on whether survival is possible. Relevant moral considerations include the primacy of the newborn's best interests, parental autonomy, physicians' duties of beneficence and non-maleficence, and distributive justice. There is significant variability between developed nations in the survival of extremely premature infants among cohorts born within perinatal tertiary care centres. This is, at least to some degree, the result of differences in the aggressiveness of obstetrical and neonatal management at these gestational ages. There is also great variability in the prevalence of major neurodevelopmental disability among survivors. Moreover, the prevalence of major disabilities does not inform quality-of-life considerations adequately. Despite similar gestational age ranges over which the benefit:burden ratio of aggressive obstetric and neonatal care is questioned in developed countries, there is marked variation in the frequency with which it is provided within these ranges. This is understandable given the relevant moral values and the different ways in which competing values will be balanced by different individuals, cultures and societies; the increasing survival of extremely premature infants, but the persistence of high (but widely variable) prevalences of major disabilities reported among survivors and even higher prevalences of mild-to-moderate neurodevelopmental sequelae; our imperfect ability to estimate an individual extremely premature infant's prognosis; and the complexities of estimating the quality of life from the individual's own perspective.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74783,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in neonatology : SN","volume":"8 6","pages":"Pages 475-482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1084-2756(03)00118-0","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in neonatology : SN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084275603001180","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

Survival rates in excess of 25% at 23 weeks' gestation and in excess of 50% at 24 weeks' gestation have been reported among live births in the 1990s within tertiary perinatal care centres in the USA and Australia. Decisions about medical management at these gestational ages can no longer be based merely on whether survival is possible. Relevant moral considerations include the primacy of the newborn's best interests, parental autonomy, physicians' duties of beneficence and non-maleficence, and distributive justice. There is significant variability between developed nations in the survival of extremely premature infants among cohorts born within perinatal tertiary care centres. This is, at least to some degree, the result of differences in the aggressiveness of obstetrical and neonatal management at these gestational ages. There is also great variability in the prevalence of major neurodevelopmental disability among survivors. Moreover, the prevalence of major disabilities does not inform quality-of-life considerations adequately. Despite similar gestational age ranges over which the benefit:burden ratio of aggressive obstetric and neonatal care is questioned in developed countries, there is marked variation in the frequency with which it is provided within these ranges. This is understandable given the relevant moral values and the different ways in which competing values will be balanced by different individuals, cultures and societies; the increasing survival of extremely premature infants, but the persistence of high (but widely variable) prevalences of major disabilities reported among survivors and even higher prevalences of mild-to-moderate neurodevelopmental sequelae; our imperfect ability to estimate an individual extremely premature infant's prognosis; and the complexities of estimating the quality of life from the individual's own perspective.

极度早产儿的管理决策
据报道,1990年代在美国和澳大利亚的三级围产期护理中心,活产婴儿在妊娠23周的存活率超过25%,在妊娠24周的存活率超过50%。在这些胎龄的医疗管理的决定不能再仅仅基于是否有可能生存。相关的道德考虑包括新生儿最大利益的首要地位,父母的自主权,医生的善意和非恶意的义务,以及分配正义。在发达国家之间,在围产期三级保健中心出生的队列中,极早产儿的存活率存在显著差异。这是,至少在某种程度上,在这些胎龄的产科和新生儿管理的侵略性差异的结果。幸存者中主要神经发育障碍的患病率也存在很大差异。此外,严重残疾的普遍性并不能充分说明生活质量方面的考虑。尽管在发达国家,积极的产科和新生儿护理的收益负担比受到类似胎龄范围的质疑,但在这些范围内,提供这种护理的频率有明显差异。考虑到相关的道德价值观以及不同的个人、文化和社会平衡相互竞争的价值观的不同方式,这是可以理解的;极早产儿的存活率不断提高,但据报道,幸存者中主要残疾的患病率持续很高(但差异很大),轻至中度神经发育后遗症的患病率甚至更高;我们对个别极早产儿预后的估计能力并不完善;以及从个人角度评估生活质量的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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