Journal of pediatric surgery · 2026
The power of pretend: Caregiver perspectives on sham feeding for infants with long-gap esophageal atresia.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Scheepers Frances, Grays Sela, Brar Amanpreet, Vidler Marianne, Joharifard Shahrzad
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Neonates with long-gap esophageal atresia (LGEA) experience oral aversion and prolonged feeding difficulties, even after surgical repair. Sham feeding-providing non-nutritive oral experiences-may support feeding skill development and caregiver bonding prior to anastomosis. This study explores the clinical and psychosocial impact of sham feeding in this population.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study of neonates who sham fed following implementation of a standardized protocol at our tertiary hospital. Demographic, surgical, and feeding data were collected via retrospective chart review. Mothers' perspectives were captured through semi-structured interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed using a structured framework. Coding was iterative and refined through team consensus.
RESULTS: Eight infants with LGEA underwent sham feeding. Most were female (75 %) with a mean gestational age of 36.8 weeks. The majority (75 %) had type A EA, while 2 (25 %) had type C EA-TEF. Mean age at final surgery was 96 days. Half underwent primary anastomosis, while the remainder underwent traction. Six (75 %) had an anastomotic leak. Eight mothers participated in qualitative interviews. Five major domains emerged: (1) parental experience, including improved bonding and restored normalcy; (2) impact of sham feeding, encompassing avoidance of oral aversion; (3) support and communication, highlighting provider knowledge and peer connections; (4) logistical and practical challenges, such as privacy concerns and navigating feeding routines, and (5) knowledge and expertise acquired and transferred.
CONCLUSION: While clinical benefits remain unproven, sham feeding appears to offer meaningful psychosocial benefits for caregivers of infants with LGEA. These findings support ongoing use and evaluation of sham feeding.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study of neonates who sham fed following implementation of a standardized protocol at our tertiary hospital. Demographic, surgical, and feeding data were collected via retrospective chart review. Mothers' perspectives were captured through semi-structured interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed using a structured framework. Coding was iterative and refined through team consensus.
RESULTS: Eight infants with LGEA underwent sham feeding. Most were female (75 %) with a mean gestational age of 36.8 weeks. The majority (75 %) had type A EA, while 2 (25 %) had type C EA-TEF. Mean age at final surgery was 96 days. Half underwent primary anastomosis, while the remainder underwent traction. Six (75 %) had an anastomotic leak. Eight mothers participated in qualitative interviews. Five major domains emerged: (1) parental experience, including improved bonding and restored normalcy; (2) impact of sham feeding, encompassing avoidance of oral aversion; (3) support and communication, highlighting provider knowledge and peer connections; (4) logistical and practical challenges, such as privacy concerns and navigating feeding routines, and (5) knowledge and expertise acquired and transferred.
CONCLUSION: While clinical benefits remain unproven, sham feeding appears to offer meaningful psychosocial benefits for caregivers of infants with LGEA. These findings support ongoing use and evaluation of sham feeding.