Abstract
Increasing numbers of neonatal intensive care units have formed small baby units or small baby teams with the intention to optimize care of extremely premature infants. Considerable time, energy, and resources are required to develop and sustain complex quality improvement constructs, so legitimate questions about effectiveness, unintended consequences, and lost opportunity costs warrant scrutiny. The small baby unit literature is diminutive. Errors of chance, bias, and confounding secondary to insufficient definitions of process and outcome metrics, overlapping quality improvement projects, and limited cost analyses restrict firm conclusions. Well-established quality improvement methodologies such as evidence-based guidelines, standardized variability reduction using measurement-and-adjust techniques, family-integrated focus, and developmentally sensitive care, reliably improve outcomes for all-sized premature infants. There is not compelling published evidence that adding specialized small baby units or designated teams for extremely premature infants further enhances short- or long-term health if robust quality improvement fundamentals are already imbedded within local culture.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
