7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Optimising neonatal service provision for preterm babies born between 27 and 31 weeks gestation in England (OPTI-PREM), using national data, qualitative research and economic analysis: a study protocol

      protocol

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          In England, for babies born at 23–26 weeks gestation, care in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) as opposed to a local neonatal unit (LNU) improves survival to discharge. This evidence is shaping neonatal health services. In contrast, there is no evidence to guide location of care for the next most vulnerable group (born at 27–31 weeks gestation) whose care is currently spread between 45 NICU and 84 LNU in England. This group represents 12% of preterm births in England and over onr-third of all neonatal unit care days. Compared with those born at 23–26 weeks gestation, they account for four times more admissions and twice as many National Health Service bed days/year.

          Methods

          In this mixed-methods study, our primary objective is to assess, for babies born at 27–31 weeks gestation and admitted to a neonatal unit in England, whether care in an NICU vs an LNU impacts on survival and key morbidities (up to age 1 year), at each gestational age in weeks. Routinely recorded data extracted from real-time, point-of-care patient management systems held in the National Neonatal Research Database, Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics, for January 2014 to December 2018, will be analysed. Secondary objectives are to assess (1) whether differences in care provided, rather than a focus on LNU/NICU designation, drives gestation-specific outcomes, (2) where care is most cost-effective and (3) what parents’ and clinicians' perspectives are on place of care, and how these could guide clinical decision-making. Our findings will be used to develop recommendations, in collaboration with national bodies, to inform clinical practice, commissioning and policy-making. The project is supported by a parent advisory panel and a study steering committee.

          Ethics and dissemination

          Research ethics approval has been obtained (IRAS 212304). Dissemination will be through publication of findings and development of recommendations for care.

          Trial registration number

          NCT02994849 and ISRCTN74230187.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          An introduction to instrumental variables for epidemiologists.

          Instrumental-variable (IV) methods were invented over 70 years ago, but remain uncommon in epidemiology. Over the past decade or so, non-parametric versions of IV methods have appeared that connect IV methods to causal and measurement-error models important in epidemiological applications. This paper provides an introduction to those developments, illustrated by an application of IV methods to non-parametric adjustment for non-compliance in randomized trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Genetic Matching for Estimating Causal Effects: A General Multivariate Matching Method for Achieving Balance in Observational Studies

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The cost of preterm birth throughout childhood in England and Wales.

              Infants born preterm are at increased risk of adverse health and developmental outcomes. Mortality and morbidity after preterm birth impose a burden on finite public sector resources. This study considers the economic consequences of preterm birth from birth to adult life and compares the costs accruing to those born preterm with those born at term. A decision-analytic model was constructed to estimate the costs to the public sector over the first 18 years after birth, stratified by week of gestational age at birth. Costs were discounted and reported in UK pounds at 2006 prices. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to examine uncertainty in the model parameters and generate confidence intervals surrounding the cost estimates. The model estimates the costs associated with a hypothetical cohort of 669601 children and is based on live birth and preterm birth data from England and Wales in 2006. The total cost of preterm birth to the public sector was estimated to be pound2.946 billion (US $4.567 billion), and an inverse relationship was identified between gestational age at birth and the average public sector cost per surviving child. The incremental cost per preterm child surviving to 18 years compared with a term survivor was estimated at pound22885 (US $35471). The corresponding estimates for a very and extremely preterm child were substantially higher at pound61781 (US $95760) and pound94740 (US $146847), respectively. Despite concerns about ongoing costs after discharge from perinatal services, the largest contribution to the economic implications of preterm birth are hospital inpatient costs after birth, which are responsible for 92.0% of the incremental costs per preterm survivor.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2019
                22 August 2019
                : 9
                : 8
                : e029421
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust , Wolverhampton, UK
                [2 ] departmentSchool of Medicine and Clinical Practice , University of Wolverhampton Faculty of Science and Engineering , Wolverhampton, UK
                [3 ] departmentDepartment of Neonatal Medicine , Imperial College London , London, UK
                [4 ] departmentNuffield Department of Population Health , University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [5 ] departmentDepartment of Health Sciences , University of Leicester , Leicester, UK
                [6 ] departmentParent Representative , BLISS National Charity for Babies Born Premature or Sick , London, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Thillagavathie Pillay; tilly.pillay@ 123456nhs.net
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4159-3282
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4125-8684
                Article
                bmjopen-2019-029421
                10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029421
                6707683
                31444186
                49e2ea24-d536-434f-9a2b-fd0b87e959eb
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 04 February 2019
                : 19 June 2019
                : 09 July 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002001, Health Services and Delivery Research Programme;
                Award ID: 15/70/104
                Categories
                Health Services Research
                Protocol
                1506
                1704
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                neonatology,organisation of health services,neonatal intensive & critical care,health economics

                Comments

                Comment on this article