Selected article for: "advanced care and healthcare provider"

Author: Maria, Arti; Litch, James A.; Stepanchak, Maria; Sarin, Enisha; Wadhwa, Rashmi; Kumar, Harish
Title: Assessment of feasibility and acceptability of family-centered care implemented at a neonatal intensive care unit in India
  • Cord-id: py1614wc
  • Document date: 2021_4_13
  • ID: py1614wc
    Snippet: BACKGROUND: A family-centered care (FCC) parent participation program that ensures an infant is not separated from parents against their will was developed for the caring of their small or sick newborn at a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Delhi, India. Healthcare provider sensitization training directed at psychosocial and tangible support and an audio-visual training tool for parent-attendants were developed that included: 1) handwashing, infection prevention, protocol for entry; 2) deve
    Document: BACKGROUND: A family-centered care (FCC) parent participation program that ensures an infant is not separated from parents against their will was developed for the caring of their small or sick newborn at a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Delhi, India. Healthcare provider sensitization training directed at psychosocial and tangible support and an audio-visual training tool for parent-attendants were developed that included: 1) handwashing, infection prevention, protocol for entry; 2) developmentally supportive care, breastfeeding, expression of breastmilk and assisted feeding; 3) kangaroo mother care; and 4) preparation for discharge and care at home. The study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of the FCC model in a NICU in India. METHODS: A prospective cohort design collected quantitative data on each parent-attendant/infant dyad at enrollment, during the NICU stay, and at discharge. Feasibility of the FCC program was measured by assessing the participation of parent-attendants and healthcare providers, and whether training components were implemented as intended. Acceptability was measured by the proportion of parent-attendants who participated in the trainings and their ability to accurately complete program activities. RESULTS: Of 395 NICU admissions during the study period, eligible participants included 333 parent-attendant/infant dyads, 24 doctors, and 21 nurses. Of the 1242 planned parent-attendant training sessions, 939 (75.6%) were held, indicating that program fidelity was high, and the majority of trainings were implemented as intended. While 50% of parent-attendants completed all 4 FCC training sessions, 95% completed sessions 1 and 2; 60% of the total participating parent-attendants completed session 3, and 75% completed session 4. Compliance rates were over 96% for 5 of 10 FCC parent-attendant activities, and 60 to 78% for the remaining 5 activities. CONCLUSIONS: FCC was feasible to implement in this setting and was acceptable to participating parent-attendants and healthcare providers. Parents participated in trainings conducted by NICU providers and engaged in essential care to their infants in the NICU. A standard care approach and behavior norms for healthcare providers directed psychosocial and tangible support to parent-attendants so that a child is not separated from his or her parents against their will while receiving advanced care in the NICU.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • acceptability feasibility and additional study: 1, 2
    • acceptability feasibility and additional support: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • acceptability feasibility and low acceptability: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
    • acceptability feasibility and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38
    • acceptability feasibility and low income country: 1, 2
    • acceptability feasibility and low income country care: 1
    • acceptability feasibility and low middle income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
    • acceptability feasibility and low resource: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    • acceptability feasibility implementation and additional study: 1
    • acceptability feasibility implementation and additional support: 1
    • acceptability feasibility implementation and low acceptability: 1, 2
    • acceptability feasibility implementation and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    • acceptability feasibility implementation and low middle income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
    • acceptability feasibility implementation and low resource: 1
    • acceptability feasibility measure and low income: 1
    • acceptability feasibility measure and low middle income: 1