Background: Since an objective description is essential to determine infant’s postnatal condition and efficacy of interventions, two scores were suggested in the past but weren’t tested yet: The Specified-Apgar uses the 5 items of the conventional Apgar score; however describes the condition regardless of gestational age (GA) or resuscitative interventions. The Expanded-Apgar measures interventions needed to achieve this condition. We hypothesized that the combination of both (Combined-Apgar) describes postnatal condition of preterm infants better than either of the scores alone. Methods: Scores were assessed in preterm infants below 32 completed weeks of gestation. Data were prospectively collected in 20 NICU in 12 countries. Prediction of poor outcome (death, severe/moderate BPD, IVH, CPL and ROP) was used as a surrogate parameter to compare the scores. To compare predictive value the AUC for the ROC was calculated. Results: Of 2150 eligible newborns, data on 1855 infants with a mean GA of 286/7± 23/7 weeks were analyzed. At 1 minute, the Combined-Apgar was significantly better in predicting poor outcome than the Specified- or Expanded-Apgar alone. Of infants with a very low score at 5 or 10 minutes 81% or 100% had a poor outcome, respectively. In these infants the relative risk (RR) for perinatal mortality was 24.93 (13.16-47.20) and 31.34 (15.91-61.71), respectively. Conclusion: The Combined-Apgar allows a more appropriate description of infant’s condition under conditions of modern neonatal care. It should be used as a tool for better comparison of group of infants and postnatal interventions.

Background: Since an objective description is essential to determine infant’s postnatal condition and efficacy of interventions, two scores were suggested in the past but weren’t tested yet: The Specified-Apgar uses the 5 items of the conventional Apgar score; however describes the condition regardless of gestational age (GA) or resuscitative interventions. The Expanded-Apgar measures interventions needed to achieve this condition. We hypothesized that the combination of both (Combined-Apgar) describes postnatal condition of preterm infants better than either of the scores alone. Methods: Scores were assessed in preterm infants below 32 completed weeks of gestation. Data were prospectively collected in 20 NICU in 12 countries. Prediction of poor outcome (death, severe/moderate BPD, IVH, CPL and ROP) was used as a surrogate parameter to compare the scores. To compare predictive value the AUC for the ROC was calculated. Results: Of 2150 eligible newborns, data on 1855 infants with a mean GA of 286/7± 23/7 weeks were analyzed. At 1 minute, the Combined-Apgar was significantly better in predicting poor outcome than the Specified- or Expanded-Apgar alone. Of infants with a very low score at 5 or 10 minutes 81% or 100% had a poor outcome, respectively. In these infants the relative risk (RR) for perinatal mortality was 24.93 (13.16-47.20) and 31.34 (15.91-61.71), respectively. Conclusion: The Combined-Apgar allows a more appropriate description of infant’s condition under conditions of modern neonatal care. It should be used as a tool for better comparison of group of infants and postnatal interventions.

Aim: Despite the lack of evidence, current resuscitation guidelines recommend tactile stimulation in apneic infants within the first minutes of life. The aim was to investigate whether timing, duration or intensity of tactile stimulation influences the extent of non-invasive respiratory support in extremely preterm infants during neonatal resuscitation. Methods: In an observational study, we analyzed 47 video recordings and physiological parameters during postnatal transition in preterm infants below 320/7 weeks of gestational age. Infants were divided into three groups according to the intensity of respiratory support. Results: All infants were stimulated at least once during neonatal resuscitation regardless of their respiratory support. Only 51% got stimulated within the first minute. Rubbing the feet was the preferred stimulation method and was followed by rubbing or touching the chest. Almost all very preterm infants were exposed to stimulation and manipulation most of the time within their first 15 min of life. Tactile stimulation lasted significantly longer but stimulation at multiple body areas started later in infants receiving prolonged non-invasive respiratory support. Conclusion: This observational study demonstrated that stimulation of very preterm infants is a commonly used and easy applicable method to stimulate spontaneous breathing during neonatal resuscitation. The concomitant physical stimulation of different body parts and therefore larger surface areas might be beneficial.