A Scottish study of heel-prick blood sampling in newborn babies

SummaryObjectiveto conduct a randomised-controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of two heel-prick devices (Tenderfoot and Genie Lancet) used in the newborn-baby screening test.Designa randomised-controlled trial.Participants and settingthe homes of 340 healthy term newborn babies discharged from the maternity unit of Stirling Royal Infirmary, Scotland. Data were collected between April and November 2003.Interventionsbabies were randomly allocated to be tested with either the Tenderfoot or Genie Lancet heel-prick device.Measurementsprimary study outcomes include (1) quality of the blood sample; (2) time taken to collect the sample; (3) number of heel pricks required to take the sample; (4) whether squeezing of heel was required; (5) pain expressed by the baby; and (6) presence of bruising. A potential intervening variable was the experience of the midwife.Findingson all outcomes, the Tenderfoot device was more effective than the Genie Lancet. Experienced midwives were more efficient in sample collection.Key Conclusionsthis study shows that the Tenderfoot device saves significant time for midwifery staff, improves baby care and reduces the need for more than one heel prick at each test, making it superior to the Genie Lancet device.Implications for Practicethere is a case to be made for midwives to be issued with the Tenderfoot device for neonatal screening.