{"title":"非侵入性呼吸支持实践在极早产儿中的跨专业观点：一项加拿大调查。","authors":"Tugba Alarcon Martinez, Elissa Remmer, Stephanie Mardakis, Marisa Leone, Johanne Boyer, Shasha Lv, Marc Beltempo, Guilherme Sant'Anna, Wissam Shalish","doi":"10.1038/s41372-025-02291-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe barriers and strategies amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) for optimal non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) provision in extremely preterm infants.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A cross-sectional web-based anonymized 19-question survey was sent to HCPs across Canadian tertiary care NICUs. The survey inquired about perspectives on NRS devices and management strategies, respiratory event monitoring, NRS failure, and possible solutions.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>391 responses from 61 physicians, 173 nurses, and 147 respiratory therapists were analyzed. HCP perspectives varied regarding appropriateness of different NRS settings and interfaces, documentation of cardiorespiratory events, and prevention of NRS failure. Obtaining effective NRS was deemed challenging by 48% of HCPs. NRS training was deemed adequate by 89% of respiratory therapists and 78% of physicians, but only 56% of nurses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial interprofessional variations exist in perceived benefits of various aspects of NRS. Better evidence on NRS modalities/settings, together with development of interdisciplinary guidelines and enhanced training, might reduce variability.</p>","PeriodicalId":16690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perinatology","volume":" ","pages":"806-811"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interprofessional perspectives on non-invasive respiratory support practices in extremely preterm infants: a Canadian survey.\",\"authors\":\"Tugba Alarcon Martinez, Elissa Remmer, Stephanie Mardakis, Marisa Leone, Johanne Boyer, Shasha Lv, Marc Beltempo, Guilherme Sant'Anna, Wissam Shalish\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41372-025-02291-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe barriers and strategies amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) for optimal non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) provision in extremely preterm infants.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A cross-sectional web-based anonymized 19-question survey was sent to HCPs across Canadian tertiary care NICUs. The survey inquired about perspectives on NRS devices and management strategies, respiratory event monitoring, NRS failure, and possible solutions.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>391 responses from 61 physicians, 173 nurses, and 147 respiratory therapists were analyzed. HCP perspectives varied regarding appropriateness of different NRS settings and interfaces, documentation of cardiorespiratory events, and prevention of NRS failure. Obtaining effective NRS was deemed challenging by 48% of HCPs. NRS training was deemed adequate by 89% of respiratory therapists and 78% of physicians, but only 56% of nurses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial interprofessional variations exist in perceived benefits of various aspects of NRS. Better evidence on NRS modalities/settings, together with development of interdisciplinary guidelines and enhanced training, might reduce variability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"806-811\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-025-02291-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-025-02291-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Interprofessional perspectives on non-invasive respiratory support practices in extremely preterm infants: a Canadian survey.
Objective: To describe barriers and strategies amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) for optimal non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) provision in extremely preterm infants.
Study design: A cross-sectional web-based anonymized 19-question survey was sent to HCPs across Canadian tertiary care NICUs. The survey inquired about perspectives on NRS devices and management strategies, respiratory event monitoring, NRS failure, and possible solutions.
Result: 391 responses from 61 physicians, 173 nurses, and 147 respiratory therapists were analyzed. HCP perspectives varied regarding appropriateness of different NRS settings and interfaces, documentation of cardiorespiratory events, and prevention of NRS failure. Obtaining effective NRS was deemed challenging by 48% of HCPs. NRS training was deemed adequate by 89% of respiratory therapists and 78% of physicians, but only 56% of nurses.
Conclusion: Substantial interprofessional variations exist in perceived benefits of various aspects of NRS. Better evidence on NRS modalities/settings, together with development of interdisciplinary guidelines and enhanced training, might reduce variability.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Perinatology provides members of the perinatal/neonatal healthcare team with original information pertinent to improving maternal/fetal and neonatal care. We publish peer-reviewed clinical research articles, state-of-the art reviews, comments, quality improvement reports, and letters to the editor. Articles published in the Journal of Perinatology embrace the full scope of the specialty, including clinical, professional, political, administrative and educational aspects. The Journal also explores legal and ethical issues, neonatal technology and product development.
The Journal’s audience includes all those that participate in perinatal/neonatal care, including, but not limited to neonatologists, perinatologists, perinatal epidemiologists, pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists, surgeons, neonatal and perinatal nurses, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, social workers, dieticians, speech and hearing experts, other allied health professionals, as well as subspecialists who participate in patient care including radiologists, laboratory medicine and pathologists.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
