Neonatal transport services, a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Objective: To understand the process and challenges facing neonatal transport in Canada and to delineate their composition and working.

Subjects and methodology: An online questionnaire was sent to all neonatal transport team directors/coordinators in Canada. The questionnaire covered different aspects of transport and was pilot tested prior to finalization. The responses were anonymous to the investigators.

Results: All sixteen neonatal transport teams in Canada surveyed. Fifteen teams responded. Dedicated team as a model was adopted by 12 teams (80%). A combined Neonatal/pediatrics team, where the team could be assembled by either neonatal or pediatrics intensive care staff, adopted by two (13%). Team members were cross-trained in about quarter of the teams (four teams out of 15) with respiratory therapists and registered nurses performing each other’s roles. Neonatal Resuscitation Program was mandatory for all teams that responded (15 teams) to become certified as a neonatal transport team member. Nine teams use a central dispatch phone call system.

Conclusion: As the first to comprehensively describe the status of neonatal transport in Canada, our study shows that neonatal transport teams have similarities as well as differences. Regionalization and differences in referral practices, geography, provincial laws, and manpower are the main reasons why teams may have their individual variations in policies, protocols, and logistics. Our data can be utilized by health professionals and policy makers to improve neonatal transport logistics within their health care systems resulting in better outcomes of transported neonates.

KEYWORDS:

• Dedicated team
• interfacility transport
• neonatal transport
• transport teams

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the Neonatal Transport teams who participated in this survey. Also, many thanks to the Acute Care Transport Services at Hospital for Sick Children- Toronto.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.