Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Clinical deterioration during neonatal transport in California

Journal of Perinatology volume 40, pages 377–384 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objective

Identify clinical factors, transport characteristics and transport time intervals associated with clinical deterioration during neonatal transport in California.

Study design

Population-based database was used to evaluate 47,794 infants transported before 7 days after birth from 2007 to 2016. Log binomial regression was used to estimate relative risks.

Results

30.8% of infants had clinical deterioration. Clinical deterioration was associated with prematurity, delivery room resuscitation, severe birth defects, emergent transports, transports by helicopter and requests for delivery room attendance. When evaluating transport time intervals, time required for evaluation by the transport team was associated with increased risk of clinical deterioration. Modifiable transport intervals were not associated with increased risk.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that high-risk infants are more likely to be unstable during transport. Coordination and timing of neonatal transport in California appears to be effective and does not seem to contribute to clinical deterioration despite variation in the duration of these processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lupton BA, Pendray MR. Regionalized neonatal emergency transport. Semin Neonatol. 2004;9:125–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Marlow N, Bennett C, Draper ES, Hennessy EM, Morgan AS, Costeloe KL. Perinatal outcomes for extremely preterm babies in relation to place of birth in England: the EPICure 2 study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014;99:F181–188.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Warner B, Musial MJ, Chenier T, Donovan E. The effect of birth hospital type on the outcome of very low birth weight infants. Pediatrics. 2004;113(1 Pt 1):35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Apfeld JC, Kastenberg ZJ, Sylvester KG, Lee HC. The effect of level of care on gastroschisis outcomes. J Pediatr. 2017;190:79–84.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kastenberg ZJ, Lee HC, Profit J, Gould JB, Sylvester KG. Effect of deregionalized care on mortality in very low-birth-weight infants with necrotizing enterocolitis. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169:26–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lapcharoensap W, Gage SC, Kan P, Profit J, Shaw GM, Gould JB, et al. Hospital variation and risk factors for bronchopulmonary dysplasia in a population-based cohort. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169:e143676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hohlagschwandtner M, Husslein P, Klebermass K, Weninger M, Nardi A, Langer M. Perinatal mortality and morbidity. Comparison between maternal transport, neonatal transport and inpatient antenatal treatment. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2001;265:113–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Araújo BF, Zatti H, Oliveira Filho PF, Coelho MB, Olmi FB, Guaresi TB, et al. Effect of place of birth and transport on morbidity and mortality of preterm newborns. J Pediatr. 2011;87:257–62.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mohamed MA, Aly H. Transport of premature infants is associated with increased risk for intraventricular haemorrhage. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2010;95:F403–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Towers CV, Bonebrake R, Padilla G, Rumney P. The effect of transport on the rate of severe intraventricular hemorrhage in very low birth weight infants. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:291–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee SK, Zupancic JA, Pendray M, Thiessen P, Schmidt B, Whyte R, et al. Transport risk index of physiologic stability: a practical system for assessing infant transport care. J Pediatr. 2001;139:220–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gould JB, Danielsen BH, Bollman L, Hackel A, Murphy B. Estimating the quality of neonatal transport in California. J Perinatol. 2013;33:964–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sample M, Acharya A, O’Hearn K, Livingstone S, Menon K. The relationship between remoteness and outcomes in critically ill children. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2017;18:e514–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mori R, Fujimura M, Shiraishi J, Evans B, Corkett M, Negishi H, et al. Duration of inter-facility neonatal transport and neonatal mortality: systematic review and cohort study. Pediatr Int. 2007;49:452–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. CPQCC Manual of Definitions For Infants Born in 2018. California Care Quality Care Collaborative, Stanford, CA; 2018.

  16. Akula VP, Gould JB, Kan P, Bollman L, Profit J, Lee HC. Characteristics of neonatal transports in California. J Perinatol. 2016;36:1122–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Frid I, Ågren J, Kjellberg M, Normann E, Sindelar R. Critically ill neonates displayed stable vital parameters and reduced metabolic acidosis during neonatal emergency airborne transport in Sweden. Acta Paediatr. 2018;107:1357–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Eliason SH, Whyte H, Dow K, Cronin CM, Lee S, Network CN. Variations in transport outcomes of outborn infants among Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Am J Perinatol. 2013;30:377–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Abdel-Latif ME, Berry A. Analysis of the retrieval times of a centralised transport service, New South Wales, Australia. Arch Dis Child. 2009;94:282–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Stanford Child Health Research Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Neonatal and Developmental Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

    Vidya V. Pai, Peiyi Kan MS, Jeffrey B. Gould & Henry C. Lee

  2. California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative, Stanford, CA, USA

    Peiyi Kan MS, Jeffrey B. Gould & Henry C. Lee

  3. Division of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

    Alvin Hackel

Authors
  1. Vidya V. Pai
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peiyi Kan MS
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey B. Gould
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alvin Hackel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Henry C. Lee
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vidya V. Pai.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pai, V.V., Kan, P., Gould, J.B. et al. Clinical deterioration during neonatal transport in California. J Perinatol 40, 377–384 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-019-0488-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-019-0488-5

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links