Premature baby care study urged
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A CONTINUING study of the outcome of costly intensive care for tiny premature babies is needed to assess how many are left disabled, leading specialists said yesterday.
The study is needed in the wake of dramatic improvements, since the 1970s, in survival rates for very small babies and those born extremely prematurely - before 28 weeks' gestation. Half of those weighing between 500g and 1,000g - less than a bag of sugar - now reach their first birthday.
Despite these improvements, 'very little is known about their long-term prognosis', the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, a Department of Health-funded unit which concentrates on care for the new-born, said. Vigilance is needed 'to ensure that the cost of increased survival is not an increased rate of handicap for the survivors'.
Dr Ann Johnson, a paediatrician at the unit, said existing hospital- based studies suggested that, while neonatal intensive care was producing increased numbers of normal survivors, there might be a 10 to 20 per cent risk of the very premature child surviving handicapped in one way or another. National figures were needed to provide a more accurate picture, to measure how it was changing over time, and to establish how far disabilities were related to the intensive care or had already existed when the child was born.
'Trends over time in the frequency of impairment and disability among survivors remain unclear,' she added.
Much of the data to provide an on-going study exists in the child health surveillance programmes, under which almost all children are assessed around their second birthday. However, the information is not recorded or collated in a consistent way, or available nationally for comparison.
The Department of Health should now organise that, the unit argues. 'We need this information to inform practice,' Dr Johnson said. 'We are not at all implying that if high levels of disability are found that would be a reason for not providing intensive care. It is much more that the care provided would need to be looked at and refined.'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments