Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Pat Ansell a Leukaemia Research Fund Centre, Institute of
Epidemiology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LN, b Mother and
Infant Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LN
Correspondence to: P Ansell p.e.ansell{at}leeds.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objectives:
To investigate policies on neonatal
vitamin K and their implementation.
Design:
Two phase postal survey.
Setting:
United Kingdom.
Participants:
A 10% random sample of midwives
registered with the United Kingdom Central Council for nursing,
midwifery, and health visiting. Of 3191 midwives in the sample, 2515 (79%) responded to phase one and 2294 (72%) completed questionnaires on their current jobs (November 1998 to May 1999). In phase two, 853 (62%) of 1383 eligible midwives gave details on 2179 of their earliest
jobs (start dates before 1990).
Results:
All the midwives in clinical practice at the time of the survey (2271, 99%) reported that they were working in
areas with official policies on neonatal vitamin K. Seven distinct policies were described: intramuscular vitamin K for all babies (1159, 51.0%); intramuscular vitamin K for babies at "high risk," oral
for others (470, 20.7%); oral vitamin K for all babies (323, 14.2%);
parental choice for all (124, 5.5%); parental choice for all except
babies at high risk, (119, 5.2%); intramuscular vitamin K for babies
at high risk only (33, 1.5%); oral vitamin K for babies at high risk
only (17, 0.7%); and a disparate group of policies including
intravenous vitamin K for some babies (26, 1.1%). Previous policies
were (and some may still be) open to individual interpretation and were
not always followed.
Conclusions:
Hospital policy is not necessarily a
good guide to individual practice. The primary purpose of clinical records is to document patient care, and recording practices reflect this. There is considerable variation in vitamin K policies and midwifery practice in the United Kingdom, and there is no clear consensus on which babies should receive vitamin K intramuscularly.
|
What is already known on this topic
What this study adds
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Concern over prophylactic administration of vitamin K to newborn babies has continued for almost a decade, following reports in the early 1990s of a statistically significant association between intramuscular vitamin K and childhood cancer.1 Subsequent studies have, in general, failed to support this association.2-10 Inconsistencies in results from the United Kingdom in particular have, however, left lingering doubts about the safety of administering vitamin K by the intramuscular route. 1 6-10
Most British studies have had a case-control design, with exposure data
collected retrospectively from maternity
records.
1 6 7 9 10
Details of vitamin K administration
may be found in several places in maternity records,6 and
all studies report that a written record confirming that it has (or has
not) been given is often not found. Some research groups have attempted
to impute a child's vitamin K status from the hospital policy in place
at the time of the child's birth. Vitamin K is, however, unique among
drugs given to newborn babies
although policies have customarily been decided by paediatricians, a midwife has usually made the final decision to give vitamin K to a healthy baby.
Three assumptions underpin imputation of vitamin K status: that previous policies are accurately recalled by current staff; that policies were followed rigidly; and that vitamin K was often given without a record being made. Anecdotal reports from midwives and paediatricians suggest, however, that official policies were not always followed. If true, this has serious implications for interpreting studies investigating neonatal vitamin K status. Furthermore, continuing controversy over vitamin K is having deleterious effects on babies, parents, midwives, and paediatricians.11-14
This two phase postal survey of midwives had two aims: to assess the
validity of imputing vitamin K status from hospital policy and to
investigate the impact of the controversy on current vitamin K polices
and midwifery practice in the United Kingdom.
| |
Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In September 1998 a 10% random sample of midwives registered as practising in the United Kingdom was selected from the professional register by the United Kingdom Central Council for nursing, midwifery, and health visiting. Questionnaires were posted directly to midwives by the central council, and names and addresses were not disclosed to the research team. Midwives could, however, add their names and contact details to the completed questionnaires.
In phase one, all midwives in the sample were sent a questionnaire, a postage-paid return envelope, and a letter describing the study. A freephone telephone number was provided for resolution of queries. The first questionnaire collected, among many other items, data on current vitamin K policies and their implementation. Questionnaires were posted in November 1998, and reminders were sent to non-responders in February and May 1999.
Midwives who returned completed questionnaires, who qualified before 1990 (the year of the first report suggesting a possible link between vitamin K and childhood cancer), and who could be contacted again were eligible for phase two. These midwives were sent an additional questionnaire requesting information on recording practices and whether policies were followed in their earliest jobs (up to four). No reminders were sent to non-responders in phase two.
Questionnaires were checked on receipt, and queries were resolved by
discussion with respondents who provided contact information. Data were
coded and entered into Microsoft Access databases designed for the
study. Analyses were carried out using Access and the statistical
software package Stata 6.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX).
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Response
Of 3191 midwives surveyed, 2515 (79%) replied to phase one
and 2294 (72%) completed questionnaires. The age distribution of
midwives who completed questionnaires (respondents) closely matched
that of all practising midwives on the professional register
(statistical analysis of the United Kingdom Central Council's professional register
reports dated July 1998 and November 1999). Distribution of respondents by health region, compared with that of all
midwives in post in the NHS at 30 September 1998, is shown in the
figure.15-18
|
|
Vitamin K policies
Policies in midwives' current jobs (November 1998 to May 1999)
are detailed in table 1. Seven distinct policies were described; the
most common policy was intramuscular vitamin K for all babies (51.0%;
1159). Overall, in 96.7% (2195) of jobs with an official policy, the
policy specifies some form of vitamin K for all babies, if parents consent.
|
for example, premature birth and admission to a
neonatal nursery. Additionally, definitions of some criteria vary from
one policy to another; the gestation below which babies were considered
to be at high risk, for example, ranged from <37 weeks (53 policies)
to <36 (149), <34 (66), <32 (22), <30 (7), and <28 weeks (5), with
gestation not stated for 127.
Implementation of current policies
Of the 2271 midwives whose current job had an official policy,
81.8% (1858) reported that the policy was always followed, with 14.3%
(326) reporting that it was not and 3.8% (87) being unsure (table 2).
The main reason given for not following official policy was parental
refusal or insistence on an oral preparation (88.0%; 287), followed by
paediatricians (8.0%; 26) and midwives (2.1%; 7) using their own
clinical judgment and general practitioners' refusal to prescribe an
oral preparation (0.6%; 2).
|
"not given" was reported as recorded by 63.2% if the policy
was to give vitamin K to babies at high risk only, by 85.6% if vitamin
K was to be given to all babies by the same route, and by 91.0% if it
was to be given to all babies but by differing routes.
Implementation of historical policies
Details of 2179 previous jobs (held before 1990) were given in
phase two; overall, only 8.5% (185) of these were reported as having
no policy on vitamin K. However, midwives were unsure if there had been
a policy for an additional 21.7% (473). Although for a minority of
these jobs (14.4%) midwives were unable to remember the details of
vitamin K administration, for most (85.6%) some details were given but
midwives were unsure if it was an official policy.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This survey of midwives differs from the two previous British surveys of vitamin K prophylaxis in several important ways. In the previous surveys information about vitamin K policies was obtained from postal questionnaires sent to each special care nursery listed by the Neonatal Nurses' Association. No data were collected on births outside these maternity units or on the implementation of policies, and it is not clear who in each unit completed the questionnaire. 19 20 The present survey, by asking individual midwives to provide information, has collected data on how policies are interpreted by those who implement them, rather than on how they are interpreted by those who set them.
The response to phase one of this survey was higher than Asch et al reported as the mean for surveys of nurses, the closest comparison group (this survey 79%, Asch et al 61%); the response in phase two (62%) was comparable to the reported mean.21 More importantly, the distribution of midwives by health region was broadly similar in both phases to that of all midwives working in the NHS at the time the sample was selected.15-18
Current vitamin K policies
More than 97% of newborn babies are likely to receive some form
of vitamin K routinely, if their parents consent; this is comparable to
the 98% reported in a 1993 survey in the British
Isles.19 The downward turn reported
in 1993 in the proportion receiving vitamin K intramuscularly does,
however, seem to have been reversed, with levels reported here likely
to be close to the 57% and 58% figures reported in 1988 and 1982, and
higher than the 38% reported in 1993.
19 20
It is difficult to assess accurately the proportions
receiving vitamin K orally and intramuscularly: numbers receiving it by each route under selective policies, with differing criteria for high
risk, are unknown, and 11% of current policies actively encourage parental choice. There is no clear consensus on which babies should receive vitamin K intramuscularly.
|
Reasons reported in phase two for not giving vitamin K
intramuscularly to babies who in some studies would be imputed as
receiving it, if policy was selective (given only to babies at high
risk)
|
Imputation of vitamin K
It is not known whether previous policies are accurately recalled
by current staff. It is, however, difficult to feel confident that they
always are, given the variety of combinations of criteria for high risk
reported for current policies. Only three out of 17 specified criteria
are included in more than 50% of selective policies, with additional
variation in how some criteria are defined. Although clinical judgment
is mentioned as a criterion in only 1.8% of policies, details given by
some midwives suggest that it plays a larger part
one example is
making the distinction between difficult and easy instrumental
deliveries. Judging such distinctions would be difficult for those
collecting data many years later.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank the midwives for enthusiastically sharing their knowledge and experience and Peter Hope and Pat Townshend for comments on an earlier draft of the paper.
Contributors: PA initiated the study, was involved in all its aspects, and is the guarantor; ER contributed to study design, interpretation of data, and writing of the paper; NTF and MJR contributed to many discussions on vitamin K and to writing the paper.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: Data collection was funded by a nursing research fellowship awarded to PA by the Smith and Nephew Foundation. Other aspects of the study were funded by the Leukaemia Research Fund.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Golding J, Greenwood R, Birmingham K, Mott M. Childhood cancer, intramuscular vitamin K, and pethidine given during labour. BMJ 1992; 305: 341-346. |
| 2. | Ekelund H, Finnstrom O, Gunnarskog J, Kallen B, Larsson Y. Administration of vitamin K to newborn infants and childhood cancer. BMJ 1993; 307: 89-91. |
| 3. |
Klebanoff MA, Read JS, Mills JL, Shiono PH.
The risk of childhood cancer after neonatal exposure to vitamin K.
N Engl J Med
1993;
329:
905-908 |
| 4. |
Olsen JH, Hetz H, Blinkenberg K, Verder H.
Vitamin K regimens and incidence of childhood cancer in Denmark.
BMJ
1994;
308:
895-896 |
| 5. |
Von Kries R, Göbel U, Hachmeister A, Kaletsch U, Michaelis J.
Vitamin K and childhood cancer: a population based case-control study in Lower Saxony, Germany.
BMJ
1996;
313:
199-203 |
| 6. |
Ansell P, Bull D, Roman E.
Childhood leukaemia and intramuscular vitamin K: findings from a case-control study.
BMJ
1996;
313:
204-205 |
| 7. |
McKinney PA, Juszczak E, Findlay E, Smith K.
Case-control study of childhood leukaemia and cancer in Scotland: findings for neonatal intramuscular vitamin K.
BMJ
1998;
316:
173-177 |
| 8. |
Passmore SJ, Draper G, Brownhill P, Kroll M.
Ecological studies of relation between hospital policies on neonatal vitamin K administration and subsequent occurrence of childhood cancer.
BMJ
1998;
316:
184-189 |
| 9. |
Passmore SJ, Draper G, Brownhill P, Kroll M.
Case-control studies of relation between childhood cancer and neonatal vitamin K administration.
BMJ
1998;
316:
178-184 |
| 10. | Parker L, Cole M, Craft AW, Hey EN. Neonatal vitamin K administration and childhood cancer in the north of England: retrospective case-control study. BMJ 1998; 316: 184-193. |
| 11. | Barton JS, McNinch AW, Tripp JH. Oral vitamin K prophylaxis and frequency of late vitamin K deficiency bleeding. Lancet 1994; 343: 1168[Medline]. |
| 12. | National Childbirth Trust. Parents' rights denied over vitamin K. Report to the Department of Health. London: NCT, 1994. |
| 13. | Department of Health. Vitamin K for newborn babies. Letter from the chief medical and nursing officers of England to all doctors, regional directors of public health, district nursing officers, midwives and health visitors. London: Stationery Office, 1998. (PL/CNO/998/4.) |
| 14. | Royal College of Midwives. Position paper 13b: vitamin K. RCM Midwives Journal 1999; 2(8): 252-253. |
| 15. | Department of Health. NHS hospital and community health services non-medical workforce census England: 30 September 1998. Detailed results. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1999. |
| 16. | Scottish health statistics 2000. Edinburgh: ISD Scotland, 2000:table P3.8. on www.show.scot.nhs.uk/isd/Scottish_Health_Statistics/SHS2000/home.htm (accessed 23 March 2001). |
| 17. | Health Statistics and Analysis Unit, National Assembly for Wales, personal communication, 2000. |
| 18. | Project Support Analysis Branch, Northern Ireland Assembly, personal communication, 2000. |
| 19. |
Barton JH, Tripp JS, McNinch AW.
Neonatal vitamin K prophylaxis in the British Isles: current practice and trends.
BMJ
1995;
310:
632-633 |
| 20. | Handel J, Tripp JH. Vitamin K prophylaxis against haemorrhagic disease of the newborn in the United Kingdom. BMJ 1991; 303: 1109. |
| 21. | Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 1129-1136[CrossRef][Medline]. |
(Accepted 8 March 2001)
Read all Rapid Responses