The effect of an early oral stimulation program on oral feeding of preterm infants

Effect of premature infant oral motor intervention (PIOMI) and pacifier intervention on the transition to oral feeding in preterm infants: A randomized controlled study

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of premature infant oral motor intervention (PIOMI) and pacifier intervention on the transition to full oral feeding in preterm infants.

METHODS

This is a randomized controlled trial conducted between January 2021 and April 2023 in a neonatal intensive care unit in Eskişehir, Turkey. Preterm infants born between 29 and 34 weeks of gestation were included in the study. Infants were assigned to the groups by stratified randomization method. The study was completed with a total of 39 infants, 13 infants in each group (PIOMI, pacifier, and control). Data were collected using the "Preterm Infant Demographic Information Form," "Feeding Monitor Form," and "Early Feeding Skills Assessment Tool (EFS)." Statistical analysis used paired sample t-tests, ANOVA, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis H, and Pearson-χ2 test methods.

RESULTS

In the research findings, it was determined that infants receiving PIOMI and pacifier intervention had a shorter length of stay, transition to full oral feeding compared to infants in the control group, and consumed a higher amount of feed in the first minute (p < .05). The infants in the PIOMI group started full oral feeding on average 3 days earlier than the infants in the pacifier group and were discharged approximately 4 days earlier (p > .05). It was determined that infants in the PIOMI group had significantly higher EFS-total compared to infants in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

PIOMI intervention and pacifier intervention should be included in nursing care in neonatal intensive care units to improve the oral feeding skills of preterm infants and shorten their discharge time.

The effectiveness of oral motor interventions on the weight gain, independent oral feeding, and length of hospital stay in hospitalized preterm infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aims

Oral feeding for preterm infants has been a challenging issue globally. In an effort to enhance the effectiveness of oral feeding in preterm infants, oral motor intervention (OMI) was developed. Present systematic review and meta-analysis study aims to examine the impact of various OMI techniques on key outcomes, including body weight at the time of discharge, the duration required to achieve independent oral feeding, and the length of hospital stay for preterm infants.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature was performed across various databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science and Google Scholar up to September 28, 2023. Quality assessment was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. The overall effect measure was calculated using a random-effects model and was presented as the standard difference of the mean (SDM), accompanied by the standard error and a 95% confidence interval (CI). We used I 2 statistic for investigating the heterogeneity between studies. Data analysis was performed by CMA software (Version 2).

Results

Finally, 22 articles included in this review. The overall effect for body weight at discharge was found to be statistically significant in the prefeeding oral stimulation (PFOS) (SDM = 7.91, 95% CI: 5.62, 10.2, p = 0.000, I 2 = 86.31) and Premature Infant OMI (PIOMI) (SDM = 3.71, 95% CI: 0.72, 6.69, p = 0.01, I 2 = 96.64) groups versus control group. The overall effect of independent oral feeding was significant for PFOS-only (SDM = -0.64, 95% CI: -1.1, -0.17, p = 0.007, I 2 = 75.45), PIOMI only (SDM = -1.48, 95% CI: -2.49, -0.46, p = 0.004, I 2 = 93.73) and nonnutritive sucking (NNS) only (SDM = -0.53, 95% CI: -0.76, -0.30, p = 0.001, I 2 = 0) groups versus control groups. The overall effect of length of hospital stay was significant for NNS group (SDM = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.67, -0.23, p = 0.067, I 2 = 0) and PIOMI group (SDM = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.69, -0.15, p = 0.002, I 2 = 20.18) versus control group.

Conclusion

Among OMIs, the PIOMI approach generally exhibited a more favorable impact on body weight gain at discharge, the duration required to achieve independent oral feeding, and the length of hospital stay.

Effects of implementing non-nutritive sucking on oral feeding progression and outcomes in preterm infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants have imperfect neurological development, uncoordinated sucking-swallowing-breathing, which makes it difficult to realize effective oral feeding after birth. How to help preterm infants achieve complete oral feeding as soon as possible has become an important issue in the management of preterm infants. Non-nutritive sucking (NNS), as a useful oral stimulation, can improve the effect of oral feeding in preterm infants. This review aimed to explore the effect of NNS on oral feeding progression through a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, CINHAL, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane databases, China's National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang and VIP database from inception to January 20, 2024. Search terms included 'non-nutritive sucking' 'oral feeding' and 'premature.' Eligibility criteria involved randomized controlled studies in English or Chinese. Studies were excluded if they were reviews, case reports, or observational studies from which valid data could not be extracted or outcome indicators were poorly defined. The meta-analysis will utilize Review Manager 5.3 software, employing either random-effects or fixed-effects models based on observed heterogeneity. We calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data, and estimated pooled odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were conducted to ensure robust and reliable findings. We evaluated the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) utilizing the assessment tool provided by the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

A total of 23 randomized controlled trials with 1461 preterm infants were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that NNS significantly shortened time taken to achieve exclusive oral feeding (MD = -5.37,95%CI = -7.48 to-3.26, p<0.001), length of hospital stay(MD = -4.92, 95% CI = -6.76 to -3.09, p<0.001), time to start oral feeding(MD = -1.41, 95% CI = -2.36 to -0.45, p = 0.004), time to return to birth weight(MD = -1.72, 95% CI = -2.54 to -0.91, p<0.001). Compared to the NNS group, the control group had significant weight gain in preterm infants, including weight of discharge (MD = -61.10, 95% CI = -94.97 to -27.23, p = 0.0004), weight at full oral feeding (MD = -86.21, 95% CI = -134.37 to -38.05, p = 0.0005). In addition, NNS reduced the incidence of feeding intolerance (OR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.14 to 0.35, p<0.001) in preterm infants.

CONCLUSION

NNS improves oral feeding outcomes in preterm infants and reduces the time to reach full oral feeding and hospitalization length. However, this study was limited by the relatively small sample size of included studies and did not account for potential confounding factors. There was some heterogeneity and bias between studies. More studies are needed in the future to validate the effects on weight gain and growth in preterm infants. Nevertheless, our meta-analysis provides valuable insights, updating existing evidence on NNS for improving oral feeding in preterm infants and promoting evidence-based feeding practices in this population.

Efficacy of Early Intervention for Infants With Cerebral Palsy in an LMIC: An RCT

OBJECTIVE

To test efficacy of a parent-delivered multidomain early intervention (Learning through Everyday Activities with Parents [LEAP-CP]) for infants with cerebral palsy (CP) compared with equal-dose of health advice (HA), on (1) infant development; and (2) caregiver mental health. It was hypothesized that infants receiving LEAP-CP would have better motor function, and caregivers better mental health.

METHODS

This was a multisite single-blind randomized control trial of infants aged 12 to 40 weeks corrected age (CA) at risk for CP (General Movements or Hammersmith Infant Neurologic Examination). Both LEAP-CP and HA groups received 15 fortnightly home-visits by a peer trainer. LEAP-CP is a multidomain active goal-directed intervention. HA is based on Key Family Practices, World Health Organization. Primary outcomes: (1) infants at 18 months CA: Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory-Computer Adaptive Test (PEDI-CAT mobility); and (2) caregiver: Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale.

RESULTS

Of eligible infants, 153 of 165 (92.7%) were recruited (86 males, mean age 7.1±2.7 months CA, Gross Motor Function Classification System at 18 m CA: I = 12, II = 25, III = 9, IV = 18, V = 32). Final data were available for 118 (77.1%). Primary (PEDI-CAT mobility mean difference = 0.8 (95% CI -1.9 to 3.6) P = .54) and secondary outcomes were similar between-groups. Modified-Intention-To-Treat analysis on n = 96 infants with confirmed CP showed Gross Motor Function Classification System I and IIs allocated to LEAP-CP had significantly better scores on PEDI-CAT mobility domain (mean difference 4.0 (95% CI = 1.4 to 6.5), P = .003) compared with HA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no overall effect of LEAP-CP compared with dose-matched HA, LEAP-CP lead to superior improvements in motor skills in ambulant children with CP, consistent with what is known about targeted goal-directed training.

Interventions to Enhance Achievement to Independent Oral Feeds in Premature Infants: A Scoping Review

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at facilitating the transition from full tube to independent oral feeds in premature infants.

METHODS

Scoping review methodology using the Preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA_ScR). A search of six databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, COCHRANE, and OT Seeker), using keywords related to oral feeding and premature infants retrieved 11,870 articles. Full-text screening was completed for 36 articles, and 21 articles were included in this review.

RESULTS

Review of the 21 articles revealed five intervention types: oral stimulation (n = 14), swallow/gustatory stimulation (n = 3), olfactory stimulation (n = 2), tactile/kinesthetic stimulation (n = 1), and auditory stimulation (n = 1). Oral stimulation had the most studies with consistent evidence supporting its beneficial effect to facilitate achievement to independent oral feeds, swallow/gustatory stimulation appeared to have some benefit, but evidence for olfactory, tactile/kinesthetic, and auditory stimulation was sparse.

CONCLUSION

Oral stimulation has the most studies with consistent evidence, and thus is suggested as a suitable early intervention strategy that can be used by health providers to facilitate the achievement to independent oral feeds in premature infants. The alternate forms of stimulation have limited evidence and necessitate further studies to confirm their benefits.

Oral stimulation for promoting oral feeding in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants (< 37 weeks' post-menstrual age (PMA)) are often delayed in attaining oral feeding. Normal oral feeding is suggested as an important outcome for the timing of discharge from the hospital and can be an early indicator of neuromotor integrity and developmental outcomes. A range of oral stimulation interventions may help infants to develop sucking and oromotor co-ordination, promoting earlier oral feeding and earlier hospital discharge. This is an update of our 2016 review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of oral stimulation interventions for attainment of oral feeding in preterm infants born before 37 weeks' PMA.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were run in March 2022 of the following databases: CENTRAL via CRS Web; MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials. Searches were limited by date 2016 (the date of the search for the original review) forward. Note: Due to circumstances beyond our control (COVID and staffing shortages at the editorial base of Cochrane Neonatal), publication of this review, planned for mid 2021, was delayed. Thus, although searches were conducted in 2022 and results screened, potentially relevant studies found after September 2020 have been placed in the section, Awaiting Classification, and not incorporated into our analysis.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing a defined oral stimulation intervention with no intervention, standard care, sham treatment or non-oral intervention (e.g. body stroking protocols or gavage adjustment protocols) in preterm infants and reporting at least one of the specified outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Following the updated search, two review authors screened the titles and abstracts of studies and full-text copies when needed to identify trials for inclusion in the review. The primary outcomes of interest were time (days) to exclusive oral feeding, time (days) spent in NICU, total hospital stay (days), and duration (days) of parenteral nutrition. All review and support authors contributed to independent extraction of data and analysed assigned studies for risk of bias across the five domains of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool. The GRADE system was used to rate the certainty of the evidence. Studies were divided into two groups for comparison: intervention versus standard care and intervention versus other non-oral or sham intervention. We performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 RCTs (1831 participants). Most trials had methodological weaknesses, particularly in relation to allocation concealment and masking of study personnel. Oral stimulation compared with standard care Following meta-analysis, it is uncertain whether oral stimulation reduces the time to transition to oral feeding compared with standard care (mean difference (MD) -4.07 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.81 to -3.32 days, 6 studies, 292 infants; I2 =85%, very low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias and inconsistency). Time (days) spent in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) was not reported. It is uncertain whether oral stimulation reduces the duration of hospitalisation (MD -4.33, 95% CI -5.97 to -2.68 days, 5 studies, 249 infants; i2 =68%, very low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias and inconsistency). Duration (days) of parenteral nutrition was not reported. Oral stimulation compared with non-oral intervention Following meta-analysis, it is uncertain whether oral stimulation reduces the time to transition to exclusive oral feeding compared with a non-oral intervention (MD -7.17, 95% CI -8.04 to -6.29 days, 10 studies, 574 infants; I2 =80%, very low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias, inconsistency and precision). Time (days) spent in the NICU was not reported. Oral stimulation may reduce the duration of hospitalisation (MD -6.15, 95% CI -8.63 to -3.66 days, 10 studies, 591 infants; I2 =0%, low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias). Oral stimulation may have little or no effect on the duration (days) of parenteral nutrition exposure (MD -2.85, 95% CI -6.13 to 0.42, 3 studies, 268 infants; very low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There remains uncertainty about the effects of oral stimulation (versus either standard care or a non-oral intervention) on transition times to oral feeding, duration of intensive care stay, hospital stay, or exposure to parenteral nutrition for preterm infants. Although we identified 28 eligible trials in this review, only 18 provided data for meta-analyses. Methodological weaknesses, particularly in relation to allocation concealment and masking of study personnel and caregivers, inconsistency between trials in effect size estimates (heterogeneity), and imprecision of pooled estimates were the main reasons for assessing the evidence as low or very low certainty. More well-designed trials of oral stimulation interventions for preterm infants are warranted. Such trials should attempt to mask caregivers to treatment when possible, paying particular attention to blinding of outcome assessors. There are currently 32 ongoing trials. Outcome measures that reflect improvements in oral motor skill development as well as longer term outcome measures beyond six months of age need to be defined and used by researchers to capture the full impact of these interventions.

Effects of an Oral Stimulation Program on Feeding Outcomes in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIMS

To review the literature on the effects of unimodal sensorimotor stimulation protocols on feeding outcomes in very preterm and moderate to late preterm infants (PIs).

METHODS

Five databases were searched up to April 2022. Studies comparing unimodal sensorimotor stimulation protocols based on the combination of manual oral stimulation with NNS against usual care in PIs, on-time transition to full oral feeding (FOF), feeding efficacy, length of hospital stay, and/or body weight gain.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. Compared to usual care, unimodal sensorimotor stimulation protocols based on manual oral stimulation combined with NNS demonstrated to be more effective in decreasing time transition to FOF (standardized mean difference [95%CI] - 1.08 [-1.74, -0.41]), improving feeding efficacy (2.15 [1.18, 3.13]) and shortening length of hospital stay (-0.35 [-0.68, -0.03]). However, the proposed intervention was not effective in improving weight gain (0.27 [-0.40, 0.95]). There were no significant differences according to gestational age (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on fair-to-high quality evidence, unimodal sensorimotor stimulation protocols combined with NNS reduce time transition to FOF, improve feeding efficacy, and shorten the length of hospital stay; yet the proposed intervention yielded no significant effects on body weight gain when compared to usual care in PIs.

Effect of Oral Motor Intervention on Oral Feeding in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective This review article aimed to explore the effect of oral motor intervention on oral feeding in preterm infants through a meta-analysis. Method Eligible studies were retrieved from four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) up to July 2020 and screened based on established selection criteria. Thereafter, relevant data were extracted and heterogeneity tests were conducted to select appropriate effect models according to the chi-square test and I ² statistics. Assessment of risk of bias was performed among the included studies. Finally, a meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the effect of oral motor intervention in preterm infants according to four clinical indicators: transition time for oral feeding, length of hospital stay, feeding efficiency, and weight gain. Results Eighteen randomized controlled trials with 848 participants were selected to evaluate the effect of oral motor intervention on preterm infants. The meta-analysis results revealed that oral motor intervention could effectively reduce the transition time to full oral feeds and the length of hospital stay as well as increase feeding efficiency and weight gain. Conclusions Oral motor intervention was an effective way to improve oral feeding in preterm infants. It is worthy to be used widely in hospitals to improve the clinical outcomes of preterm infants and reduce the economic burdens of families and society. Future studies should seek to identify detailed intervention processes and intervention durations for clinical application.

Randomised oral stimulation and exclusive breastfeeding duration in healthy premature infants

AIM

Although exclusive breastfeeding is recommended for all newborn in the first 6 months of life, only 13% of Danish premature infants complies with this. This trial aimed to examine whether oral stimulation prolonged exclusive breastfeeding in premature infants.

METHOD

A randomised controlled trial was conducted at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark between 2016 and 2018. Systematic oral stimulation was performed by the parents after training by occupational therapists. Primary outcome was exclusive breastfeeding duration with 6 months' follow-up, analysed by intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

Included were 211 infants (53% boys) with a mean gestational age of 231 days, allocated in ratio 1:1 to oral stimulation or standard care. There was no difference in exclusive breastfeeding duration between infants orally stimulated and control infants. Thus, for orally stimulated infants, median duration was 122 days (interquartile range 40-183) in contrast to 154 days (interquartile range 61-183) for the controls, P value .16. At 6 months of age, 27% of orally stimulated infants were exclusively breastfed compared with 25% of controls.

CONCLUSION

In healthy premature infants, oral stimulation performed by parents has no long-lasting effect on breastfeeding duration. Attention should be directed to parental education and involvement.

Impact of a pre-feeding oral stimulation program on first feed attempt in preterm infants: Double-blind controlled clinical trial

Objective

To evaluate the effect of an oral stimulation program in preterm on the performance in the first oral feeding, oral feeding skills and transition time from tube to total oral intake.

Study designer

Double-blind randomized clinical trial including very preterm newborns. Congenital malformations, intracranial hemorrhage grade III or IV, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and necrotizing enterocolitis were excluded. Intervention group (GI) received an oral stimulation program of tactile extra-, peri-, and intraoral tactile manipulation once a day for 15 minutes, during a 10-day period. Control group (GII) received sham procedure with same duration of time. Feeding ability was assessed by a speech-language pathologist blinded to group assignment. The classification of infants’ oral performance was determined by Oral Feeding Skills (OFS). Neonates were monitored until hospital discharge.

Results

Seventy-four (37 in each group) were randomized. Mean gestational ages and birth weights were 30±1.4 and 30±1.5 weeks, and 1,452±330g and 1,457±353g for intervention and control groups, respectively. Infants in the intervention group had significantly better rates than infants in the control group on: mean proficiency (PRO) (41.5%±18.3 vs. 19.9%±11.6 (p<0.001)), transfer rate (RT) (2.3 mL/min and 1.1 mL/min (p<0.001)) and overall transfer (OT) (57.2%±19.7 and 35.0%±15.7 (p<0.001)). Median transition time from tube to oral feeding was 4 (3–11) and 8 (7–13) days in intervention and control groups, respectively (p = 0.003). Intake of breast milk was found to reduce transition time from tube feeds to exclusive oral feeding (p<0.001, HR 1.01, 95%CI 1.005–1.019), but the impact of the study intervention remained significant (p = 0.007, HR 1.97, 95%CI 1.2–3.2).

Conclusion

Infants who were breast-fed and an oral stimulation program proved beneficial in reducing transition time from tube feeding to oral feeding.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03025815.

The Effectiveness of an Oral Sensorimotor Stimulation Protocol for the Early Achievement of Exclusive Oral Feeding in Premature Infants. A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Aims: This study is aimed to investigate the effectiveness of an oral stimulation protocol in preterm infants compared to usual care, to reduce the time for achieving safe full oral feeding.Methods: 47 preterm infants (25- 30 weeks of gestational age) were randomized into two groups. Babies of the EG (n = 24) received a 10-minute oral stimulation protocol while the CG (n = 23) received the standard care. The primary outcome were the days from the initiation of the intervention until the achievement of full oral feeding. Secondary outcomes were: days from the first day the intervention started until achieving a first oral intake of 30% in the first 5 minutes, days from the first day the intervention started until achieving a first oral intake of 100%, and days of hospitalization. A parametric survival model with Gaussian distribution was used.Results: The EG achieved full oral feeding 8.3 days before the CG (p = 0.013). EG also achieved the first oral intake of 30% in the first five minutes, 6.03 days before (p = 0.019) and of 100%, 5.88 days before (p = 0.040). EG also spent 6.9 days less hospitalized than CG (p = 0.028).Conclusion: Oral stimulation in preterm infants significantly shortens the time to achieve full oral feeding and reduces the length of hospitalization.

The effects of premature infant oral motor intervention (PIOMI) on oral feeding of preterm infants: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Given the increase in the birth and survival rate of the premature infants, a need for supportive health care services becomes more evident. The goal of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of the Premature Infant Oral Motor Intervention (PIOMI) in the feeding progression and early intervention. This study was a double-blind randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

This clinical trial included premature infants in the neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) of two hospitals in Tehran, who were randomly assigned into intervention and control group, each containing 15 infants. The PIOMI was administered to the intervention group in the course of 10 days. The infants in the control group received routine nursing services. Repeated measures ANOVA (RMA) were analyzed. The postmenstrual age and weight of the participants were examined at the time points of accomplishing one, four, and eight oral feedings a day and at the time of hospital discharge.

RESULTS

The intervention group reached the first oral feeding (with a mean of 7.2 days) and eight oral feeding (with a mean of 13.47 days) earlier than the control group. The length of hospital stay in intervention group was significantly shorter (P = 0.03). RMA wasn't statistically significant between groups for weight (F: 0.76, P: 0.39, ŋ: 0.03); but within-subjects test showed that change of the weight over time and for interaction of time and group was significant (F: 74.437, P < 0.001, ŋ: 0.727). The effect size of infants' age in the measurement times was 91%.

CONCLUSION

the results revealed that PIOMI is a fruitful method for premature infants. We suggest that PIOMI can be integrated in feeding rehabilitation programs of the premature infants born with gestational age of as young as 26-29 weeks, and applied at 29 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA).

THE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

IRCT20180410039260N1.

Impact of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit oral feeding on neuropsychomotor outcomes at 9 months of corrected age in Chinese low-birthweight preterm infants: A retrospective study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To examine the changes in neuropsychomotor development and investigate the effect of feeding progression in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) on neuropsychomotor outcomes in low-birthweight preterm infants within 9 months of corrected age.

BACKGROUND

Low-birthweight (LBW) preterm infants (<37 weeks of gestation and birthweight <2,500 g) are at a high risk for neuropsychomotor development delay. Therefore, exploring NICU practices related to neuropsychomotor development is important.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective hospital-based cohort study.

METHODS

This study included 196 LBW preterm infants who were admitted to the NICU between January 2014-March 2016 and attended the follow-up growth evaluation in the clinic after discharge. The neuropsychomotor development of preterm infants was assessed every 3 months to a corrected age of 9 months using the paediatric neuropsychomotor diagnostic scale (PNDS). Generalised linear mixed models (GLMM) were performed.

RESULTS

The total PNDS scores had a downward trend, but the difference on pairwise comparison was not statistically significant. In total, 18.1%, 15.2% and 9.7% of preterm infants were examined for neuropsychomotor disorders at 3, 6 and 9 months of corrected age, respectively. The result of GLMM showed that the early initiation of oral feeding with breast milk was associated with optimal neuropsychomotor development. The first 3 months of corrected age is the critical period for neurodevelopmental disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed the importance of the early initiation of oral feeding with breast milk as early as possible within the NICU setting and highlighted the importance of close developmental follow-up.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The early initiation of oral feeding with breast milk may be recommended to promote neuropsychomotor development of LBW preterm infants within the NICU setting. Early identification of neuropsychomotor developmental delays within the first 3 months may guide early interventions.

Oral stimulation for promoting oral feeding in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants (< 37 weeks' postmenstrual age) are often delayed in attaining oral feeding. Normal oral feeding is suggested as an important outcome for the timing of discharge from the hospital and can be an early indicator of neuromotor integrity and developmental outcomes. A range of oral stimulation interventions may help infants to develop sucking and oromotor co-ordination, promoting earlier oral feeding and earlier hospital discharge.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of oral stimulation interventions for attainment of oral feeding in preterm infants born before 37 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA).To conduct subgroup analyses for the following prespecified subgroups.• Extremely preterm infants born at < 28 weeks' PMA.• Very preterm infants born from 28 to < 32 weeks' PMA.• Infants breast-fed exclusively.• Infants bottle-fed exclusively.• Infants who were both breast-fed and bottle-fed.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 25 February 2016), Embase (1980 to 25 February 2016) and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to 25 February 2016). We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing a defined oral stimulation intervention with no intervention, standard care, sham treatment or non-oral intervention in preterm infants and reporting at least one of the specified outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author searched the databases and identified studies for screening. Two review authors screened the abstracts of these studies and full-text copies when needed to identify trials for inclusion in the review. All review authors independently extracted the data and analysed each study for risk of bias across the five domains of bias. All review authors discussed and analysed the data and used the GRADE system to rate the quality of the evidence. Review authors divided studies into two groups for comparison: intervention versus standard care and intervention versus other non-oral or sham intervention. We performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 19 randomised trials with a total of 823 participants. Almost all included trials had several methodological weaknesses. Meta-analysis showed that oral stimulation reduced the time to transition to oral feeding compared with standard care (mean difference (MD) -4.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.56 to -4.06 days) and compared with another non-oral intervention (MD -9.01, 95% CI -10.30 to -7.71 days), as well as the duration of initial hospitalisation compared with standard care (MD -5.26, 95% CI -7.34 to -3.19 days) and compared with another non-oral intervention (MD -9.01, 95% CI -10.30 to -7.71 days).Investigators reported shorter duration of parenteral nutrition for infants compared with standard care (MD -5.30, 95% CI -9.73 to -0.87 days) and compared with another non-oral intervention (MD -8.70, 95% CI -15.46 to -1.94 days). They could identify no effect on breast-feeding outcomes nor on weight gain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although the included studies suggest that oral stimulation shortens hospital stay, days to exclusive oral feeding and duration of parenteral nutrition, one must interpret results of these studies with caution, as risk of bias and poor methodological quality are high overall. Well-designed trials of oral stimulation interventions for preterm infants are warranted. Such trials should use reliable methods of randomisation while concealing treatment allocation, blinding caregivers to treatment when possible and paying particular attention to blinding of outcome assessors.

The Effects of Non-Nutritive Sucking and Pre-Feeding Oral Stimulation on Time to Achieve Independent Oral Feeding for Preterm Infants

Background:

The survival rates of preterm infants has increased over the last years, but oral feeding difficulties are the most common problems encountered by them

Objectives:

This study aimed at comparing the effects of non-nutritive sucking (NNS) and pre-feeding oral stimulation on feeding skills, length of hospital stay and weight gain of 26-32 weeks gestational age preterm infants in NICU, to determine the more effective intervention.

Patients and Methods:

Thirty-two preterm infants were assigned randomly into three groups. One intervention group received pre-feeding oral stimulation program and the other received non-nutritive sucking stimulation, while the control group received a sham intervention. Gestational age of infants was calculated during 1, 4 and 8 oral feeding and discharge time from NICU. The infants’ weights were measured weekly from birth and at discharge time.

Results:

Mean gestational age on 8 time oral feeding per day, in 3 groups was not significant (P = 0.282). Although NNS and pre-feeding oral stimulation groups has fulfilled this criterion 7.55 and 6.07 days sooner than the control group, respectively (a result which is of great clinical and economic importance), but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Weight gaining at discharge time in NNS group was significantly higher than control and pre-feeding oral stimulation groups (P < 0.05).

Conclusions:

This study revealed that pre-feeding oral stimulation and NNS programs both were effective on oral feeding skills and weight gaining of the immature newborns. Yet, it seems that NNS program was more effective than pre-feeding oral stimulation on weight gaining.