2012
DOI: 10.1177/0148607112449482
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Randomized Controlled Trial of Slow vs Rapid Enteral Feeding Advancements on the Clinical Outcomes of Preterm Infants With Birth Weight 750–1250 g

Abstract: Rapid enteral feeding advancements in 750-1250 g birth weight infants reduce the time to reach full enteral feeding and the use of PN administration. Rapid-advancement enteral feed also decreases extrauterine growth restriction with improved short-term outcomes for these high-risk infants.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
69
3
3

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
6
69
3
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Measures of postnatal growth failure, also referred to as extrauterine growth restriction or extrauterine 7,[29][30][31] at the time of hospital discharge, 32,33 or at 28 days after birth. 34 Measures based on z scores at discharge and the differences between these scores at birth and discharge have also been used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Measures of postnatal growth failure, also referred to as extrauterine growth restriction or extrauterine 7,[29][30][31] at the time of hospital discharge, 32,33 or at 28 days after birth. 34 Measures based on z scores at discharge and the differences between these scores at birth and discharge have also been used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors determined that there was not a statistically significant difference in the effect of slow versus fast feedings on the development of NEC or on mortality [71]. Each of the trials did report that in the slow advancement group, the infants took a statistically significant longer time to regain birth weight [7276], but there was no effect on secondary outcome measures of feeding intolerance [74–76] or the incidence of invasive infection [75,76]. A recent retrospective study by Maas and colleagues evaluated premature infants who were born at less than 32 weeks gestational age and under 1500 grams and determined that there was no significant difference in the incidence of NEC seen in the accelerated feeding advancement group (3.3% accelerated versus 2.7% in the slower group), but they acknowledge that their study was underpowered to detect small differences between the two groups [77].…”
Section: Evidence Based Feeding Protocols For the Prevention Of Necmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, NEC incidence was described in a study that examined a feeding advancement strategy. (29) In their data, feeding milk types were described as human milk and bovine products, and the NEC outcome in infants weighing less than 1250 g was noted as 4%. (29) It is therefore prudent to encourage mothers to provide their own milk whether their intentions are to breastfeed or not to capitalize the most on the biological components in breast milk to reduce NEC risk.…”
Section: Evidence That Drives Nicu Clinicians To Prescribe Pdhmmentioning
confidence: 99%