A Painless Light Meter at the Front Door: Checking Newborn Jaundice at Home

What two 2026 studies, from Dutch midwives (Westenberg et al.) and Israeli home-visit nurses (Nissimov et al.), tell families about home checks for jaundice

Many newborns turn a little yellow in their first week, and this often happens after the family has gone home. Two studies published in 2026 tested a small light meter held against the skin during home visits: in the Netherlands, midwives using it found more babies who needed treatment than by looking alone, and in Israel, nurses using it avoided most unnecessary referrals to a clinic or hospital.

Why newborn jaundice matters, and why it often shows up at home

Jaundice is the yellow color that appears in the skin and the whites of the eyes of many newborns. It comes from bilirubin, a yellow substance made when the body breaks down old red blood cells. A newborn's liver is still learning to clear bilirubin, so levels rise for a few days and then fall. For most babies this is harmless. In a small number, though, bilirubin climbs so high that it can damage the brain, a rare but serious condition called kernicterus. Jaundice is one of the most common reasons babies are admitted to hospital in their first week, and severe cases still occur in wealthy countries as well as poorer ones [1][2]. The good news is that high levels are easy to treat with phototherapy, a treatment in which the baby lies under a special light, as long as they are found in time.

How families and clinicians have faced jaundice until now

For generations, the main way to check for jaundice was simply to look at the baby. Unfortunately, the eye is not a good judge. In a study of healthy newborns in a US hospital nursery, different examiners often disagreed about how yellow the same baby was [3]. In an Israeli hospital, looking at the skin got the risk wrong for about 6 in 10 babies whose blood levels were actually in the danger zone [4]. Jaundice is also harder to see in babies with darker skin [5], and in the United States Black babies account for more than a quarter of kernicterus cases even though they make up about 14% of births [6]. Hospitals began measuring bilirubin in every baby before discharge, first with blood tests and then with transcutaneous bilirubin meters, often called "TcB" meters, which shine a light onto the skin and estimate the level without a needle. Large hospital programs that did this saw fewer babies reach dangerously high levels [7], and an expert review concluded that a low meter reading reliably rules out high jaundice, while a high reading should be confirmed with a blood test [8]. The problem is timing. Families now go home sooner after birth [9], and bilirubin usually peaks on the third or fourth day of life [10], often after the baby has left hospital. Checks after discharge are frequently late or missed [11], and in the Netherlands a national review found that some babies still reached dangerously high levels [12]. Bringing the meter into the home was the obvious next step, but it had not been properly tested.

Two studies that took the meter into family homes

The first study, the Better Assessment of Neonatal Jaundice at Home (BEAT jaundice @home) study, took place in 9 community midwife practices in the Netherlands, run by researchers from Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital in Rotterdam and University Medical Centre Groningen [13]. Between July 2021 and June 2023, 2,314 babies born at 35 weeks of pregnancy or later were checked at every home visit in two ways: the midwife first decided by eye whether the baby looked worryingly yellow, and then measured jaundice with a TcB meter placed on the baby's chest. If either check raised concern, the baby had a heel prick, a few drops of blood taken from the heel, to measure bilirubin exactly. Because every baby had both checks, the researchers could compare the two methods in the same babies.

The second study took place in the Haifa District of Israel, where public health nurses visit firstborn and premature babies at home during the first two weeks [14]. Researchers compared 3 months of usual care (157 babies), when nurses referred babies who looked yellow or whose hospital discharge letter asked for a bilirubin check, with 9 months (1,079 babies) in which nurses used the same kind of meter and followed a simple color-coded plan. When a reading was in a middle range, the nurse could start a secure video call with a hospital children's doctor at Shamir Medical Center, who helped decide whether the baby could stay home. Very high readings meant going straight to the emergency department.

What the researchers found

In the Dutch study, 78 of the 2,314 babies had bilirubin high enough to need treatment, about 3 in every 100 [13]. Of the 74 of those babies who had a meter reading taken at the same visit, the meter picked up 28 that the midwife's eye had missed, while the eye picked up 7 that the meter missed. That is 21 more babies found by the meter. Two of the babies missed by eye had very high levels. Encouragingly, no baby in the study needed an exchange transfusion, an emergency procedure in which a baby's blood is replaced, and none had complications from jaundice at follow-up.

There was a trade-off. The meter led to more heel pricks that turned out to show a level below the treatment line: 244, compared with 142 when midwives relied on their eyes. The researchers also calculated costs and estimated that the meter approach was cheaper overall, about €54 per baby compared with €69, saving roughly €15 per baby. In an extra analysis, using the meter only for babies who looked at least a little yellow reduced the extra heel pricks from 102 to 82 and still found 20 more babies than the eye alone, although it missed one baby who did not look yellow. Midwives generally liked the device and found it easy to use, and they said that having an objective number made it easier to agree with other professionals about what to do next. Their main worries were the cost of buying the meters and having them checked by the manufacturer every year, and the lack of a shared set of rules for home care.

In the Israeli study, 127 of the 157 babies in the usual-care period (about 8 in 10) were sent for a jaundice check elsewhere [14]. With the meter and video calls, 840 babies would normally have been referred, but only 152 actually were, so 688 trips to a clinic or hospital were avoided, roughly 8 in every 10. Video calls with the hospital doctor took place in 158 visits, and the doctor helped decide whether a baby should see a primary care doctor or go to the emergency department. All 4 babies who needed phototherapy were found, and no harm to any baby was recorded.

Why the results seem to point in opposite directions

It may seem puzzling that the meter led to more blood tests in one country and fewer referrals in the other. The explanation is that the eye can be wrong in both directions. Dutch midwives, looking only at skin color, missed some babies who needed treatment, so the meter added blood tests to catch them. Israeli nurses, following visible yellowness and discharge instructions, sent many babies who turned out to be fine, so the meter spared those families a trip. In both places, the meter gave staff an objective number that looking alone could not.

What this means for your baby

If a midwife or nurse checks your baby's jaundice with a meter at home, that is a gentle, painless check. A reading in the safe range is reassuring. A high reading does not mean something is wrong; it means a blood test is needed to measure bilirubin exactly, and in the Dutch study no treated baby needed anything more than phototherapy. Some babies can even receive phototherapy at home: 7 of the 86 treated babies in the Dutch study did. Meters can be less accurate in babies with darker skin, so it is reasonable to ask your care team how they take this into account [15][5]. If you are worried that your baby looks more yellow, trust your instincts and contact your midwife, nurse or doctor.

What researchers are working on next

Neither study randomly assigned babies to different approaches, so some uncertainty remains. The Dutch study's results were affected by one hospital laboratory that tended to measure bilirubin too high, and skin tone was based on parents' description of their own skin rather than the baby's [13]. The Israeli study saw only four babies who needed treatment, too few to be sure the approach never misses a serious case, and it did not measure costs [14]. Researchers now want to test home meters in fair head-to-head comparisons, confirm whether checking only yellow-looking babies is safe, find better ways to describe a newborn's skin tone [16], and see how home checks work in places with fewer resources, where community health workers in Bangladesh have already used meters successfully [17].

The bottom line for families

Looking at a baby's skin has long been the main way to spot jaundice at home, and it often gets it wrong. These two studies show that a simple light meter, used by trained midwives and nurses with clear rules and a doctor to call, can find more babies who need treatment and spare many others an unnecessary trip to a clinic or hospital.

References

  1. Olusanya BO, Kaplan M, Hansen TWR. Neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia: a global perspective. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018;2(8):610-620. doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(18)30139-130139-1) ↩
  2. Slusher TM, Zamora TG, Appiah D, et al. Burden of severe neonatal jaundice: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2017;1(1):e000105. doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000105 ↩
  3. Moyer VA, Ahn C, Sneed S. Accuracy of clinical judgment in neonatal jaundice. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000;154(4):391-394. doi:10.1001/archpedi.154.4.391 ↩
  4. Riskin A, Tamir A, Kugelman A, Hemo M, Bader D. Is visual assessment of jaundice reliable as a screening tool to detect significant neonatal hyperbilirubinemia?. J Pediatr. 2008;152(6):782-7, 787.e1-2. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.11.003 ↩
  5. Cornwell J, Michaud Maturana M, Mena J, et al. Neonatal jaundice assessment across all skin tones: finding the gaps between guidelines and practice. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2026;111(5):F474-F475. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2025-330053 ↩
  6. Okolie F, South-Paul JE, Watchko JF. Combating the Hidden Health Disparity of Kernicterus in Black Infants: A Review. JAMA Pediatr. 2020;174(12):1199-1205. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.1767 ↩
  7. Eggert LD, Wiedmeier SE, Wilson J, Christensen RD. The effect of instituting a prehospital-discharge newborn bilirubin screening program in an 18-hospital health system. Pediatrics. 2006;117(5):e855-862. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-1338 ↩
  8. Okwundu CI, Olowoyeye A, Uthman OA, et al. Transcutaneous bilirubinometry versus total serum bilirubin measurement for newborns. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;5(5):CD012660. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012660.pub2 ↩
  9. Jones E, Stewart F, Taylor B, Davis PG, Brown SJ. Early postnatal discharge from hospital for healthy mothers and term infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;6(6):CD002958. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002958.pub2 ↩
  10. Kaplan M, Maisels MJ. Natural history of early neonatal bilirubinemia: a global perspective. J Perinatol. 2021;41(4):873-878. doi:10.1038/s41372-020-00901-x ↩
  11. Kaplan M, Zimmerman D, Shoob H, Stein-Zamir C. Post-discharge neonatal hyperbilirubinemia surveillance. Acta Paediatr. 2020;109(5):923-929. doi:10.1111/apa.15096 ↩
  12. van der Geest BAM, Rosman AN, Bergman KA, et al. Severe neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia: lessons learnt from a national perinatal audit. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2022;107(5):527-532. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2021-322891 ↩
  13. Westenberg LEH, Poley MJ, Bouma HA, et al. Universal Transcutaneous Bilirubin Screening in a Midwifery-Led Home Care Setting. JAMA Netw Open. 2026;9(1):e2551883. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.51883 ↩
  14. Nissimov S, Haas N, Habib S, et al. Home-Based Transcutaneous Bilirubin Screening and Telemedicine Reduce Neonatal Referrals. Neonatology. 2026;123(4):443-451. doi:10.1159/000550875 ↩
  15. Dam-Vervloet AJ, Morsink CF, Krommendijk ME, et al. Skin color influences transcutaneous bilirubin measurements: a systematic in vitro evaluation. Pediatr Res. 2025;97(5):1706-1710. doi:10.1038/s41390-024-03081-y ↩
  16. Maya-Enero S, Candel-Pau J, Garcia-Garcia J, Giménez-Arnau AM, López-Vílchez MÁ. Validation of a neonatal skin color scale. Eur J Pediatr. 2020;179(9):1403-1411. doi:10.1007/s00431-020-03623-6 ↩
  17. Rahman M, Jahan F, Billah SM, et al. Feasibility and acceptability of home-based neonatal hyperbilirubinemia screening by community health workers using transcutaneous bilimeters in Bangladesh. BMC Pediatr. 2023;23(1):155. doi:10.1186/s12887-023-03969-4 ↩