Neonatal acuity tool‐defined staffing ratios in a tertiary Australian neonatal intensive care unit

Abstract

AimsThere is well‐established data linking the adequacy of nurse staffing to patient outcomes. Evidence‐based standards for staffing are therefore critical to drive improvements in clinical care. One such evidence‐based approach is the use of patient acuity‐based tools. The objective of this study is to determine the performance of a neonatal acuity tool in an Australian tertiary neonatal health‐care setting, focusing on the classification of patient acuity and nursing:patient staffing ratios compared to current practice.MethodsAcuity data were collected in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and special care baby unit (SCBU) over a 10‐week period in 2023. Patient data were scored in the 16 domains at two time points (prior to morning and evening nursing shift changeover) for all admitted newborns.ResultsFor ventilated newborns nursed with a nurse:patient staffing ratio of 1:1, 78% of scores were within the L4‐high acuity (score ≥ 26) band, with the remaining scores within the L3‐high acuity (18–25) band. For newborns on non‐invasive respiratory support in NICU staffed 1:1, the proportion scoring within the L4 acuity band was higher in the nasal high‐flow group compared to the nasal continuous positive airway pressure group (P = 0.032), an effect not seen for those nursed 1:2 in NICU or for those on nasal high‐flow nursed in SCBU either 1:2 or 1:3.ConclusionThis study of how a neonatal acuity classification system compares with current nurse:patient staffing allocations in an Australian tertiary NICU, suggests refinements in staffing ratios for specific patient groups on respiratory support are possible.