Continuous nasogastric milk feeding versus intermittent bolus milk feeding for premature infants less than 1500 grams

Background Milk feedings can be given via nasogastric tube either intermittently, typically over 10 to 20 minutes every two or three hours, or continuously, using an infusion pump. Although theoretical benefits and risks of each method have been proposed, effects on clinically important outcomes rem...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2011-11, Vol.2011 (11), p.CD001819
Hauptverfasser: Premji, Shahirose S, Chessell, Lorraine
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 11
container_start_page CD001819
container_title Cochrane database of systematic reviews
container_volume 2011
creator Premji, Shahirose S
Chessell, Lorraine
Premji, Shahirose S
description Background Milk feedings can be given via nasogastric tube either intermittently, typically over 10 to 20 minutes every two or three hours, or continuously, using an infusion pump. Although theoretical benefits and risks of each method have been proposed, effects on clinically important outcomes remain uncertain. Objectives To examine the evidence regarding the effectiveness of continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Search methods Searches were performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2011), MEDLINE, CINAHL and HealthSTAR up to July 2011. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi‐randomised clinical trials comparing continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed all trials for relevance and methodologic quality. The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used to extract data. Main results Overall, the seven included trials, involving 511 infants, found no differences in time to achieve full enteral feeds between feeding methods (weighted mean difference (WMD) 2 days; 95% CI ‐0.3 to 3.9) . In the subgroup analysis of those studies comparing continuous nasogastric versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feedings the findings remained unchanged (WMD 2 days, 95% CI ‐0.4 to 4.1). There was no significant difference in somatic growth and incidence of NEC between feeding methods irrespective of tube placement. One study noted a trend toward more apneas during the study period in infants fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to those fed by intermittent feedings delivered predominantly by orogastric tube placements [mean difference (MD) 14.0 apneas during study period; 95% CI ‐0.2 to 28.2]. In subgroup analysis based on weight groups, one study suggested that infants less than 1000 grams and 1000 to 1250 grams birth weight gained weight faster when fed by the continuous nasogastric tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.5; MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.2 to 3.8, respectively). A trend toward earlier discharge for infants less than 1000 grams birth weight fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD ‐11 days; 95% CI ‐21.8 to ‐0.2). Authors' conclusions Small
doi_str_mv 10.1002/14651858.CD001819.pub2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7066504</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>903660593</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4722-fa88c9c903da432f2415a9bd7ad207647f816b8b139e7537ea328ccbdbd5f413</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUU1PxCAUJEbj918w3DztCrSl9GKi62di4sU7ofSxi7awAtX472WzrlEvniDMvJnhDUInlEwpIeyMlryiohLT2RUhVNBmuhxbtoX2V8BkhWz_uO-hgxifCSl4w-pdtMcYqakgbB-NM--SdaMfI3Yq-rmKKViNB9u_YAPQWTfHbxBixq1LEAabEriEW9_np1804wNeBhhUGgNktlEuRdxDjDgtlMO0IgTPgxriEdoxqo9w_HUeoqeb66fZ3eTh8fZ-dvEw0WXN2MQoIXSjG1J0qiyYYSWtVNN2teryB3hZG0F5K1paNFBXRQ2qYELrtmu7ypS0OETna9m8mwE6nXMH1ctlsIMKH9IrK38jzi7k3L_JmnBekTILnH4JBP86QkxysFFD3ysHeWMyJ-OcVE2RmXzN1MHHGMB8u1AiV43JTWNy09jKm-XBk58Zv8c2FWXC5Zrwbnv4kNrrRcj2_-j-cfkEOpmp4g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>903660593</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Continuous nasogastric milk feeding versus intermittent bolus milk feeding for premature infants less than 1500 grams</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Premji, Shahirose S ; Chessell, Lorraine ; Premji, Shahirose S</creator><creatorcontrib>Premji, Shahirose S ; Chessell, Lorraine ; Premji, Shahirose S</creatorcontrib><description>Background Milk feedings can be given via nasogastric tube either intermittently, typically over 10 to 20 minutes every two or three hours, or continuously, using an infusion pump. Although theoretical benefits and risks of each method have been proposed, effects on clinically important outcomes remain uncertain. Objectives To examine the evidence regarding the effectiveness of continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Search methods Searches were performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2011), MEDLINE, CINAHL and HealthSTAR up to July 2011. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi‐randomised clinical trials comparing continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed all trials for relevance and methodologic quality. The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used to extract data. Main results Overall, the seven included trials, involving 511 infants, found no differences in time to achieve full enteral feeds between feeding methods (weighted mean difference (WMD) 2 days; 95% CI ‐0.3 to 3.9) . In the subgroup analysis of those studies comparing continuous nasogastric versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feedings the findings remained unchanged (WMD 2 days, 95% CI ‐0.4 to 4.1). There was no significant difference in somatic growth and incidence of NEC between feeding methods irrespective of tube placement. One study noted a trend toward more apneas during the study period in infants fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to those fed by intermittent feedings delivered predominantly by orogastric tube placements [mean difference (MD) 14.0 apneas during study period; 95% CI ‐0.2 to 28.2]. In subgroup analysis based on weight groups, one study suggested that infants less than 1000 grams and 1000 to 1250 grams birth weight gained weight faster when fed by the continuous nasogastric tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.5; MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.2 to 3.8, respectively). A trend toward earlier discharge for infants less than 1000 grams birth weight fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD ‐11 days; 95% CI ‐21.8 to ‐0.2). Authors' conclusions Small sample sizes, methodologic limitations, inconsistencies in controlling variables that may affect outcomes, and conflicting results of the studies to date make it difficult to make universal recommendations regarding the best tube feeding method for premature infants less than 1500 grams. The clinical benefits and risks of continuous versus intermittent nasogastric tube milk feeding cannot be reliably discerned from the limited information available from randomised trials to date.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1465-1858</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1469-493X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1465-1858</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-493X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001819.pub2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22071802</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Animals ; Child health ; Enteral Nutrition ; Enteral Nutrition - adverse effects ; Enteral Nutrition - methods ; Feeding the low birthweight infant ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Infant, Very Low Birth Weight ; Intubation, Gastrointestinal ; Intubation, Gastrointestinal - methods ; Length of Stay ; Medicine General &amp; Introductory Medical Sciences ; Milk ; Milk, Human ; Neonatal care ; Nutrition and Metabolism in the High‐Risk Neonate ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Techniques of feeding ; Treatment Outcome ; Weight Gain</subject><ispartof>Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011-11, Vol.2011 (11), p.CD001819</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4722-fa88c9c903da432f2415a9bd7ad207647f816b8b139e7537ea328ccbdbd5f413</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4722-fa88c9c903da432f2415a9bd7ad207647f816b8b139e7537ea328ccbdbd5f413</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22071802$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Premji, Shahirose S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chessell, Lorraine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Premji, Shahirose S</creatorcontrib><title>Continuous nasogastric milk feeding versus intermittent bolus milk feeding for premature infants less than 1500 grams</title><title>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</title><addtitle>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</addtitle><description>Background Milk feedings can be given via nasogastric tube either intermittently, typically over 10 to 20 minutes every two or three hours, or continuously, using an infusion pump. Although theoretical benefits and risks of each method have been proposed, effects on clinically important outcomes remain uncertain. Objectives To examine the evidence regarding the effectiveness of continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Search methods Searches were performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2011), MEDLINE, CINAHL and HealthSTAR up to July 2011. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi‐randomised clinical trials comparing continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed all trials for relevance and methodologic quality. The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used to extract data. Main results Overall, the seven included trials, involving 511 infants, found no differences in time to achieve full enteral feeds between feeding methods (weighted mean difference (WMD) 2 days; 95% CI ‐0.3 to 3.9) . In the subgroup analysis of those studies comparing continuous nasogastric versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feedings the findings remained unchanged (WMD 2 days, 95% CI ‐0.4 to 4.1). There was no significant difference in somatic growth and incidence of NEC between feeding methods irrespective of tube placement. One study noted a trend toward more apneas during the study period in infants fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to those fed by intermittent feedings delivered predominantly by orogastric tube placements [mean difference (MD) 14.0 apneas during study period; 95% CI ‐0.2 to 28.2]. In subgroup analysis based on weight groups, one study suggested that infants less than 1000 grams and 1000 to 1250 grams birth weight gained weight faster when fed by the continuous nasogastric tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.5; MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.2 to 3.8, respectively). A trend toward earlier discharge for infants less than 1000 grams birth weight fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD ‐11 days; 95% CI ‐21.8 to ‐0.2). Authors' conclusions Small sample sizes, methodologic limitations, inconsistencies in controlling variables that may affect outcomes, and conflicting results of the studies to date make it difficult to make universal recommendations regarding the best tube feeding method for premature infants less than 1500 grams. The clinical benefits and risks of continuous versus intermittent nasogastric tube milk feeding cannot be reliably discerned from the limited information available from randomised trials to date.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Child health</subject><subject>Enteral Nutrition</subject><subject>Enteral Nutrition - adverse effects</subject><subject>Enteral Nutrition - methods</subject><subject>Feeding the low birthweight infant</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Infant, Very Low Birth Weight</subject><subject>Intubation, Gastrointestinal</subject><subject>Intubation, Gastrointestinal - methods</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Medicine General &amp; Introductory Medical Sciences</subject><subject>Milk</subject><subject>Milk, Human</subject><subject>Neonatal care</subject><subject>Nutrition and Metabolism in the High‐Risk Neonate</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Techniques of feeding</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Weight Gain</subject><issn>1465-1858</issn><issn>1469-493X</issn><issn>1465-1858</issn><issn>1469-493X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>RWY</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUU1PxCAUJEbj918w3DztCrSl9GKi62di4sU7ofSxi7awAtX472WzrlEvniDMvJnhDUInlEwpIeyMlryiohLT2RUhVNBmuhxbtoX2V8BkhWz_uO-hgxifCSl4w-pdtMcYqakgbB-NM--SdaMfI3Yq-rmKKViNB9u_YAPQWTfHbxBixq1LEAabEriEW9_np1804wNeBhhUGgNktlEuRdxDjDgtlMO0IgTPgxriEdoxqo9w_HUeoqeb66fZ3eTh8fZ-dvEw0WXN2MQoIXSjG1J0qiyYYSWtVNN2teryB3hZG0F5K1paNFBXRQ2qYELrtmu7ypS0OETna9m8mwE6nXMH1ctlsIMKH9IrK38jzi7k3L_JmnBekTILnH4JBP86QkxysFFD3ysHeWMyJ-OcVE2RmXzN1MHHGMB8u1AiV43JTWNy09jKm-XBk58Zv8c2FWXC5Zrwbnv4kNrrRcj2_-j-cfkEOpmp4g</recordid><startdate>20111109</startdate><enddate>20111109</enddate><creator>Premji, Shahirose S</creator><creator>Chessell, Lorraine</creator><creator>Premji, Shahirose S</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><scope>7PX</scope><scope>RWY</scope><scope>ZYTZH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111109</creationdate><title>Continuous nasogastric milk feeding versus intermittent bolus milk feeding for premature infants less than 1500 grams</title><author>Premji, Shahirose S ; Chessell, Lorraine ; Premji, Shahirose S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4722-fa88c9c903da432f2415a9bd7ad207647f816b8b139e7537ea328ccbdbd5f413</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Child health</topic><topic>Enteral Nutrition</topic><topic>Enteral Nutrition - adverse effects</topic><topic>Enteral Nutrition - methods</topic><topic>Feeding the low birthweight infant</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Infant, Very Low Birth Weight</topic><topic>Intubation, Gastrointestinal</topic><topic>Intubation, Gastrointestinal - methods</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Medicine General &amp; Introductory Medical Sciences</topic><topic>Milk</topic><topic>Milk, Human</topic><topic>Neonatal care</topic><topic>Nutrition and Metabolism in the High‐Risk Neonate</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Techniques of feeding</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Weight Gain</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Premji, Shahirose S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chessell, Lorraine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Premji, Shahirose S</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Cochrane Library</collection><collection>Cochrane Library</collection><collection>Cochrane Library (Open Aceess)</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Premji, Shahirose S</au><au>Chessell, Lorraine</au><au>Premji, Shahirose S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Continuous nasogastric milk feeding versus intermittent bolus milk feeding for premature infants less than 1500 grams</atitle><jtitle>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</jtitle><addtitle>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</addtitle><date>2011-11-09</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>2011</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>CD001819</spage><pages>CD001819-</pages><issn>1465-1858</issn><issn>1469-493X</issn><eissn>1465-1858</eissn><eissn>1469-493X</eissn><abstract>Background Milk feedings can be given via nasogastric tube either intermittently, typically over 10 to 20 minutes every two or three hours, or continuously, using an infusion pump. Although theoretical benefits and risks of each method have been proposed, effects on clinically important outcomes remain uncertain. Objectives To examine the evidence regarding the effectiveness of continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Search methods Searches were performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2011), MEDLINE, CINAHL and HealthSTAR up to July 2011. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi‐randomised clinical trials comparing continuous versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feeding in premature infants less than 1500 grams. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed all trials for relevance and methodologic quality. The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used to extract data. Main results Overall, the seven included trials, involving 511 infants, found no differences in time to achieve full enteral feeds between feeding methods (weighted mean difference (WMD) 2 days; 95% CI ‐0.3 to 3.9) . In the subgroup analysis of those studies comparing continuous nasogastric versus intermittent bolus nasogastric milk feedings the findings remained unchanged (WMD 2 days, 95% CI ‐0.4 to 4.1). There was no significant difference in somatic growth and incidence of NEC between feeding methods irrespective of tube placement. One study noted a trend toward more apneas during the study period in infants fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to those fed by intermittent feedings delivered predominantly by orogastric tube placements [mean difference (MD) 14.0 apneas during study period; 95% CI ‐0.2 to 28.2]. In subgroup analysis based on weight groups, one study suggested that infants less than 1000 grams and 1000 to 1250 grams birth weight gained weight faster when fed by the continuous nasogastric tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.5; MD 2.0 g/day; 95% CI 0.2 to 3.8, respectively). A trend toward earlier discharge for infants less than 1000 grams birth weight fed by the continuous tube feeding method compared to intermittent nasogastric tube feeding method (MD ‐11 days; 95% CI ‐21.8 to ‐0.2). Authors' conclusions Small sample sizes, methodologic limitations, inconsistencies in controlling variables that may affect outcomes, and conflicting results of the studies to date make it difficult to make universal recommendations regarding the best tube feeding method for premature infants less than 1500 grams. The clinical benefits and risks of continuous versus intermittent nasogastric tube milk feeding cannot be reliably discerned from the limited information available from randomised trials to date.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>22071802</pmid><doi>10.1002/14651858.CD001819.pub2</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1465-1858
ispartof Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011-11, Vol.2011 (11), p.CD001819
issn 1465-1858
1469-493X
1465-1858
1469-493X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7066504
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Animals
Child health
Enteral Nutrition
Enteral Nutrition - adverse effects
Enteral Nutrition - methods
Feeding the low birthweight infant
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Infant, Very Low Birth Weight
Intubation, Gastrointestinal
Intubation, Gastrointestinal - methods
Length of Stay
Medicine General & Introductory Medical Sciences
Milk
Milk, Human
Neonatal care
Nutrition and Metabolism in the High‐Risk Neonate
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Techniques of feeding
Treatment Outcome
Weight Gain
title Continuous nasogastric milk feeding versus intermittent bolus milk feeding for premature infants less than 1500 grams
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T21%3A21%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Continuous%20nasogastric%20milk%20feeding%20versus%20intermittent%20bolus%20milk%20feeding%20for%20premature%20infants%20less%20than%201500%20grams&rft.jtitle=Cochrane%20database%20of%20systematic%20reviews&rft.au=Premji,%20Shahirose%20S&rft.date=2011-11-09&rft.volume=2011&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=CD001819&rft.pages=CD001819-&rft.issn=1465-1858&rft.eissn=1465-1858&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001819.pub2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E903660593%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=903660593&rft_id=info:pmid/22071802&rfr_iscdi=true