Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome Research
Journal Critique #2
Sarkar, S., & Donn, S. M. (2006). Management of neonatal abstinence syndrome in neonatal intensive care units: A national survey. Journal of Perinatology, 26(1), 15-7. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211427
The rationale behind this article was to try to manage the neonatal abstinence syndrome of a new born in intensive care.
The researchers tried to set up a universal testing to measure the neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). The objective was to get a better understanding of what the hospitals were using to evaluate the newborns with the withdrawal of the opiate addicted mothers; checking to see if there were common procedures. The methods used was a pretested questionnaire that is available online, …show more content…
The Finnegan was the most used scoring system to test the severity of the withdrawal symptoms. With 16 using the original version and almost double at 66 using the modified version, 3 used the Lipsitz tool, 10 others didn’t use any routine, the others used locally set up scoring systems. The mast majority took urine or meconium to test for toxicology before treatment was even started. Opioids are used for both opioid and poly drug withdrawal, Phenobarbital is used for the poly drug withdrawal and methadone for the opioids; meaning that there are a few different options for each withdrawal drug (Sarkar & Donn, …show more content…
As of this study the Finnegan and the Lipsitz were used, using psychomotor behavior monitoring to watch for withdrawal scoring. There were limitations to this study, data used was based on what a single person reported on what should be done, and also that the person believed being done was actually being done. The authors felt the results that “adopted the evidence-based practices or clinical behaviors, even when there is compelling evidence to do so (Sarkar & Donn, 2006”. It is easier to say that is evidence based or if it is working the way it should. There are different ways that they would change the study to be more effective. Changing the study to be less passive and teaching proactive strategies, and interventions in order to get better evidence based recommendations (Sarkar & Dunn, 2006).
The feeling of this study that it was done really well; it addressed the areas that needed to on the NAS issues giving ideas on how to make the system work together with other hospitals more of a universal reasoning
Sarkar, S., & Donn, S. M. (2006). Management of neonatal abstinence syndrome in neonatal intensive care units: A national survey. Journal of Perinatology, 26(1), 15-7. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211427
The rationale behind this article was to try to manage the neonatal abstinence syndrome of a new born in intensive care.
The researchers tried to set up a universal testing to measure the neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). The objective was to get a better understanding of what the hospitals were using to evaluate the newborns with the withdrawal of the opiate addicted mothers; checking to see if there were common procedures. The methods used was a pretested questionnaire that is available online, …show more content…
The Finnegan was the most used scoring system to test the severity of the withdrawal symptoms. With 16 using the original version and almost double at 66 using the modified version, 3 used the Lipsitz tool, 10 others didn’t use any routine, the others used locally set up scoring systems. The mast majority took urine or meconium to test for toxicology before treatment was even started. Opioids are used for both opioid and poly drug withdrawal, Phenobarbital is used for the poly drug withdrawal and methadone for the opioids; meaning that there are a few different options for each withdrawal drug (Sarkar & Donn, …show more content…
As of this study the Finnegan and the Lipsitz were used, using psychomotor behavior monitoring to watch for withdrawal scoring. There were limitations to this study, data used was based on what a single person reported on what should be done, and also that the person believed being done was actually being done. The authors felt the results that “adopted the evidence-based practices or clinical behaviors, even when there is compelling evidence to do so (Sarkar & Donn, 2006”. It is easier to say that is evidence based or if it is working the way it should. There are different ways that they would change the study to be more effective. Changing the study to be less passive and teaching proactive strategies, and interventions in order to get better evidence based recommendations (Sarkar & Dunn, 2006).
The feeling of this study that it was done really well; it addressed the areas that needed to on the NAS issues giving ideas on how to make the system work together with other hospitals more of a universal reasoning