Chairman's Library
Visit the Chairman’s Library. Get insights directly from one of the nation’s preeminent authorities on the medical liability industry and political reform initiatives.

Feedback
Have something specific you would like to speak with us about? Send us a note.

My Rating:
    Rating:
      No votes
      The Doctor’s Advocate | Fourth Quarter 2007


      Director's Forum
      | | More options
      Subscribe  

      Criteria to Define an Acute Intrapartum Hypoxic Event as Sufficient to Cause Cerebral Palsy

      by David B. Troxel, MD, Medical Director, Board of Governors

      The report “Neonatal Encephalopathy and Cerebral Palsy: Defining the Pathogenesis and Pathophysiology” was published in 2003 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Academy of Pediatrics. It significantly broadened our understanding of this problem and provided the necessary information for evaluating the newborn with encephalopathy. An executive summary of the report entitled “Neonatal Encephalopathy and Cerebral Palsy: Executive Summary” (Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2004 103:780–81) is an important reference.

      As noted in the forward of this report, “Until recently, four nonspecific clinical signs: 1) meconium-stained liquor, 2) nonreassuring fetal heart rate patterns, 3) low Apgar scores, and 4) neonatal encephalopathy were often assumed to be adequate evidence of birth asphyxia and hypoxic-ischemic neonatal encephalopathy in the absence of objective criteria to show that a de novo acute hypoxic event actually occurred during labor and delivery.” In reality, these four nonspecific signs often are the results of pathological insults to the newborn that occurred before labor and delivery.

      Dr. R. Gibbs, et al., at the University of Colorado felt that applying the evidence contained in this report had great implications for risk management; however, the report did not make specific recommendations for clinical practice. Therefore, Dr. Gibbs, et al., wrote “Suggestions for Practice to Accompany Neonatal Encephalopathy and Cerebral Palsy” (Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2004 103:778–79).

      Both of these articles are available on the ACOG Web site (www.acog.org).

      The Criteria to Define an Acute Intrapartum Hypoxic Event as Sufficient to Cause Cerebral Palsy was developed by Drs. Henry Galan and Ronald Gibbs at the University of Colorado. It summarizes the “Suggestions for Practice” and provides a practical guideline to follow when faced with this difficult problem. Documenting the presence or absence of the 4 Essential and 5 Suggestive Criteria should be done in all cases of potential neonatal encephalopathy and cerebral palsy.

      The Criteria to Define an Acute Intrapartum Hypoxic Event as Sufficient to Cause Cerebral Palsy is available on our Web site at http://www.thedoctors.com/KnowledgeCenter/PatientSafety/articles/CON_ID_000310.

      Please consider:

      • Sharing this information with your entire perinatal team, including Pediatrics, NICU Staff, Anesthesia, L&D Personnel, etc.
      • Developing written guidelines and pro­tocols to apply the 12 “Suggestions for Practice” in your institution.
      • Developing an interdisciplinary nomen­clature at your institution that avoids nonspecific terms such as “fetal distress” and “birth asphyxia.”
      •  

        About the Author

        David B. Troxel, MD, is medical director of The Doctors Company. Dr. Troxel is clinical professor emeritus in the School of Public Health at the University of California at Berkeley. He is past president of the American Board of Pathology and the California Society of Pathologists.


       

      The Doctor’s Advocate is published by The Doctors Company to advise and inform its members about loss prevention and insurance issues.

       

      The guidelines suggested in this newsletter are not rules, do not constitute legal advice, and do not ensure a successful outcome. They attempt to define principles of practice for providing appropriate care. The principles are not inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods reasonably directed at obtaining the same results.

       

      The ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of any treatment must be made by each health care provider in light of all circumstances prevailing in the individual situation and in accordance with the laws of the jurisdiction in which the care is rendered.

       

      The Doctor’s Advocate is published quarterly by Corporate Communications, The Doctors Company. Letters and articles, to be edited and published at the editor’s discretion, are welcome. The views expressed are those of the letter writer and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or official policy of The Doctors Company. Please sign your letters, and address them to the editor.




      | | More options
      Subscribe