|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Course Directors
Edward E, Lawson, M.D.
Professor
Department of Pediatrics
Neonatology
The Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine
Lawrence M. Nogee, M.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Pediatrics
Neonatology
The Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine
Christoph U. Lehmann, M.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Pediatrics,
Health Information
Science and Dermatology
The Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine
Mary Terhaar, RN
Assistant Professor
Undergraduate Instruction,
The Johns Hopkins University
School of Nursing
Robert J. Kopotic, MSN, RRT, FAARC
Director of Clinical Programs
ConMed Corporation
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Learning
Objectives |
|
The
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and The Institute for
Johns Hopkins Nursing take responsibility for the content, quality,
and scientific integrity of this CME/CE activity.
At
the conclusion of this activity, participants should be able to:
- Discuss transport as it relates to effective perinatal and neonatal
care
- Explain additional considerations for transporting special populations
- Identify recognized best practices in neonatal transport
|
|
|
|
Commentary |
|
Huxley once wrote, "Logical consequences are the scarecrows of fools and the beacons of wise men"[1]. One such beacon is the notion that the best outcomes result when the needs of the patients are matched to the skill, knowledge and experience of caregivers; the most advanced technology is employed; and the most appropriate support services are provided. Neonatal care is no different. The most favorable outcomes for acutely ill neonates are the result of a finely tuned collaboration between diverse disciplines and institutions, working together to ensure the best chance of survival and the best long term outcomes.
The literature that serves as the basis for safe and effective neonatal transport
is a small body of work and predominantly descriptive in nature. The first publications
describe the practice as an important component in perinatal regionalized care[2,3,4].
Subsequent papers have described the composition
of the team, the training of the personnel, the equipment required, and the collaboration
within communities necessary to promote the best possible outcomes. Notably lacking
are multi-center studies which evaluate approaches to care during transport with
an eye to improving outcomes.
Three themes can be identified in the body of literature related to neonatal transport. These are configuration and preparation of systems and teams, transport of special populations, and stabilization prior to neonatal transport. Regarding the first, Wheeler et al document the success of a program instituted at the Navel Medical Center of San Diego. Implemented by the military, this program effectively managed stabilization and transport to the NICU, accomplished favorable clinical outcomes, and realized significant savings. The authors attribute these positive results to careful planning and training of team members. The report by Lupton & Pendray provides several descriptions of transport team configurations, along with several sets of practical guidelines for establishing a regional transport system.
Some of the greatest challenges facing the neonatal transport team occur during stabilization and transport of neonates requiring surgery or with a probable diagnosis of cardiac defect. Paxton’s article details the special considerations each major surgical condition requires, while Harter & Clingersmith address the special needs of neonates with cardiac defects prior to establishing a definitive diagnosis. Both reports emphasize protecting the airway, maintaining thermal stability, promoting normoglycemia, and similar critical considerations.
Tertiary neonatal centers are responsible
for the education of all members of the neonatal
team, and focus on effective resuscitation,
stabilization and transfer. Training must
provide both theoretical and hands-on clinical
experiences that build the skill and confidence
of the team so they can initiate safe and
effective intensive care from the minute the baby is
born. The Mears & Chalmers
2005 article reports on the success of the
STABLE (an acronym/mnemonic for Sugar, Temperature,
Airway/artificial breathing, Blood pressure,
Laboratory analysis, and Emotional support)
program in the UK. This approach to education
and practice promotes consistent, effective
and comprehensive early care, and holds promise
for improved outcomes for neonates at the
highest risk during the initial hours of life.
Each of the manuscripts reviewed in this issue offers recommendations for practice based on the experiences of the respective services. We strongly recommend that the transport team consult with the Medical Control Physician for the transport service, and that the transport team coordinate the approach to care with the specialists and sub-specialists who will provide for each neonate upon arrival at the tertiary care center.
In summary: care during transport is based on standard NICU practices. Currently,
the evidence base for practice in the unit and for practice in the field is the same.
Yet the transport team may be held to a different standard of care while stabilizing
the infant in a transport vehicle[5].
There is a great need for studies which investigate practices during transport and
the associated outcomes; such research would greatly assist in providing a consistently
high quality of care and reducing long term morbidity and mortality for acutely ill
neonates transported within any community.
References:
| 1. |
ThinkExist.com Quotations. "Thomas Henry
Huxley quotes". ThinkExist.com Quotations Online 1 Dec. 2006. 31 Jan.
2007. |
| 2. |
Segal, S. Transfer of a premature or
other high-risk newborn infant to a referral hospital. Pediatric Clinics
of North America; 13, 1995. |
| 3. |
Segal S. Manual for Transport of high
risk newborn infants. Canadian Pediatric Society, 1972. |
| 4. |
Health & Welfare Canada. Recommended
standards for maternity and newborn care, 1975. |
| 5. |
Ginzburg, H. Legal issues in medical transport. In: MacDonald, M,
Miller, M., eds Emergency Transport of the Perinatal Patient. Boston,
MA: Little, Brown: 1989. |
Sources for Additional Information:
|
|
|
|
|
CONFIGURATION
OF TRANSPORT SYSTEMS: EXPERIENCE AT A MILITARY MEDICAL CENTER |
|
Wheeler,
D. S., Sperring, J. L., Vaux, K.K., Poss, W. B. (1999). Development
of a Pediatric Critical Care Transport Team: Experience at a Military
Medical Center. Military Medicine, 154:3, 188-193.
(For non-journal subscribers,
an additional fee may apply for full text articles) |
|
|
|
A pediatric critical care transport program was established at the Naval Medical Center in San Diego, California when military personnel assumed the responsibility for pediatric and neonatal transport which had formerly been the responsibility of civilian contractors. Leadership identified the need for formal training for pediatric residents in stabilization and transport of infants and children, and so a program was developed to provide military personnel with both empirical knowledge and practical experience. The goals were to assure quality of care, realize significant financial savings, and train capable clinicians. The authors report on outcomes in relation to all three goals.
Three phases of evaluation were conducted. The first two related to clinical and
financial outcomes. A retrospective review of transports, outcomes and expenses
was conducted and a database was developed so transport statistics and financial
data could be tracked and evaluated concurrently. The third phase related to the
caregivers’ evaluation and application of the program content and approach, and
used a participant survey to evaluate the perceived benefits.
Between 1994 and 1997, 404 transports were performed and served as the base for analysis. During 1997, a total of 64 transports were performed by the team: 31 neonatal and 33 pediatric. Average call to departure time was 49 minutes, including 13 cases reported as delayed. After removing those outliers from the data, the average time from call to departure was 34 minutes, with reasons for delay reported as: waiting for a vehicle (n=10), problem with a vehicle (n=2), and waiting for a doctor (n=1). The reason for transport was reported as: respiratory diagnoses (41%), neurological diagnoses (12%), prematurity (9%), cardiac diagnoses (9%), infections (6%), ingestion or poisoning (5%), surgical diagnoses (4%), metabolic or endocrine diagnoses (2%), and miscellaneous diagnoses (12%).
The authors report that the program successfully accomplished its objectives. Financial savings were documented to be approximately $2,000 for each transport – even allowing that not all incidental costs were identified, this figure represents significant avoidance of noncontributing cost. Although the primary benefit was the elimination of out-of-pocket expenses for the active duty member who was the parent of the transported neonate, the savings for the Department of Defense (and thus the taxpayer) were appreciable as well.
The perceived value of the education program was measured by a survey sent to previous participants, with the majority considering the program and the experience to be worthwhile and significant. Perhaps more importantly, the majority of program graduates were, at the time of the survey, practicing overseas and in rural communities 2-3 hours from any medical center. They placed value on the program as preparing them to stabilize and manage infants and children in settings removed from the support available in tertiary care sites. |
|
|
CONFIGURATION
OF TRANSPORT SYSTEMS: A REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE |
|
Lupton,
BA & Pendray, MR. Regionalized neonatal emergency transport. Seminars
in Neonatology Vol 9, Issue 2 (2004),125-133.
(For non-journal subscribers,
an additional fee may apply for full text articles) |
|
|
|
The
authors describe the elements of a safe and
effective neonatal transport program in the
context of the needs of the neonates being
transported and the evolving systems in which they receive care. They provide
an historical review of neonatal care, including the concept of regionalization
and the use of transport within this model. Both maternal and neonatal
transports are discussed as well as return transports, which contribute
to the effective management of neonatal intensive care beds. The roles
of the medical director, manager, transport coordinator, nurses, respiratory
therapists, paramedics, and physicians are considered, as are several models
for configuration of the transport team.
Duties of the various team members are described, along with the rationale supporting
their selection, training, and practice. Configuration of the team appears less
dependent on the individual members’ credentials than on the fit between the role
each is expected to play and the knowledge, skill and experience each brings to
the team: highlighting that finding, the authors note that teams of two nurses,
a nurse and a respiratory therapist, and two paramedics all reported comparable
outcomes. Further, they emphasize the need for strong contingency plans that make
it possible to call in additional trained personnel when the needs of the neonate
to be transported exceed the skill set available within the regular team. They further
note that the medical director is ultimately responsible for the care provided by
the team within parameters established in state practice acts.
The authors stress that education of team members needs to be ongoing. In addition to the content recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, they discuss the need for programs to address frequently encountered conditions and challenges likely to be faced by the team. For example, regarding mode of transport, they recommend that teams who fly be educated concerning barometric pressure, g-force, changes in humidity, vibration, noise, and heat loss – and their effects on human physiology in general and the neonate in particular. Regular programs to maintain and verify competencies, skills, and knowledge base are considered key to successful transport programs.
The authors also discuss equipment, documentation, and quality assurance, providing several practical sets of guidelines that include: an outline for organizing and developing a transport team, a classification for the types of transport, guidelines for prioritizing patients, and parameters for response time. They emphasize that when developing a neonatal transport team, the best interest of the patient must be considered first, followed by referral patterns, population growth, and the mission and goals of the institutions. Efficient use of specialized care, such as extracorporeal life support, should also be considered.
Communication – between members of the team, between facilities, and within the community – is considered essential. In addition, the report provides a list of principles useful for providing safe and effective neonatal transport, including: identifying problems early, optimizing communications, providing expertise throughout the transport, adequately stabilizing the neonate before mobilizing, preventing surprises, and promoting a smooth, controlled transport. |
|
|
TRANSPORTING
SPECIAL POPULATIONS: THE SURGICAL NEONATE |
| |
Paxton,
J. M. 1990. Transport of the surgical neonate. Perinatal
Neonatal Nursing. 3 (3) 43-49.
(For non-journal subscribers,
an additional fee may apply for full text articles) |
|
|
|
Maternal rather than neonatal transport is recommended for infants with surgical conditions. Given recent advances in fetal diagnostics, this can often (but not always) be accomplished. In addition to the considerations common to transport of a neonate with a medical diagnosis, infants with surgical conditions and their families can present a set of particular challenges to the transport team.
Paxton emphasizes that thermoregulation requires careful attention. Neonates with surgical conditions like spina bifida, gastroschisis, or omphalocele face significant risk for heat loss. These conditions leave core body organs close to (if not actually exposed on) the surface – allowing radiation and evaporative heat loss from the body that can compromise core temperature and may result in cold stress.
Insensible fluid loss also represents a threat to the infant with a condition requiring
surgical intervention, particularly regarding hypovolemia. Maintaining perfusion
to tissues that are already vulnerable must receive careful attention; Paxton notes
that placing the infant in a sterile plastic bag is a common strategy to reduce
insensible fluid loss.
The neonate with a surgical condition is also vulnerable to glucose instability, a problem that cold stress, pain, hypovolemia, and respiratory challenge can all exacerbate. Maintaining normoglycemia helps to protect vulnerable tissue from further damage as well as to promote optimal post-op wound healing.
After attending to airway, breathing, circulation, temperature stability, normoglycemia, and comfort, the team needs to focus on gathering information to help plan the infant’s long term care. This involves collecting the history, maternal medical records, fetal diagnostics, imaging, maternal blood, cord blood, and any additional information relevant to the care of the newborn.
The author presents special recommendations
for each major surgical condition. Some examples:
- passing an oral-gastric tube and avoiding positive pressure ventilation is recommended in the presence of diaphragmatic hernia
- prone positioning with the head of the bed elevated 30 degrees or more is recommended in the presence of tracheal esophageal fistula or esophageal atresia
- gastro-intestinal decompression can be effective for omphalocele and gastroschisis along with actions to prevent heat and fluid loss
- neural tube defects can be managed by keeping the exposed tissue moist,
clean, and free from fecal material, and by protecting it from pressure
or trauma. Placing the infant prone or side-lying is recommended as a
part of the safe care for this neonate.
In addition, the author notes that special consideration of the effect of altitude and barometric pressure on a volume of gas is indicated when air transport is required for the infant with a surgical condition. Infants with diaphragmatic hernias may become unstable due to the effects of altitude effect gas trapped in the body cavity. Similarly, as the partial pressure of oxygen decreases with altitude, in flight the diffusion of oxygen within the lungs may decrease as well – increasing the challenge of ensuring respiratory stability of the infant. |
|
|
TRANSPORTING
SPECIAL POPULATIONS: THE NEONATE WITH CARDIAC DEFECT |
| |
Harter,
D. & Clingersmith, P. 1994. Transport of the neonate with suspected
or diagnosed congenital cardiac disease. Critical Care Nursing
Clinics of North America. Vol 6. Number 1. 121-131.
(For non-journal subscribers,
an additional fee may apply for full text articles) |
|
|
|
Because the differential diagnosis often requires specialized technology and assessment usually available only in tertiary centers, the transport team frequently needs to provide effective care without a definitive diagnosis. As the authors point out, in the case of a neonate with a cardiac defect, this can become particularly challenging. The best outcomes for this population depend on careful assessment and early recognition of the critical indicators of cardiac compromise. Although infants with cardiac defects may appear to transition well initially, the parents and staff may notice subtle changes, such as poor nipple feeding, mild cyanosis (central or peripheral, at rest or when crying), or a murmur. Presentation may be consistent with a possible diagnosis of respiratory distress, sepsis, or congenital anomaly, and referral to tertiary care is indicated for the best possible outcome.
Absent a differential diagnosis, consultation between the tertiary and referring centers should enable presumptive diagnosis and proper preparation of the team as well as the neonate for safe transport. The authors note that unexplained tachypnea and cyanosis warrant cardio-respiratory monitoring, pulse oximetry, and establishment of vascular access. In addition, a "hyperoxia test" is frequently recommended. This test consists of obtaining arterial blood gas values to determine partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) in 21% and 100% FiO2. A rise in the PaO2 of >30mmHg or exceeding 100mmHg tends to indicate a pulmonary, rather than a cardiac, cause for evident cyanosis. Failed hyperoxia testing may indicate cyanotic cardiac defect, which cannot be remedied with oxygen due to persistent mixing of systemic and arterial blood or pulmonary blood flow impairment. Oxygen therapy during transport is used for this population, even though it may yield only minimal improvement.
The authors discuss specific lesions only in the context of the presenting signs, symptoms, and age of onset. They provide three concise tables that outline: the differential diagnosis of congenital cardiac disease, respiratory disease and sepsis; maternal conditions associated with congenital cardiac disease; and a graduated assessment form/worksheet utilized for quality assurance. The assessment form/worksheet can additionally be used to facilitate communication of essential information as well as to evaluate the transport process, both of which are essential to maintaining a safe and effective transport program. |
|
|
STABILIZATION
BEFORE TRANSPORT |
| |
Mears,
M & Chalmers, S. 2005. Neonatal pre-transport stabilization – Caring
for infants the STABLE way. Infant. 1(1) 34-37.
(For non-journal subscribers,
an additional fee may apply for full text articles) |
|
|
|
While
maternal transport for a neonate at risk
is the gold standard, the authors report
that over 5% of babies will require ex-uterine
neonatal transport. The neonate is at additional risk during the transport
period because the extensive support available in the NICU is miles away.
This risk can be reduced by maintaining normal acid-base balance, carbon
dioxide levels, oxygenation, blood pressure, glucose, and temperature.
This is a challenge during transport, however, because of the environment
with its reduced space and lighting and its limited resources and manpower.
In addition, the stress that results from separating the neonate from the
parents and requiring the family to travel long distances cannot be understated.
All these variables have become the focus of negative media attention.
Mears and Chalmers report on the STABLE Program, a concise educational approach
that organizes the myriad of details necessary to stabilize and care for sick neonates;
reinforces neonatal life support efforts; and complements transport courses currently
available. The STABLE mnemonic represents Sugar, Temperature, Airway/artificial
breathing, Blood pressure, Laboratory analysis, and Emotional support, and is utilized
to facilitate retention and recall when transport teams are faced with an uncommonly
stressful situation. The program builds on the ABC (airway, breathing and circulation)
basics to structure a seamless approach to stabilization by providing information
on identifying hypoglycemia, hypothermia, hypoxemia, hypoxia, hypotension, sepsis,
and parental issues in the post-resuscitation/pre-transport period.
The authors report on implementation of the STABLE Program in London with neonatal
nurses, midwives, house officers, registrars, and consultants during 2002 and 2003.
They describe the course as providing a review of fetal and neonatal development,
physiology, and pathology, with an emphasis on promoting stability in relation to
the critical conditions of normoglycemia, optimal thermal regulation, airway stabilization,
respiration, normo-tension, and effective support for family members during the
crisis of complicated birth. Skills components are both theoretical as well as hands-on,
and address effective teamwork, communication, and focused
intervention. Team members participate together in these training sessions and learn
to appreciate the diversity of skills and the critical value of effective teamwork.
Pre- and post-test scores with all 140 participants demonstrated improvement, with
some exceeding 50%. The vast majority scored the requisite 84% on the post test
to qualify for a certificate of completion. All 140 participants indicated they
would recommend the course to their colleagues.
Future plans include further implementation of the STABLE Program nationwide and extending the program to include the STABLE CARDIAC module. The authors conclude that using the STABLE Program with all neonatal team members involved in resuscitation, stabilization, and transport of sick neonates promotes more comprehensive care for both neonates and their families, improved working relationships, sharing of ideas, and increased job satisfaction. In addition, when the parents observe a consistently collaborative approach to care, the transport process may seem less daunting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAST
MONTH’S Q & A January 2007 - Volume 4 - Issue
5
In our January 2007 issue, we reviewed the clinical
trial information for intravenous ibuprofen (pharmacologically related to
indomethacin) for the treatment and prophylaxis of PDA, and its effect on
intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) prophylaxis.
 |
Commentary:
Carlton K.K. Lee, Pharm.D., MPH
Assistant Professor, Department of Pediatrics
School of Medicine
Johns Hopkins University
Clinical Specialist, Pediatrics
Department of Pharmacy
The Johns Hopkins Hospital |
 |
Reviews:
Melissa D. Meekins, Pharm.D.
Pediatric Specialty Resident
Department of Pharmacy
The Johns Hopkins Hospital |
| |
Our
readers asked the January faculty the following questions: |
 |
Is
there any evidence that oral
ibuprofen is as effective as IV ibuprofen in the treatment of PDA for
preemies? |
 |
The
experience with oral ibuprofen
in treating PDA for preemies
is currently limited to four
small clinical trials: two
open-labeled studies and
two comparison trials to
indomethacin. When combining
the subjects of the two open
label trials, ductal closure was achieved in 91.4% (32 of 35) of patients[1,2].
Ductal reopening did not
occur in one of these studies
(N=22)[1] and
was not reported in the other
(N=13)[2]. There were no drug
related side effects of oliguria
or bleeding[1,2].
The comparison pilot studies
of oral ibuprofen to indomethacin
have reported statistically
similar rates of ductal closure
at 77.8% (7/9) vs. 88.9%
(8/9)[3] and
46.7% (7/15) vs. 66.7% (10/15)[3,4], respectively (p=NS
for both). Slightly favorable
response rates with indomethacin
in both of these trials may
be attributed to better drug
absorption with the intravenous
(IV) route of administration
compared to oral ibuprofen.
Indomethacin subjects in
the Supapannachart et al[3] trial
received their doses by either
IV or PO, and indomethacin
was administered exclusively
intravenously in the study
by Chotigeat et al[4]. Ductal
reopening was statistically
similar at 40% vs 33% (p=NS),
ibuprofen vs indomethacin
respectively, in one of these
studies[4]. In
regards to adverse drug events,
favorable renal effects were
observed with ibuprofen.
Ibuprofen use was associated
with higher urine output
(with no significant increase
in serum creatinine or blood
urea nitrogen)[3];
and significantly less diuretic
(furosemide) use (p<0.01)[4] Despite
the lack of statistical significance,
a higher rate of NEC was
also observed with indomethacin
(66.7% vs 40%) in the study
by Chotigeat and associates[4].
Despite promising closure
rates as high as 90% with
open-labeled studies, unanswered issues in regards to dosing and other
potential side effects still remain. Three different oral ibuprofen
dosing regimens were used in the four aforementioned trials; 10 mg/kg/dose
x 1 followed by 5 mg/kg/dose x 2 given every 24 hours (same as the
IV treatment dose), or every 12 hours, or 10 mg/kg/dose x 3 given every
24 hours. A PO/IV bioavailability study is needed to determine the
proper oral dose. Spontaneous intestinal perforation, without signs
of NEC, has been reported in two very-low birth-weight infants receiving
oral ibuprofen for PDA treatment[5].
References:
| 1. |
Heyman E, Morag I, Batash
D et al. Closure
of patent ductus arteriosus with oral ibuprofen suspension in premature
newborns: a pilot study. Pediatrics. 2003;112:354-358. |
| 2. |
Hariprasad P, Sundarrajan V, Srimathy
G, et al. Oral
ibuprofen for closure of hemodynamically significant PDA in premature
neonates. Indian Pediatrics. 2002;39(1):99-100. |
| 3. |
Supapannachart S, Limrungsiul A,
Khowsathit P. Oral
ibuprofen and indomethacin for treatment of patent ductus arteriosus
in premature infants: a randomized trial at Ramathibodi Hospital.
J Med Assoc Thai. 2002;85(Suppl 4):S1252-8. |
| 4. |
Chotigeat U, Jirapapa K, Layangkool,
T. A
comparison of oral ibuprofen and intravenous indomethacin for closure
of patent ductus arteriosus in preterm infants. J. Med Assoc
Thai. 2003;86 (Suppl 3):S563-9. |
| 5. |
Tatli MM, Kumral A, Duman N, et al. Spontaneous
intestinal perforation after oral ibuprofen treatment of patent
ductus arteriosus in two very-low-birthweight infants. Acta
Paediatr. 2004;93(7):999-1001. |
|
| |
|
|
As
a prophylactic protocol, is there any evidence that oral ibuprofen
may be beneficial when the IV preparation is not available? |
|
The
available clinical data on
oral ibuprofen use with PDA
prophylaxis is currently
limited to a small, randomized,
controlled study conducted
in Thailand[6]. Twenty-two
neonates between 28-32 weeks
gestational age with a birth
weight of approximately 1500
grams received PO ibuprofen,
while 20 neonates of similar
age, birth weight, and other
clinical characteristics
received placebo. An oral ibuprofen dosage of 10 mg/kg/dose every 24
hours for 3 doses, with the first dose initiated within 24 hours of
life, was given. The investigators found the prevalence of symptomatic
PDA to be lower in the ibuprofen prophylaxis group compared to placebo
(0/22 vs. 5/22, p<0.05)[6]. Although
there were no significant
side effects, gastrointestinal
bleeding did occur more frequently
with ibuprofen (12/22 vs.
6/20, p=0.196)[6].
It is also important to consider
the unpredictability of the
oral administration of drugs in infants. Infants, especially premature
infants, may have irregular gastric emptying and decreased intestinal
and/or biliary function. Additionally, in the presence of a PDA, decreased
mesenteric blood flow may also play a role in altering absorption.
The pharmacokinetics of oral ibuprofen have been studied in premature
infants and results have shown large inter-individual variability with
respect to drug exposure, area under the curve (AUC), and peak plasma
concentration (Cmax). In
a pharmacokinetic study by
Sharma et al, the coefficient of variation was 88.5% for AUC and 74.1%
for Cmax[7]. This
is quite variable considering
a relatively homogeneous patient population [mean gestational age 30.45
+/- 1.48 weeks (range 26 to 32 weeks) and mean birth weight 1262.5
+/- 247.76 grams (range 750 to 1900 grams)]. Additional oral pharmacokinetic
studies are needed to fine-tune the dosing strategy with oral ibuprofen
by reducing the inter-individual variability of drug exposure (AUC
and Cmax).
References:
|
|
|
|
|
Accreditation • back
to top
Physicians
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine is
accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
Nurses
The Institute for Johns Hopkins Nursing is accredited
as provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing
Center's Commission on Accreditation.
Respiratory Therapists
Respiratory Therapists should visit
this page to confirm that AMA PRA category 1 credit is accepted toward
fulfillment of RT requirements.
Credit Designations • back
to top
Physicians
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine designates
this educational activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)TM.
Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their
participation in the activity.
Nurses
This 1.0 contact hour (for each eNewsletter or a
maximum of 6 contact hours for all twelve eNewsletters) Educational Activity
(Provider Directed/Learner Paced) is provided by The Institute for Johns
Hopkins Nursing.
Respiratory Therapists
Respiratory Therapists should visit
this page to confirm that your state will accept the CE Credits gained
through this program.
Target Audience • back
to top
This activity has been developed for Neonatologists, NICU Nurses
and Respiratory Therapists working with Neonatal patients. There are no fees
or prerequisites for this activity.
Learning Objectives • back
to top
At the conclusion of this activity, participants should be able
to:
- Discuss transport as it relates to effective perinatal and neonatal care
- Explain additional considerations for transporting special populations
- Identify recognized best practices in neonatal transport
Statement of Responsibility • back
to top
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and The Institute
for Johns Hopkins Nursing takes responsibility for the content, quality,
and scientific integrity of this CME/CNE activity.
Faculty Disclosure Policy
Affecting CE Activities • back
to top
As providers accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing
Medical Education and the American Nursing Credentialing
Center’s Commission
of Accreditation, it is the policy of The Johns Hopkins
University School of Medicine and The Institute for
Johns Hopkins Nursing to require the disclosure of
the existence of any significant financial interest
or any other relationship a faculty member or a provider
has with the manufacturer(s) of any commercial product(s)
discussed in an education presentation. The presenting
faculty reported the following:
- Dr. Nogee has indicated a financial relationship of grant/research support
with Forest Laboratories and has received an honorarium from Forest Laboratories.
- Dr. Lawson has indicated a financial relationship of grant/research support
from the NIH. He also receives financial/material support from Nature Publishing
Group as the Editor of the Journal of Perinatology.
- Dr. Lehmann has indicated a financial relationship in the form of honorarium
from the Eclipsys Corporation.
All other faculty have indicated that they
have not received financial support for consultation, research, or evaluation,
nor have financial interests relevant to this e-Newsletter.
Unlabelled/Unapproved
Uses • back
to top
No faculty member has indicated that their presentation will include
information on off-label products.
Disclaimer Statement • back
to top
The opinions and recommendations expressed by faculty and other experts
whose input is included in this program are their own. This enduring material
is produced for educational purposes only. Use of Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine and The Institute for Johns Hopkins Nursing name implies
review of educational format design and approach. Please review the complete
prescribing information of specific drugs or combination of drugs, including
indications, contraindications, warnings and adverse effects before administering
pharmacologic therapy to patients.
Internet CE Policy • back
to top
The Offices of Continuing Education (CE) at The Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine and The Institute for Johns Hopkins Nursing are committed
to protect the privacy of its members and customers. The Johns Hopkins University
maintains its Internet site as an information resource and service for physicians,
other health professionals and the public.
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and
The Institute for Johns Hopkins Nursing will keep
your personal and credit information confidential
when you participate in a CE Internet based program. Your information will
never be given to anyone outside The Johns Hopkins University program. CE
collects only the information necessary to provide you with the service you
request.
Copyright
© JHUSOM, IJHN, and eNeonatal Review
Created by DKBmed. |
|
