Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 Sep 23;321(7263):727-9.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7263.727.

National census of availability of neonatal intensive care. British Association for Perinatal Medicine

Affiliations

National census of availability of neonatal intensive care. British Association for Perinatal Medicine

J Parmanum et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether availability of neonatal intensive care cots is a problem in any or all parts of the United Kingdom.

Design: Three month census from 1 April to 30 June 1999 comprising simple data sheets on transfers out of tertiary units.

Setting: The 37 largest high risk perinatal centres in the United Kingdom.

Participants: One obstetric specialist and one neonatal specialist in each centre.

Main outcome measures: Suboptimal care resulting directly from pressure on service-that is, transfers out of tertiary units (either in utero or after delivery) because the unit was "full" and not because the hospital was incapable of providing the care needed.

Results: All units provided data. The number of intensive care cots in each unit was between five and 16. During the three months 309 transfers occurred (equivalent to 1236 per year), of which 264 were in utero and 45 postnatal. Sixty five in utero transfers involved multiple births, hence the census related to 382 babies (1528 per year). There was considerable regional variation. The reason for transfer in most cases was "lack of neonatal beds".

Conclusions: Currently most major perinatal centres in the United Kingdom are regularly unable to meet in-house demand; this has implications for the service as a whole. The NHS has set no standards to help health authorities and primary care groups develop services relating to this specialty; such a step may well be an appropriate lever for change.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) Access and availability of neonatal intensive care. London: HMSO; 1993.
    1. National Association of Health Authorities and Trusts. Reinventing health care—towards a new model. London: NAHAT; 1993.
    1. Simpson H, Walker G. Estimating the cots required for neonatal intensive care. Arch Dis Child. 1981;56:90–93. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Morris D, Cottrell AJ, Hey EN. Requirements for neonatal cots. A Northern Neonatal Network study. Arch Dis Child. 1993;68:544–549. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Field D, Hodges S, Mason E, Burton P. The demand for neonatal intensive care. BMJ. 1989;299:1305–1308. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms