Neonatal and Pediatric Medicine
Open Access

Critical; Encephalopathy; Hypothermia; Intervention

Introduction

The introduction sets the stage for the research, providing background information on the significance of neonatal intensive care and the challenges faced in caring for premature or critically ill newborns [1]. It may also include a literature review to showcase existing knowledge gaps and the need for the current study. The field of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) interventions has witnessed remarkable advancements over the past few decades, leading to significant improvements in the survival and long-term outcomes of premature and critically ill newborns [2]. The NICU is a specialized unit within a hospital that provides intensive medical attention and specialized care to newborns who are born prematurely or with serious medical conditions.

Neonatal mortality and morbidity rates have historically been a major concern in the healthcare industry, with premature birth being a leading cause of infant mortality worldwide. However, with advancements in medical technology, research, and multidisciplinary care approaches, the NICU has become a place of hope and healing for newborns facing critical health challenges. This comprehensive review aims to explore the recent breakthroughs and innovations in NICU interventions, covering a wide range of medical, technological, and supportive measures that have contributed to improved neonatal outcomes [3]. The review will delve into key areas such as respiratory support, nutrition management, infection control, neurodevelopmental care, and family-centered initiatives.

Throughout this review, we will examine the evidence-based practices and clinical studies that have paved the way for safer and more effective treatments in the NICU. Additionally, we will explore the role of advanced monitoring techniques, precision medicine, and telemedicine in optimizing neonatal care [4].

It is crucial to acknowledge the concerted efforts of neonatologists, pediatricians, nurses, researchers, and medical technology companies that have collectively worked towards transforming the NICU landscape. Their commitment to innovation and compassionate care has not only saved countless lives but also enhanced the quality of life for many NICU graduates [5].

Despite these remarkable achievements, challenges persist in the field of neonatal care, and this review will also discuss ongoing research and areas for future exploration. By understanding the evolving landscape of NICU interventions, we can identify areas that require further attention and investment to continue making strides in neonatal healthcare [6].

Methods

The specific study was carried out between July 2019 and June 2020 at the obstetrics clinic of the University Hospital of Thessaly, Greece, with a prospective design. Our initial sample consisted of postpartum women after CS (planned and emergency) who were aged 18 or older and gave written informed consent to participate in the study. Our first sample consisted of 490 women who gave written consent for participation in the research study and met the predetermined criteria for participation in the study [7]. From this sample, 21 women were lost after first contact, and finally, 469 postpartum women responded to the follow-up and constituted the sample of our study.

Research participation criteria

The University Hospital of Larisa in Greece’s Ethics Commission gave the study their seal of approval (approval number: 18838/08-05- 2019).The research participants who delivered babies with CS had a full medical history at the particular hospital, indicating that they were observed for the entirety of their pregnancies or the majority of them there [8]. They also had a sufficient command of the Greek language, displayed satisfactory mental levels, and did not use any drugs or alcohol during the perinatal period. Women who had recently given birth but did not match the above requirements were not included in the study.

Measures and data

Data were gathered twice, on the second day and the sixth week after delivery. The researcher administered socio-demographic (Criteria A) questionnaires to postpartum women during their hospitalization on the second day following caesarean birth in the first phase, with their informed consent, and collected information on each woman’s medical history [9]. When there were no guests and no medical or nursing procedures being done, the moms were approached and communicated with in their hospital room; when there were other women present, the mother was moved to a more private location. The first phase of the research was carried out on the second postoperative day since it corresponds with women’s physical recovery following surgery [10].

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to look into the effects of a neonate being admitted to the NICU (for any cause) on the emergence of P-PTSD in a cohort of women who had undergone CS. In contrast to women who get CS, postpartum PTSD rates in the general postpartum population ranged from 3 to 27%, with percentages exceeding 30%. Our findings showed that P-PTSD was experienced by 11.7% of postpartum women after CS. While 52.2% of the entire group reported no birth satisfaction (they did not expect to give birth in this way), 51% of women had perceived their CS as traumatic. However, P-PTSD was reported by 37.7% of postpartum women whose neonates were hospitalized because of prenatal stress, respiratory issues, infections, or IUGR, and 38.8% of postpartum women whose neonates were admitted to the NICU because of preterm. The high rate of PTSD is in line with a previous study in which 60% of women whose children were admitted to the NICU had the disorder. Additionally, the findings of a different study demonstrated a connection between postpartum moms’ acute PTSD symptoms and their child’s placement in the NICU for any cause. These findings indicate significant psychological stress comparable to large natural disasters, sexual assault, and war. In accordance with our findings, mothers who underwent CS with kids who were admitted to the NICU in addition to Criterion a (fear for the life of the neonate) because of perinatal stress, breathing issues, infections, and IUGR were more likely to experience P-PTSD than mothers whose kids were admitted to the NICU because they were premature. According to our observations, preterm was not a role in the onset of PTSD; as a result, this rate is caused by other circumstances that may endanger the mother’s life, such as emergency CS, difficulties, or displeasure with the delivery method. We must emphasize that the autonomic nervous system functions to effectively respond to a threat during an acute lifethreatening event in order to understand this phenomena. However, unexpected situations are linked to acute psychological trauma that can cause PTSD. Therefore, it appears that additional conditions that interfere with the normal course of pregnancy and get the mother ready for a potential complication during childbirth may be linked to preterm.

Conclusion

Our data indicate that the development of P-PTSD in women following CS is significantly influenced by the neonate’s admission to the NICU. However, because moms are better psychologic[ally equipped to handle this situation, being premature is not in and of itself a risk factor. These women may have a high incidence of PTSD for various reasons. They can be repeating an earlier mental trauma because they did not match prenatal stress Criteria. As we have seen, the effects of trauma can be mild, sneaky, or downright terrible. Numerous variables, such as the individual’s traits, the nature and qualities of the incident, developmental processes, the gravity of the trauma, and psychosocial factors, all affect how an event affects a person. Mothers after CS and those whose infants are admitted to the NICU require additional measures, including psychological support interventions and a reevaluation of their mental health. Additionally, extra effort must be taken to promote nursing in order to lessen the severity of birth trauma and foster mother-child relationships. Finally, it would be intriguing to investigate which regulated socio-demographic variables might function as protective factors in future studies.

1. Dutt SB, Jayant N (2016) A review article on Swarna prashana samskara wsr immunization. IJAA 2: 1024-1028.

Google Scholar

2. Shahapure S (2018) A Study On Parent’s Opinion Towards Swarna Bindu Prashana In Kalaburagi City. IJPERA 3: 1-4.

Google Scholar

3. Rao NP, Shailaja U, Mallika KJ, Desai SS, Debnath P (2012) Traditional Use Of Swarnamrita Prashana As A Preventive Measure: Evidence Based Observational Study In Children. IJRiAP 3: 1-5.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Aniket P, Pallavi D, Aziz A, Avinash K, Vikas S (2017) Clinical effect of suvarna bindu prashan. JAIMS 2: 11-18.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

5. Gaikwad A (2011) A Comparative pharmaco-clinical study of Madhu-Ghrita and SwarnaVacha Madhu-Ghrita on neonates. Ayurved MD Research thesis. R. A Guj Ayur Uni.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Singh (2016) A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial on Swarna Prashana and its Immunomodulatory Activity in Neonates. Jam.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Rathi R, Rathi B (2017) Efficacy of Suvarnaprashan in Preterm infants-A Comparative Pilot study J of Ind Sys Medi 5: 91.

Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Ismaili K, Hall M, Donner C, Thomas D, Vermeylen D, et al. (2003) Results of systematic screening for minor degrees of fetal renal pelvis dilatation in an unselected population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188: 242-246.

Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Coplen DE, Austin PF, Yan Y, Blanco VM, Dicke JM (2006) The magnitude of fetal renal pelvic dilatation can identify obstructive postnatal hydronephrosis, and direct postnatal evaluation and management. J Urol 176: 724-727.

Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Grignon A, Filion R, Filiatrault D, Robitaille P, Homsy Y, et al. (1986) Urinary tract dilatation in utero: classification and clinical applications. Radiol 160: 645-647.

Google Scholar, Crossref