Published Nov 11, 2008
nurseinnh
7 Posts
I am curious as to what other hospitals use as a normal newborn hypoglycemia protocol? I feel ours is a bit aggressive.
Here is our protocol.
If an infant is at "high risk" for hypoglycemia (GDM, LGA or SGA) we need to check a glucose one hour after birth and then again two hours after birth. If either is below range (below 45), then we feed the infant and check glucose again. IF the second glucose is within "normal limits" (over 45) then we continue to check the baby's glucose via heel stick every 3 HOURS until 24 hours of age--even if the glucose is 60s-70s the whole time.
The parents hate it, we feel mean and the babies can't enjoy it--they pull their feet away whenever someone touches them.
I would just like to compare. Thank you!!
SewHeather
16 Posts
ours is very similar, except when we have 2 consecutive readings above 45, we can discontinue to heel sticks unless we have any reason to recheck it, ie jitteriness, unwilling to eat, lethargy, etc... Checking every three hours after a few good reasings seems a little over the top, I would hate having to stick a baby that many times.
rn/writer, RN
9 Articles; 4,168 Posts
Our at-risk newborns are checked about twenty minutes after birth. We encourage early breastfeeding. Depending on the reading, bottle-fed babies may also eat soon.
The goal is to have two consecutive readings > 45. Heel sticks are done ac and one hour or longer after a feeding until we get the two normal readings. Usually we are done by the time the kiddo is about four hours old. This saves them 4-6 sticks over your system. Yikes!
Once the two good readings are obtained, we don't do any more dexis unless there is something else that would warrant one--abnormal temp, lethargy, jittery behavior, etc. Your protocol does seem overly aggressive.
It would be interesting for your unit to keep track of how many newborns went on to have problems after two consecutive normal readings. If you found that this was highly unusual and that it was accompanied by some other indicator such as lethary or jitteriness that would cause you to do a dexi anyway, perhaps such evidence would persuade the top dog neonate to back off a bit and let sleeping babies lie.
That's the way it used to be before they changed the protocol. We have all asked the pedis to provide us with the literature that supports this new one. It has been a rough adjustment. Normally, we do vital signs on any at risk infant q4 until discharge...So we end up doing vitals q3 to cluster them with the glucose so as not to disturb them more than we have to. The babies we are most concerned about (with good reason) are the IUGR or twin gestations. But under the new protocol, we are poking the babies before feedings and then the poor things are completely worn out and won't eat!
Elvish, BSN, DNP, RN, NP
4 Articles; 5,259 Posts
We do heelsticks on at-risk babies at 1, 2, and 4 hours old. If those are all normal, we stop. If one of those is low, we feed them (or they breastfeed) and recheck in an hour. If the last one (or the 4-hr one, whichever is later) is normal, we stop. Q3 sounds a bit over-the-top.
SmilingBluEyes
20,964 Posts
We do three consecutive sugar checks , prior to eating. If all 3 are stable (we prefer above 45) then we do one more at 12 hours age and again, a final one at 24 hours. IF sugars are below 45, we do them more often, PC cup feeding formula on breastfeeding infants who "ride the line" continually, until they settle in the 50s.
mom2michael, MSN, RN, NP
1,168 Posts
Our "at risk" babies get one shortly after delivery. If it's below 40, we feed them and check again in 1 hour, if it's OK then it's one more check before their next feed and then we just monitor them if that one was OK. If s/s start to appear, then we can always recheck them otherwise we just encourage frequent feedings (either breast or bottle) and really stress to the parents that includes waking up the baby to make them eat.
I think your policy is a bit excessive (this is coming from me, the RN who works in a place that is over the top excessive regarding infants :rotfl:)
Vida
129 Posts
If that was my baby I'd refuse THAT many sticks! Geeze - poor little guys!
We have only had a couple of parents refuse....one set of parents were doctors themselves.
Most parents just go with the flow, they believe that "we have to do what we have to do."
I think it is pretty excessive as well.
Conejita, BSN
72 Posts
This is exactly the protocol we have on my unit.
This could actually represent a fair amount of blood loss in a smaller infant.
I'd get your manager to press the docs for justification for so much testing. In my book, they'd have to have some mighty compelling evidence to back this up.
I agree with Miranda----you are actually committing a sort of blood-letting in the way you do this. It could present a problem. And it is very unnecessary.