Author : Laura Johnson Faherty
Publisher :
ISBN 13 :
Total Pages : 38 pages
Book Rating : 4.:/5 (125 download)
Book Synopsis Informing the Development of Standardized Clinical Definitions of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome and Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome by : Laura Johnson Faherty
Download or read book Informing the Development of Standardized Clinical Definitions of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome and Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome written by Laura Johnson Faherty and published by . This book was released on 2021 with total page 38 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: From 2010 to 2017, the United States experienced a significant increase in maternal opioid-related diagnoses and neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). NAS is increasingly being referred to as neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS), as opioids are becoming the most common cause of neonatal withdrawal, whether alone or in the presence of other substances. A major challenge in the field is the lack of a standardized clinical definition of NAS. To address this challenge, the authors convened two modified-Delphi expert panels consisting of national experts on substance-exposed mother-infant dyads. Through these online panels, the authors solicited expert opinion to inform the development of clinical definitions of NAS and NOWS for use at the bedside as part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services initiative on NAS. To convene the panels, the authors used ExpertLensTM, a previously evaluated platform for conducting iterative online modified-Delphi panels. Participants provided initial responses to study questions about key components of the clinical definition of NAS and NOWS; reviewed how their responses compared to those of other participants; and revised their responses based on group feedback and discussion, if needed. Eighteen experts provided numeric ratings and free-text comments to contextualize their responses. Simple descriptive statistics, including frequency distributions, medians, interquartile ranges, as well as the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Manual's approach to determining consensus in expert panels were used to analyze rating data, and the authors thematically analyzed the experts' free-text comments.