[Baby Record Book Pdf Free 14

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Oludare Padilla

unread,
Jun 12, 2024, 6:48:52 AM6/12/24
to sigtikaro

Tip #4: Use Envelopes
When you use a 3-ring binder type of baby book, you can slip in blank pages. A lot of these blank pages in my books have envelopes taped to them. This is a great way to store the family Christmas card, birthday invitations, folded pictures they drew, hair they cut out themselves, photos, ultrasound pics, etc. I tape a lot of photos down in my books as well, but the envelopes are great for storing multiples of photos as well as cards.

baby record book pdf free 14


Download File > https://t.co/F7yXCx5n5G



When Colm Travers, M.D., assistant professor in the Division of Neonatology, arrived at the UAB RNICU the next morning, he was astounded to see Curtis alive and responding well to treatment. Travers researches periviable infants, those born at the limits of viability, and could not recall knowing of an infant surviving at a younger gestational age than Curtis.

After 275 days in the UAB RNICU, Curtis was discharged on April 6, 2021, a day filled with joy and a little disbelief. A baby with a less than 1 percent chance of survival was healthy enough to go home to his family.

Curtis and Michelle reunite with members from his care team outside of the UAB Women and Infants Center to celebrate his Guinness World Records title.
Photography: Andrea MabryThe team saw the culmination of their collaboration, research, programs and expertise in the smile of a happy, healthy 1-year-old boy.

While Curtis presented a unique opportunity for the NICU team to put years of practice, experience and research to the test, he also offered the team a unique opportunity to study something that no other hospital in the world has had the opportunity to do.

The Rourke Baby Record (or RBR for short) is a system that many Canadian doctors and other healthcare professionals use for well-baby and well-child visits for infants and children from 1 week to 5 years of age.

It includes forms (Guides I to V) for charting the well-baby visits and Resources pages 1 to 4 that summarize current information and provide links to supporting resources for healthcare professionals.

Topics include: Pregnancy, birth, family tree, sacraments and devotions, baby milestones, medical history, birthdays one through seven, first day of school grades Pre-K through fourth... and more! Carefully laid out with Bible verses and spaces to attach photographs. A perfect gift for a baby shower, Baptism, or baby's first birthday!

Study Part 2: Retrospective chart review of well-baby visits by 38 FP/GPs using student t-tests and factor analysis. Outcome measures were well-baby visit documentation of growth, nutrition, safety issues, developmental milestones, physical examination, and overall comprehensiveness.

Study Part 1: Questionnaire respondents (N = 41/100) used the RBR in several ways, and found it most helpful for assessing healthy child development, charting/recording the visits, managing time effectively, addressing parent concerns, identifying health problems, and identifying high risk situations. The RBR was seen to be least helpful as a tool for managing or for referring identified health problems.

The RBR was widely used by FP/GPs in these settings. RBR users found it helpful for many purposes, and had a consistently high rate of documentation of many aspects of well-baby care. The Rourke Baby Record has become a de facto gold standard clinical practice tool in knowledge translation for pediatric preventive medicine and health surveillance for primary care pediatric providers.

With its seemingly widespread use by family physicians in Canada, research on the RBR prevalence and utility as well as quality of well-baby visit documentation was needed. This is the first published study to assess the utilization of the Rourke Baby Record and the quality of documentation of well-baby visits by family physicians/general practitioners.

The research conformed to the Helsinki Declaration [20]. Ethics approval was obtained both from The University of Western Ontario Research Ethics Board for Health Sciences Research Involving Human Subjects (HSREB #11272E) and from the Human Investigation Committee (HIC #05.134) of the Faculty of Medicine at Memorial University of Newfoundland. Informed consent was obtained from all participating physicians. The questionnaire was piloted by several RBR-using FP/GPs, and the chart audit form was piloted both in practices who used and did not use the RBR.

The 2005 Scott Medical Directory Database was used to identify family physicians and general practitioners who worked in three cities in Ontario, Canada: London, Toronto, and Ottawa. Contact information on these 1,065 physicians was crosschecked for accuracy with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) and Canada 411 online databases. Eight hundred and thirty-five of these were able to be successfully contacted by telephone in the spring of 2005 and brief verbal information obtained on their clinical activities. Of the 596 doing office-based practice, 512 were doing well-baby care in their practices and of these, 402 (78.5%) used the RBR as a clinical documentation tool, 38 (7.4%) used a variety of other structured forms, and 72 (14.1%) did not use a structured form for well-baby care.

To study the utility of the RBR, a random computer generated sample of 100 of the 402 RBR-using physicians was sent a questionnaire. It asked how the RBR was used, with six listed uses and comment space for others. The questionnaire then inquired about the helpfulness of the RBR. The physicians were asked to respond on a five point Likert scale (ranging from very unhelpful to very helpful) regarding ten aspects of well-baby care. The survey form also had two open-ended questions: one looking for other ways not previously listed that the RBR was particularly helpful; and a second asking for suggested improvements to the RBR. Descriptive analysis was done.

Participants were obtained through the principal investigator contacting by telephone consecutive names on a random computer generated list of physicians in each group. To be eligible the physicians had to be able to be contacted within three attempts, they could not be using an electronic medical record or a structured well-baby visit record other than the RBR, they had to be in practice for longer than two years, and had to agree to have their charts audited by the research assistants. The sample of 20 RBR using physicians that were successfully contacted, were eligible and agreed to participate was derived from the first 49 on the randomly generated list of 402 RBR users. The sample of 18 non-RBR using physicians that were successfully contacted, were eligible and agreed to participate was derived from the full sample of 72 non RBR users.

Six outcome variables reflecting documentation were assessed for each chart audited: growth, nutrition, safety issues, developmental milestones, physical examination, and overall comprehensiveness. The variables were defined as follows:

The unit of analysis was the family physician. Each physician received a derived score on each of these variables based on the proportion of visits where the definition of each variable was met. (e.g.: the proportion of visits where all growth parameters were recorded, the proportion of visits where type of feeding was recorded, and so on). A sixth variable, Overall Comprehensiveness, was derived based on the mean proportion of the other five scores.

The scores in the RBR user group were compared with the scores in the non-user group using student t-tests. Factor analysis was used to test that the five items fit a single factor model of a comprehensive measurement of well-baby visits. Gender and date of birth were the only patient identifiers collected. Physician identifiers were removed when data analysis was complete.

Forty-one of the 100 RBR-using physicians who were sent the questionnaire responded. The 41 respondents were 51% male, they were all certified in family medicine through the CFPC, they had been in practice on average for 20 years, and 85% were in group practice rather than solo practice. Analysis of the responses provided an indication of how the RBR was utilized, the degree of satisfaction with the tool, and suggestions for RBR improvement.

The value or helpfulness of the RBR to the doctors is shown in Table 1. It was seen as most helpful for assessing healthy child development, charting/recording the visits, managing time effectively, addressing parent concerns, identifying health problems, and identifying high risk situations such as safety issues and family problems. The RBR was seen to be least helpful for managing or for referring identified health problems. Other uses listed by respondents included: recalling guidelines, giving advice to parents, organizing the well baby visit, and use as a teaching tool.

The most common suggestions for improvement to the RBR were: to expand the space for writing; to update and consolidate the immunization section; to improve growth charting; to expand the development section; and to make the RBR available in a well integrated electronic format.

The demographics of the 38 participating FP/GPs are shown in Table 2. The two groups (RBR users and non-users) were similar in terms of Canadian training, extra pediatrics training and involvement in some teaching. The only statistically significant difference between the groups was the number of years in practice. The RBR using physicians had been in practice for a shorter length of time.

Factor analysis was used to test that the five items fit a single factor model of a comprehensive measurement of well-baby visits. Not only were all indicators in the same direction, but also each indicator was a satisfactory measure of the comprehensive scale. The overall reliability for the comprehensive scale was Alpha = .7535 and standardized item alpha = .7877, an excellent measure of reliability.

More comprehensive care generally requires more time. The high reported value of the RBR to users as a charting/recording tool and for managing time effectively thus seem to suggest more comprehensiveness within the time available for the well-baby visit.

795a8134c1
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages