Person: Ringer, Steven
Email Address
AA Acceptance Date
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
First Name
Name
Search Results
Publication NIDCAP improves brain function and structure in preterm infants with severe intrauterine growth restriction
(Nature Publishing Group, 2012) Als, Heidelise; Duffy, Frank; McAnulty, Gloria; Butler, Samantha; Lightbody, L; Kosta, S; Weisenfeld, Neil; Robertson, Richard; Parad, Richard; Ringer, Steven; Blickman, J G; Zurakowski, David; Warfield, SimonObjective: The effect of NIDCAP (Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program) was examined on the neurobehavioral, electrophysiological and neurostructural development of preterm infants with severe intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Study Design: A total of 30 infants, 27–33 weeks gestation, were randomized to control (C; N=17) or NIDCAP/experimental (E; N=13) care. Baseline health and demographics were assessed at intake; electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 35 and 42 weeks postmenstrual age; and health, growth and neurobehavior at 42 weeks and 9 months corrected age (9 months). Results: C and E infants were comparable in health and demographics at baseline. At follow-up, E infants were healthier, showed significantly improved brain development and better neurobehavior. Neurobehavior, EEG and MRI discriminated between C and E infants. Neurobehavior at 42 weeks correlated with EEG and MRI at 42 weeks and neurobehavior at 9 months. Conclusion: NIDCAP significantly improved IUGR preterm infants' neurobehavior, electrophysiology and brain structure. Longer-term outcome assessment and larger samples are recommended.
Publication In the Early Postpartum Period, Parents are Interested in Newborn Genomic Testing
(2014) Waisbren, Susan; Back, Danielle; Liu, Christina; Kalia, Sarah S.; Ringer, Steven; Holm, Ingrid; Green, RobertPurpose We surveyed parents to ascertain interest in newborn genomic testing and determine whether these queries would provoke refusal of conventional newborn screening (NBS). Methods: After brief genetics orientation, parents rated their interest in receiving genomic testing for their healthy newborn on a 5-point Likert scale and answered questions about demographics and health history. We used logistic regression to explore factors associated with interest in genomic testing and tracked any subsequent rejection of NBS. Results: We queried 514 parents within 48 hours after birth while still in the hospital (mean age (sd) 32.7 (6.4) years, 65.2% female, 61.2% white, 79.3% married). Parents reported being not at all (6.4%), a little (10.9%), somewhat (36.6%), very (28.0%) or extremely (18.1%) interested in genomic testing for their newborns. None refused conventional NBS. Married participants and those with health concerns about their infant were less interested in newborn genomic testing (p=0.012 and p=0.030, respectively). Mothers’ and fathers’ degree of interest was discordant (≥ 2 categories different) in 24.4% of couples. Conclusions: Interest in newborn genomic testing was high among parents of healthy newborns and the majority of couples had similar levels of interest. Surveying parents about genomic sequencing did not prompt rejection of NBS.