The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2022
Comparison of two Specialized Cleft Palate Feeders.
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.
Penny Cameron, Nugent Kendra-Ann, Gilgan Holly, Bezuhly Michael
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feeding efficiency and weight gain in infants with cleft palate fed using 1 of the 2 specialty feeders.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Cleft palate clinic in a tertiary pediatric hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Infants with cleft palate (with or without cleft lip) fed using the Medela SpecialNeeds® Feeder (n = 39) or the Dr. Brown's® Specialty Feeding System (n = 16) and who had documented feeding and growth data available from the time of initial assessment in the first month of life and at subsequent follow-up between 2 and 4 months.
PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Feeding velocity (mL/min).
SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: Calorie velocity (kcal/min), weight gain, and complications associated with poor feeding.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in feeding or calorie velocities were identified between infants with cleft palate fed with the Medela SpecialNeeds® feeder and those fed with the Dr. Brown's® feeder. Mean weight z-scores by month did not differ significantly between the 2 bottle groups at the time of initial assessment (P = .84) and follow-up (P = .20). Mean weight z-scores by month for the infants included in this study fell below the 50th percentile. The proportion of infants who developed otitis media, reflux requiring treatment, or who required hospital admission for nasogastric (NG) feeds did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite being adequately powered for the primary outcome, no significant differences were identified between infants fed with the Medela or the Dr. Brown's feeders in terms of feeding velocity, calorie velocity, weight gain, or complications.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Cleft palate clinic in a tertiary pediatric hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Infants with cleft palate (with or without cleft lip) fed using the Medela SpecialNeeds® Feeder (n = 39) or the Dr. Brown's® Specialty Feeding System (n = 16) and who had documented feeding and growth data available from the time of initial assessment in the first month of life and at subsequent follow-up between 2 and 4 months.
PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Feeding velocity (mL/min).
SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: Calorie velocity (kcal/min), weight gain, and complications associated with poor feeding.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in feeding or calorie velocities were identified between infants with cleft palate fed with the Medela SpecialNeeds® feeder and those fed with the Dr. Brown's® feeder. Mean weight z-scores by month did not differ significantly between the 2 bottle groups at the time of initial assessment (P = .84) and follow-up (P = .20). Mean weight z-scores by month for the infants included in this study fell below the 50th percentile. The proportion of infants who developed otitis media, reflux requiring treatment, or who required hospital admission for nasogastric (NG) feeds did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite being adequately powered for the primary outcome, no significant differences were identified between infants fed with the Medela or the Dr. Brown's feeders in terms of feeding velocity, calorie velocity, weight gain, or complications.