Effects of nasal continuous positive-airway pressure on nutritive swallowing in lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current knowledge suggests that, to be successful, oral feeding in preterm infants should be initiated as soon as possible, often at an age where immature respiration still requires ventilatory support in the form of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP). While some neonatologist teams claim great success with initiation of oral feeding in immature infants with nCPAP, others strictly wait for this ventilatory support to be no longer necessary before any attempt at oral feeding, fearing laryngeal penetration and tracheal aspiration. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to provide a first assessment of the effect of various levels of nCPAP on bottle-feeding in a neonatal ovine model, including feeding safety, feeding efficiency, and nutritive swallowing-breathing coordination. Eight lambs born at term were surgically instrumented 48 h after birth to collect recordings of electrical activity of laryngeal constrictor muscle, electrocardiography, and arterial blood gases. Two days after surgery, lambs were bottle-fed under five randomized nCPAP conditions, including without any nCPAP or nasal mask and nCPAP of 0, 4, 7, and 10 cmH(2)O. Results revealed that application of nCPAP in the full-term lamb had no deleterious effect on feeding safety and efficiency or on nutritive swallowing-breathing coordination. The present study provides a first and unique insight on the effect of nCPAP on oral feeding, demonstrating its safety in newborn lambs born at term. These results open the way for further research in preterm lambs to better mimic the problems encountered in neonatology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".