MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2041144672 · doi:10.1002/ebch.808

Cochrane Review: Non‐nutritive sucking for promoting physiologic stability and nutrition in preterm infants

2011· article· en· W2041144672 sur OpenAlexaff
Janet Pinelli, Amanda Symington

Notice bibliographique

RevueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInfant Development and Preterm Care
Établissements canadiensHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCochrane LibraryCINAHLMEDLINEEnteral administrationPediatricsParenteral nutritionRandomized controlled trialWeight gainIntensive care medicineInternal medicineBody weightPsychological interventionNursing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Non‐nutritive sucking is used during gavage feeding and in the transition from gavage to breast/bottle feeding in preterm infants to promote the development of sucking behaviour and improve digestion of enteral feedings. Objectives To determine whether non‐nutritive sucking (NNS) in preterm infants influences: a) weight gain, b) energy intake, c) heart rate, d) oxygen saturation, e) length of hospital stay, f) intestinal transit time, g) age at full oral feeds, or h) any other clinically relevant outcomes. Search strategy MEDLINE and CINAHL databases back to 1976 and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005) were searched. Updated search in March 2010 included MEDLINE (search via PubMed), CINAHL, EMBASE and CENTRAL ( The Cochrane Library ). Selection criteria All trials utilizing experimental or quasi‐experimental designs in which non‐nutritive sucking in preterm infants was compared to no provision of non‐nutritive sucking were eligible for the review. Data collection and analysis Data were extracted independently by the two authors. No subgroup analyses were performed because of the small number of studies related to the relevant outcomes. Main results This review consisted of 21 studies, 15 of which were randomized controlled trials. NNS was found to decrease significantly the length of hospital stay in preterm infants. The review did not reveal a consistent benefit of NNS with respect to other major clinical variables (weight gain, energy intake, heart rate, oxygen saturation, intestinal transit time, age at full oral feeds and behavioral state). The review identified other positive clinical outcomes of NNS: transition from tube to bottle feeds and better bottle feeding performance. No negative outcomes were reported in any of the studies. Authors' conclusions This review found a significant decrease in length of stay in preterm infants receiving a NNS intervention. The review did not reveal a consistent benefit of NNS with respect to other major clinical variables (weight gain, energy intake, heart rate, oxygen saturation, intestinal transit time, age at full oral feeds and behavioral state). The review identified other positive clinical outcomes of NNS: transition from tube to bottle feeds and better bottle feeding performance. No negative outcomes were reported in any of the studies. There were also a number of limitations of the presently available evidence related to the design of the studies, outcome variability, and lack of long‐term data. Based on the available evidence, NNS in preterm infants would appear to have some clinical benefit. It does not appear to have any short‐term negative effects. Plain Language Summary Non‐nutritive sucking for promoting physiologic stability and nutrition in preterm infants An infant born prematurely may be fed through a tube into the stomach, so is often given a pacifier to suck on to improve nutrition. An infant needs coordinated sucking, swallowing and breathing to feed. The ability to suck and to swallow is present by 28 weeks gestation, but infants are not fully coordinated until 32 to 34 weeks. This means that preterm infants less than 32 weeks gestation are usually not able to feed effectively from the breast or a bottle. They are fed by a small tube that is placed up the nose into the stomach (gavage feeding). Sucking on a pacifier (non‐nutritive sucking) during gavage feeding may encourage the development of sucking behaviour and improve digestion of the feeding. Non‐nutritive sucking may also have a calming effect on infants, although it does have the potential to interfere with breastfeeding. The authors searched the medical literature and found 21 studies, 15 were randomized controlled trials and six were non‐randomized. The total number of infants in each study ranged from 10 to 59. Weight gain was similar with and without use of a pacifier. Preterm infants with pacifiers did not stay in hospital as long as those without and hospital costs were less (two studies). These infants showed less defensive behaviors during tube feedings, spent less time in fussy and active states during and after tube feedings, and settled more quickly into sleep. Their transition to full enteral (by tube or mouth) or bottle feeds (three studies) and bottle feeding performance, in general, (one study) were easier. No negative outcomes were reported.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,139
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,069
Tête enseignante GPT0,364
Écart entre enseignants0,295 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations15
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review JournalMême sujetInfant Development and Preterm CareTravaux en français237 207