English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

OBJECTIVES: The Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Score (FNAS) monitors infants with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS), but it has been criticized for being time consuming and subjective. Many institutions have transitioned to a more straightforward screening tool, Eat, Sleep, Console (ESC), an assessment based on 3 simple observations with a focus on maximizing nonpharmacologic therapies. We aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of the ESC with that of the FNAS to determine if infants who needed pharmacologic therapy could potentially be missed when assessed by using ESC. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of infants identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision billing codes for NAS. FNAS scores were recorded every 4 hours for the entire hospitalization. ESC proxy scores were created by using components of the FNAS that referenced eating, sleeping, and consoling. Detailed demographic and clinical data were manually extracted regarding opioid exposures and pharmacologic treatment of NAS. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2016, 423 infants ≥37 weeks’ gestation had a total of 33 115 FNAS scores over 921 days of observation. In total, 287 (68%) were exposed to buprenorphine, 100 (23.7%) were exposed to methadone, and 165 (39%) were pharmacologically treated. The FNAS was 94.8% sensitive and 63.5% specific for pharmacologic treatment, and the ESC proxy variables were 99.4% sensitive and 40.2% specific (P &amp;lt; .01). CONCLUSIONS: ESC proxy variables have slightly higher sensitivity compared with FNAS, suggesting that ESC use is unlikely to miss infants requiring treatment who would have been identified by FNAS. Transitioning from FNAS to ESC is not likely to impair the care of infants with NAS.

Proxy Finnegan Component Scores for Eat, Sleep, Console in a Cohort of Opioid-Exposed Neonates