Aim: Dietitian-led implementation of evidence-based nutrition support practices improves nutrient intakes, clinical outcomes and growth, decreases length of stay and related costs, and reduces intravenous nutrition costs and prescription errors. We aimed to investigate current neonatal dietitian resourcing and roles in New Zealand and Australian neonatal units, and to compare this with dietitian workforce recommendations and previously reported survey data. Methods: A two-part electronic survey was emailed to 50 Australasian Neonatal Dietitians Network members and other dietitians working in neonatal intensive care or special care baby units in New Zealand and Australia. The survey ran from July to October 2018. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the distribution of responses. Responses were compared with other similar surveys and British Dietetic Association workforce recommendations.

Background: Significant global variation exists in neonatal nutrition practice, including in assigned milk composition values, donor milk usage, fortification regimens, probiotic choice and in methods used to calculate and report nutrition and growth outcomes, making it difficult to synthesize data to inform evidence-based, standardized nutritional care that has potential to improve neonatal outcomes. The Australasian Neonatal Dietitians' Network (ANDiN) conducted a survey to determine the degree to which neonatal nutritional care varies across Australia and New Zealand (A&NZ) and to highlight potential implications.Materials and Methods: A two-part electronic neonatal nutritional survey was emailed to each ANDiN member (n = 50). Part-One was designed to examine individual dietetic practice; Part-Two examined site-specific nutrition policies and practices. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the distribution of responses.Results: Survey response rate: 88%. Across 24 NICU sites, maximum fluid targets varied (150–180 mL.kg.d−1); macronutrient composition estimates for mothers' own(MOM) and donor (DM) milk varied (Energy (kcal.dL−1) MOM: 65–72; DM 69–72: Protein (g.dL−1): MOM: 1.0–1.5; DM: 0.8–1.3); pasteurized DM or unpasteurized peer-to-peer DM was not available in all units; milk fortification commenced at different rates and volumes; a range of energy values (kcal.g−1) for protein (3.8–4.0), fat (9.0–10.0), and carbohydrate (3.8–4.0) were used to calculate parenteral and enteral intakes; probiotic choice differed; and at least seven different preterm growth charts were employed to monitor growth.Discussion: Our survey identifies variation in preterm nutrition practice across A&NZ of sufficient magnitude to impact nutrition interventions and neonatal outcomes. This presents an opportunity to use the unique skillset of neonatal dietitians to standardize practice, reduce uncertainty of neonatal care and improve the quality of neonatal research.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract