Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Thermal care for preterm infants in the delivery room has not been compromised since the routine adoption of delayed cord clamping in our unit
  1. Rebecca Clarke,
  2. Jessica Burgess-Shannon,
  3. Claire Howarth,
  4. Victoria Rowell,
  5. Narendra Aladangady
  1. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Rebecca Clarke, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Homerton University Hospital Neonatal Unit, London, UK; rebecca.clarke31{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

It was with great interest that we read the work of Dunne et al describing higher rates of admission hypothermia in preterm infants following the introduction of delayed cord clamping (DCC) (6% to 54%).1 We share their concerns given the association between admission hypothermia and increased mortality.2

The 2021 National Neonatal Audit Programme (NNAP) data highlighted our tertiary, medical neonatal intensive care unit as a negative outlier—only 12.1% of preterm infants received DCC compared with the national average of 43.0%. A quality improvement project (QIP) followed, led by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) consisting of neonatal, obstetric, anaesthetic and midwifery staff. Exploration of barriers and change ideas informed the development of a new guideline, education sessions and poster resources to embed DCC into routine practice. Subsequently, we demonstrated …

View Full Text


  • Twitter @DrJessBS

  • Correction notice This article has been amended since it was first published. An acknowledgement has been added.

  • Contributors RC and JB-S were the two doctors who led the quality improvement project in delayed cord clamping and then wrote the manuscript. CH supported with the findings from the thermal care audit. VR and NA oversaw the quality improvement project and helped to edit the final version of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.