Article Text

This article has a correction. Please see:

Download PDFPDF
Delivery room resuscitation in the UK: post-survey follow-up
  1. Thomas Michael Whitby1,
  2. Victoria Whitby2,
  3. Ian Sinha3
  1. 1Department of Paediatrics, St Helens and Knowsley Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
  2. 2Department of Accident and Emergency, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
  3. 3Department of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Thomas Michael Whitby, Department of Paediatrics, St Helens and Knowsley Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Whiston Hospital, Warrington Road, Liverpool L35 5DR, UK; Thomaswhitby{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.

Oxygen has been used in the resuscitation of newborn infants for over two centuries. Caution around the use of high concentrations of inspired oxygen (FiO2) for neonatal resuscitation has driven research to determine whether room air is a safe and effective alternative. Based on randomised controlled trials and relevant systematic reviews,1 the Resuscitation Council (UK)2 and the European Resuscitation Council3 recommend that term infants should be resuscitated initially in room air, and preterm infants in blended oxygen, guided by pulse oximetry. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation4 advocates that term infants should be resuscitated in room air, and that the administration of supplementary oxygen should be guided by pulse oximetry.

The aim of the study was to examine whether centres …

View Full Text


  • Contributors Drs TW and VW contributed to the design, acquisition of data, analysis, interpretation of data, drafting and review of final article. Dr SI contributed to the design, interpretation of data, drafting, and review of final article.

  • Competing interests None.

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

  • Data sharing statement There were some regional variations in practice, but little difference in terms of the institutional practice of Level 1, 2, or 3 units (data available on request).

Linked Articles

  • Corrections
    BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health