To Individualize the Management Care of High-Risk Infants With Oral Feeding Challenges: What Do We Know? What Can We Do?

The increase in preterm infants' survival over the last 30 years has shed light over their inability to feed by mouth safely and efficiently. With adverse events such as increased risks for oxygen desaturation, bradycardia, penetration/aspiration, infants' hospitalization in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) are understandably prolonged. Unfortunately, this leads to delayed mother-infant reunion, maternal stress, breastfeeding obstacles, and increased medical costs. Such impediments have stimulated clinicians and researchers to better understand the underlying causes and develop evidence-based solutions to assist these infants. However, it is notable that the research-to-practice translation of this knowledge has been limited as there are still no validated guidelines or protocols as how to best diagnose and care for these infants. This report revisits the immature physiologic functions at the root of these infants' oral feeding difficulties, the current practices, and the recent availability of evidence-based efficacious tools and interventions. Taking advantage of the latter, it presents a renewed perspective of how management strategies can be tailored to the specific needs of individual patients.

Comparison of two tools to assess dyad feeding interaction in infants with gastroesophageal reflux disease

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the Mother-Infant/Toddler Feeding Scale (MITFS) and the Nursing Child Assessment Feeding Scale (NCAFS). Specific questions were as follows: (1) Are there differences between the results of the MITFS and the NCAFS tools in terms of rating infant feeding interactions? And (2) does one tool provide a more detailed, nuanced overview of the quality of feeding interactions than the other?

DESIGN AND METHODS

This comparative descriptive study is a secondary analysis of a study evaluating a massage intervention for infants with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). A feeding observation for each dyad was scored using both the NCAFS and MITFS. Infants were 6-18 weeks of age.

RESULTS

There were moderate correlations (r = 0.3-0.8) between 11 of 20 possible NCAFS and MITFS mother-related subscales, and between 3 of 10 possible NCAFS and the MITFS infant-related subscales. A total of 19 dyads (83%) had one or more NCAFS subscale scores that were at least 1 standard deviation (SD) below normative scores, and 21 dyads (91%) had one or more MITFS subscale T-scores that deviated 1 SD from the normative T-scores. Agreement between the two instruments on scores deviating from the norm was 78%.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Both instruments discussed in this paper are standardized ways of assessing an infant feeding. Use of a standardized feeding tool is an objective way to evaluate feedings and can potentially identify specific areas of concern to guide an individualized intervention for a mother-infant dyad. Thus, nurses and other health professionals working with mothers and babies, whether in the hospital, pediatrician offices, or clinics would benefit from learning how to use a standardized feeding tool. Use of a feeding tool also provides the opportunity for nurses to understand the basis of important qualities of a feeding interaction, and a way for nurses who regularly feed infants to self-evaluate their feeding methods. This may minimize less than optimal interactions and allow for optimal support for infants during feedings by mothers and nurses.