In the current study, we investigated the NR status in an academic referral center. Based on the current literature, it is estimated that approximately 3 - 8% of newborns require initial efforts, and 0.1 - 0.3% receive advanced interventions (
8). In this research, we found that 14.1% of our newborns required resuscitation, with 10.2% basic steps (suction, bag-mask ventilation) and 3.9% advanced interventions including CC, ETT, and adrenaline. The number of CS deliveries was markedly higher than NVD, and due to the risk of general anesthesia-related to neurotoxicity in the developing brain, which has been recently focused on (
11-
13) and other advantageous, the majority of our CS deliveries were performed under spinal anesthesia. According to the recent evidence-based literature, 99% of newborns deaths occur in low and middle-income countries (
3), and the most common critical outcomes for NR were death, blindness, cerebral palsy, deafness, and neurodevelopmental defects (
14). Here, we acclaim that because it was a retrospective study, we could not evaluate the NR outcomes. Searching the literature in Iran reveals limited and not inconstant results. The need for NR was 11.4% in the Safaeenjad study, 9.9% and 1.5% for basic and advanced resuscitation, respectively. They reported that maternal comorbidities had a positive association, while the maternal level of education had a negative association with the need for NR (
10). Afjeh et al. conducted similar research in an academic hospital in Tehran. They reported an NR rate of 2.3%, with only 1.15% need for advanced intervention. Low birth weight, preterm labor, meconium staining of amniotic fluid, multiple pregnancies, and fetal distress had a significant correlation with the need for NR (
15). Wyckoff et al. from Texas reported that only 0.47% of their newborns required resuscitation, and 0.08% of them needed advanced steps (
16). In Trevisanuto et al. work from Italy, less than 2% of their newborns needed advanced resuscitation (
17). In Molkenboer et al., breach presentation significantly correlated with the need for NR (
18). It is notable that during the last decades, the most significant progress regarding NR outcomes has been reported from Europe and the USA (
19). Bjorland et al. from Norway showed the need for NR in 6.2% of their newborns, of whom 0.5% required advanced interventions (
20). Comparison of our results with others’ emphasizes the need for improving the present state. Moreover, in this report from a tertiary-level center with a high turnover, NR might be underestimated. It seems that in some cases, the high-risk pregnancies are missed, and the delivery room is not well prepared to face an unplanned NR. Our hospital has a NICU ward, a general labor unit, and an operating room for emergency and elective CS. In our hospital, a pediatrician is always available for NR. In the delivery room, obstetric residents and midwives, and nurses firstly are faced with the newborn; indeed, the first most important minutes before the pediatrician arrives. Therefore, they also should be well qualified and trained. Furthermore, tighter screening strategies should be performed to identify high-risk cases. However, to decrease the occurrence of some avoidable conditions, such as preterm labor and low birth weight, preventive strategies are crucial through proper prenatal care and providing adequate information for mothers. Finally, the efficacy of NR workshops should be evaluated as Niknafas et al. study from Iran concluded that the skill of NR depends on active practice and cooperation in the NR process, and just participation in educational courses is not sufficient (
21).
The reported incidence of NR, which varies among studies from different areas, presents valuable findings regarding the quality of NR team, prenatal care, fetal monitoring to timely intervention such as emergence CS, medical team, including obstetrics, anesthesiologist, and pediatrician experience and communication. Thus it is a multifactorial issue, and discrepancy among studies is expectable. The differences consist of hospital policies and characteristics, referral or not, private or governmental, academic or not, maternal level of education and knowledge. The experience and qualifications of the medical team are not the same among different centers. Obviously, a referral, teaching educational center with a high turnover admitting high-risk pregnancies from all areas of province by educational way that the majority of procedures are performed by residents and medical students, could not be compared with a private and local hospital. As expected, studies demonstrate that the need for NR is significantly higher in low-resource settings compared to high-resource with comprehensive maternal and prenatal care and accurate fetal monitoring (
20). The rate of CS, extreme preterm newborns (< 28 weeks), general anesthesia, and low birth weight newborns are some influencing factors.