Advances in Neonatal Care (Adv Neonatal Care)

Publisher: National Association of Neonatal Nurses, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins

Journal description

This exciting full-color journal is dedicated to improving the outcomes of infants and their families. As the official journal of the National Association of Neonatal Nurses, Advances in Neonatal Care presents scientifically sound, clinically relevant articles focusing on the interdisciplinary aspects of care. A rich variety of thought-provoking articles and features not only keep readers up-to-date on this challenging and rapidly changing field, but also promote new approaches to controversial issues. Many articles are enhanced by unique, online only video features.

Current impact factor: 1.12

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2014 Impact Factor 1.122

Additional details

5-year impact 0.00
Cited half-life 5.50
Immediacy index 0.06
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.00
Website Advances in Neonatal Care website
Other titles Advances in neonatal care
ISSN 1536-0903
OCLC 47348509
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publisher details

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author cannot archive a post-print version
  • Restrictions
    • 12 months embargo
  • Conditions
    • Some journals have separate policies, please check with each journal directly
    • Pre-print must be removed upon acceptance for publication
    • Post-print may be deposited in personal website or institutional repository
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Must include statement that it is not the final published version
    • Published source must be acknowledged with full citation
    • Set statement to accompany deposit
    • Must link to publisher version
    • NIH authors will have their accepted manuscripts transmitted to PubMed Central on their behalf after a 12 months embargo (see policy for details)
    • Wellcome Trust and HHMI authors will have their accepted manuscripts transmitted to PubMed Central on their behalf after a 6 months embargo (see policy for details)
    • Publisher last reviewed on 19/03/2015
  • Classification
    ​ yellow

Publications in this journal

  • Advances in Neonatal Care 10/2015; 15(5):345-353. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000228
  • Advances in Neonatal Care 09/2015; DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000227
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The maternal microbiome is recognized as a key determinant of a range of important maternal and child health outcomes, and together with perinatal factors influences the infant microbiome. This article provides a summary review of research investigating (1) the role of the maternal microbiome in pregnancy outcomes known to adversely influence neonatal and infant health, including preterm birth, cardiometabolic complications of pregnancy such as preeclampsia and gestational diabetes, and excessive gestational weight gain; (2) factors with an established link to adverse pregnancy outcomes that are known to influence the composition of the maternal microbiome; and (3) strategies for promoting a healthy maternal microbiome, recognizing that much more research is needed in this area.
    Advances in Neonatal Care 08/2015; DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000218
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 06/2015; 15(3):164-165. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000197
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 06/2015; 15(3):E1-E2. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000205
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 06/2015; 15(3):225-227. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000194
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 06/2015; 15(3):E3-E15. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000201
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 04/2015; 15(2):E1-E2. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000174
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 04/2015; 15(2):84-85. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000172
  • Advances in Neonatal Care 04/2015; 15(2):77-80. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000173
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although advanced practice in neonatal nursing is accepted and supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics and National Association of Neonatal Nurse Practitioners, less than one-half of all states allow independent prescriptive authority by advanced practice nurse practitioners. The purpose of this study was to compare costs of a collaborative practice model that includes neonatal nurse practitioner (NNP) plus neonatologist (Neo) versus a neonatologist only (Neo-Only) practice in Washington state. Published Internet median salary figures from 3 sources were averaged to produce mean ± SD provider salaries, and costs for each care model were calculated in this descriptive, comparative study. Median NNP versus Neo salaries were $99,773 ± $5206 versus $228,871 ± $9654, respectively (P < .0001). The NNP + Neo (5 NNP/3 Neo full-time equivalents [FTEs]) cost $1,185,475 versus Neo-Only (8 Neo FTEs) cost $1,830,960. The NNP + Neo practice model with 8 FTEs suggests a cost savings, with assumed equivalent reimbursement, of $645,485/year. These results may provide the impetus for more states to adopt broader scope of practice licensure for NNPs. These data may provide rationale for analysis of actual costs and outcomes of collaborative practice.
    Advances in Neonatal Care 03/2015; 15(2). DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000161
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) may be the most preventable cause of death for infants 0 to 6 months of age. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) first published safe sleep recommendations for parents and healthcare professionals in 1992. In 1994, new guidelines were published and they became known as the "Back to Sleep" campaign. After this, a noticeable decline occurred in infant deaths from SIDS. However, this number seems to have plateaued with no continuing significant improvements in infant deaths. The objective of this review was to determine whether nurses provide a safe sleep environment for infants in the hospital setting. Research studies that dealt with nursing behaviors and nursing knowledge in the hospital setting were included in the review. A search was conducted of Google Scholar, CINAHL, PubMed, and Cochrane, using the key words "NICU," "newborn," "SIDS," "safe sleep environment," "nurse," "education," "supine sleep," "prone sleep," "safe sleep," "special care nursery," "hospital policy for safe sleep," "research," "premature," "knowledge," "practice," "health care professionals," and "parents." The review included research reports on nursing knowledge and behaviors as well as parental knowledge obtained through education and role modeling of nursing staff. Only research studies were included to ensure that our analysis was based on rigorous research-based findings. Several international studies were included because they mirrored findings noted in the United States. All studies were published between 1999 and 2012. Healthcare professionals and parents were included in the studies. They were primarily self-report surveys, designed to determine what nurses, other healthcare professionals, and parents knew or had been taught about SIDS. Integrative review. Thirteen of the 16 studies included in the review found that some nurses and some mothers continued to use nonsupine positioning. Four of the 16 studies discussed nursing knowledge and noncompliance with AAP safe sleep recommendations. Eleven of the 16 studies found that some nurses were recommending incorrect sleep positions to mothers. Five of the 16 studies noted that some nurses and mothers gave fear of aspiration as the reason they chose to use a nonsupine sleep position. In the majority of the studies, the information was self-reported, which could impact the validity of the findings. Also, the studies used convenience sampling, which makes study findings difficult to generalize. The research indicates that there has been a plateau in safe sleeping practices in the hospital setting. Some infants continue to be placed in positions that increase the risk for SIDS. The research also shows that some nurses are not following the 2011 AAP recommendations for a safe sleep environment. Clearly, nurses need additional education on SIDS prevention and the safe sleep environment, and additional measures need to be adopted to ensure that all nurses and all families understand the research supporting the AAP recommendation that supine sleep is best. Further work is needed to promote evidence-based practice among healthcare professionals and families.
    Advances in Neonatal Care 02/2015; 15(1):8-22. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000145
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) makes a significant contribution to diagnose brain injury in premature infants and is a diagnostic procedure that requires the infant to be taken out of the controlled environment established for growth and development. To ensure safe procedures for these vulnerable patients, practical planning and surveillance are paramount. This systematic review summarizes and evaluates the literature reporting on practical planning to maintain required safety for premature infants undergoing MRI. Literature identified through various search strategies was screened, abstracted, appraised, and synthesized through a descriptive analysis. Thirteen research studies, 2 quality improvement projects, and 10 other documents, including practice guidelines, general reviews and articles, a book chapter, and an editorial article, were retained for in-depth review. Various procedures and equipment to ensure the safety of premature infants during MRI have been developed and tested. Although the results are promising and increasingly consistent, our review suggests that more research is needed before conclusive recommendations for the use of magnetic resonance-compatible incubators, the "feed-and-sleep" approach to avoid sedation, or the specific noise-cancelling ear protection for the premature infants' safety during MRI can be established.
    Advances in Neonatal Care 02/2015; 15(1):23-37. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000142
  • NA
    Advances in Neonatal Care 02/2015; 15(1):3-5. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000157
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this article was to establish psychometric validity evidence for competency assessment instruments and to evaluate the impact of 2 forms of training on the abilities of clinicians to perform neonatal intubation. To inform the development of assessment instruments, we conducted comprehensive task analyses including each performance domain associated with neonatal intubation. Expert review confirmed content validity. Construct validity was established using the instruments to differentiate between the intubation performance abilities of practitioners (N = 294) with variable experience (novice through expert). Training outcomes were evaluated using a quasi-experimental design to evaluate performance differences between 294 subjects randomly assigned to 1 of 2 training groups. The training intervention followed American Heart Association Pediatric Advanced Life Support and Neonatal Resuscitation Program protocols with hands-on practice using either (1) live feline or (2) simulated feline models. Performance assessment data were captured before and directly following the training. All data were analyzed using analysis of variance with repeated measures and statistical significance set at P < .05. Content validity, reliability, and consistency evidence were established for each assessment instrument. Construct validity for each assessment instrument was supported by significantly higher scores for subjects with greater levels of experience, as compared with those with less experience (P = .000). Overall, subjects performed significantly better in each assessment domain, following the training intervention (P = .000). After controlling for experience level, there were no significant differences among the cognitive, performance, and self-efficacy outcomes between clinicians trained with live animal model or simulator model. Analysis of retention scores showed that simulator trained subjects had significantly higher performance scores after 18 weeks (P = .01) and 52 weeks (P = .001) and cognitive scores after 52 weeks (P = .001). The results of this study demonstrate the feasibility of using valid, reliable assessment instruments to assess clinician competency and self-efficacy in the performance of neonatal intubation. We demonstrated the relative equivalency of live animal and simulation-based models as tools to support acquisition of neonatal intubation skills. Retention of performance abilities was greater for subjects trained using the simulator, likely because it afforded greater opportunity for repeated practice. Outcomes in each assessment area were influenced by the previous intubation experience of participants. This suggests that neonatal intubation training programs could be tailored to the level of provider experience to make efficient use of time and educational resources. Future research focusing on the uses of assessment in the applied clinical environment, as well as identification of optimal training cycles for performance retention, is merited.
    Advances in Neonatal Care 02/2015; 15(1):56-64. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000130
  • Advances in Neonatal Care 02/2015; 15(1):1-2. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000158
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the relationship of perinatal factors, neonatal factors, and family characteristics with school outcomes of low-birth-weight (LBW) children. An integrative review of the literature was performed using electronic databases focusing on key words, including school outcome, school performance, educational outcome, academic outcome/academic achievement, and LBW. The in utero or neonatal risk factors for poor school outcome included in this review were perinatal brain injury, brain structural abnormality, motor deficits, and neonatal conditions. Social risk factors found to contribute to poorer school outcomes were family structure, family stability, parental education, poverty, male sex, nonwhite race, and acculturation level. Long-term school outcomes of LBW children are influenced by a number of factors related to the characteristics of both children and their families. These factors need to be considered when designing preventive interventions.
    Advances in Neonatal Care 02/2015; 15(1):38-47. DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000133