No abstract

IntroductionEnding preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 will not be possible without evidence-based strategies addressing the health and care of low birthweight (LBW, <2.5 kg) infants. The majority of LBW infants are born in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and account for more than 60%–80% of newborn deaths. Feeding promotion tailored to meet the nutritional needs of LBW infants in LMICs may serve a crucial role in curbing newborn mortality rates and promoting growth. The Low Birthweight Infant Feeding Exploration (LIFE) study aims to establish foundational knowledge regarding optimal feeding options for LBW infants in low-resource settings throughout infancy.Methods and analysisLIFE is a formative, multisite, observational cohort study involving 12 study facilities in India, Malawi and Tanzania, and using a convergent parallel, mixed-methods design. We assess feeding patterns, growth indicators, morbidity, mortality, child development and health system inputs that facilitate or hinder care and survival of LBW infants.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by 11 ethics committees in India, Malawi, Tanzania and the USA. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations targeting the global and local research, clinical, programme implementation and policy communities.Trial registration numbersNCT04002908 and CTRI/2019/02/017475.

ObjectivesTo describe the feeding profile of low birthweight (LBW) infants in the first half of infancy; and to examine growth patterns and early risk factors of poor 6-month growth outcomes.DesignProspective observational cohort study.Setting and participantsStable, moderately LBW (1.50 to <2.50 kg) infants were enrolled at birth from 12 secondary/tertiary facilities in India, Malawi and Tanzania and visited nine times over 6 months.Variables of interestKey variables of interest included birth weight, LBW type (combination of preterm/term status and size-for-gestational age at birth), lactation practices and support, feeding profile, birthweight regain by 2 weeks of age and poor 6-month growth outcomes.ResultsBetween 13 September 2019 and 27 January 2021, 1114 infants were enrolled, comprising 4 LBW types. 363 (37.3%) infants initiated early breast feeding and 425 (43.8%) were exclusively breastfed to 6 months. 231 (22.3%) did not regain birthweight by 2 weeks; at 6 months, 280 (32.6%) were stunted, 222 (25.8%) underweight and 88 (10.2%) wasted. Preterm-small-for-gestational age (SGA) infants had 1.89 (95% CI 1.37 to 2.62) and 2.32 (95% CI 1.48 to 3.62) times greater risks of being stunted and underweight at 6 months compared with preterm-appropriate-for-gestational age (AGA) infants. Term-SGA infants had 2.33 (95% CI 1.77 to 3.08), 2.89 (95% CI 1.97 to 4.24) and 1.99 (95% CI 1.13 to 3.51) times higher risks of being stunted, underweight and wasted compared with preterm-AGA infants. Those not regaining their birthweight by 2 weeks had 1.51 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.85) and 1.55 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.99) times greater risks of being stunted and underweight compared with infants regaining.ConclusionLBW type, particularly SGA regardless of preterm or term status, and lack of birthweight regain by 2 weeks are important risk identification parameters. Early interventions are needed that include optimal feeding support, action-oriented growth monitoring and understanding of the needs and growth patterns of SGA infants to enable appropriate weight gain and proactive management of vulnerable infants.Trial registration numberNCT04002908.

No abstract

Objectives Limited literature exists as to whether preoperative GT evaluation may predict which patients will go onto require GJ feeding. The goal of this study was to compare the preoperative evaluations between patients maintained on GT feeds versus patients who required conversion to GJ feeds. Methods We identified patients at Boston Children’s Hospital who underwent GT placement and required GJ feeding between 2006–2012. GT patients were matched according to age, neurologic, and cardiac status with GJ converted patients. Preoperative characteristics, rates of total hospitalizations, and respiratory related admissions were reviewed. Results 79 GJ patients (median (IQR): age 15 (4.3, 55.7) months; weight 8.8 (4.6, 14.5) kg) were matched with 79 GT patients (median (IQR): age 14.6 (4.7, 55.7) months; weight 8.5 (5, 13.6) kg). Median time from GT to GJ conversion was 8 (IQR 3, 16) months. Both groups had similar rates of successful preoperative nasogastric feeding trials (GT (84.5%) vs GJ (83.1%), p=1.0), upper GI series (GT (89.1%) vs GJ (93.2%), p=0.73), abnormal videofluoroscopic swallow studies (GT (53.8%) vs GJ (62.2%), p=0.4), and completion of gastric emptying studies (GT (10.1%) vs GJ (5.1%), p=0.22). No differences were seen in preoperative hospitalization rates (p=0.25), respiratory admissions (p=0.36), although GJ patients had a mean reduction in the number of hospitalization of −1.5 ± 0.5 days, p<0.001, after conversion. Conclusions No differences in preoperative patient characteristics or diagnostic evaluations were seen in GT fed versus GJ converted patients. GJ patients did experience an overall decrease in total admissions after GJ conversion.