[Skip to Navigation]
Editorial
February 17, 2020

Delivering Neonates at High Risk in the Right Place: Back to the Future Again

Author Affiliations
  • 1Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville
JAMA Pediatr. 2020;174(4):329-330. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.6059

Regionalization of perinatal care has long been known to improve neonatal outcomes.1 The March of Dimes, in their original iteration of Toward Improving the Outcome of Pregnancy in 1976, strongly advocated for regionalized perinatal care and development of levels of neonatal care. In response, health care systems created regional perinatal networks to facilitate antenatal transfer of women at risk for preterm birth in the hopes of improving neonatal outcome and maternal care. In the 1990s, with the advent of managed care and expansion of Medicaid reimbursement, hospitals sought to control costs within systems. These changes led to an increase in the number of community neonatal intensive care units, which have outpaced local acuity and volume and contributed to the relative disintegration of regionalized perinatal networks.2 With variable definitions of levels of neonatal care, smaller neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) may not be able to offer the same resources as larger units, and lower daily volumes of NICU census can be associated with poorer outcomes.3 For women with pregnancies requiring very preterm deliveries, receiving care at the right hospital with the right resources can be a matter of survival or normal development for their children.

Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    ×