Survey of Oral Feeding Practices Amongst Health Care Professionals for Infants Receiving Nasal Continuous-Positive Airway Pressure (nCPAP) and High Flow Nasal Canula (HFNC) Respiratory Support in the United Kingdom (UK).

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Rebecca Murphy, Nicholas Drey, Madeline Cruice
{"title":"Survey of Oral Feeding Practices Amongst Health Care Professionals for Infants Receiving Nasal Continuous-Positive Airway Pressure (nCPAP) and High Flow Nasal Canula (HFNC) Respiratory Support in the United Kingdom (UK).","authors":"Rebecca Murphy, Nicholas Drey, Madeline Cruice","doi":"10.1007/s00455-026-10984-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is international uncertainty and little guidance regarding oral feeding on nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) respiratory support. The aim of this study is to investigate current practice in the UK when deciding to offer oral feeds to infants on nCPAP/HFNC. A novel survey was designed and conducted using Qualtrics. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants in speech and language therapy, medicine and nursing via professional associations. Participants completed the 41-item survey which explored oral feeding practices for infants on nCPAP/HFNC. The survey included closed-choice and open-ended questions. Descriptive statistics using SPSS, were used to analyse quantitative findings. A frequency count and thematic analysis were used to describe qualitative data. 103 responses were analysed. Regarding frequency of oral feeding on nCPAP, most respondents (45%) never fed; 30% rarely fed; 21% sometimes fed; 3% often fed, and 1% always fed (n = 73). Regarding HFNC, most respondents (48%) sometimes fed; 23% often fed; 1% always fed and 28% never or rarely fed (n = 69). 58% of respondents followed no guidelines when making decisions regarding oral feeding on nCPAP/HFNC, and 42% did or had guidelines in development (n = 83). Qualitative analysis identified the importance of the multidisciplinary team (MDT), infant readiness and the evidence-base when orally feeding an infant on nCPAP/HFNC. A continuum of conflict was acknowledged ranging from agreement amongst the MDT to disagreement within and between disciplines. More clinicians feed on HFNC than on nCPAP and there is little in the way of guidelines to support decision-making leading to variation in practice. Further research is recommended, including empirical studies using instrumental assessment of swallow safety, to guide clinicians with their decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":11508,"journal":{"name":"Dysphagia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dysphagia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-026-10984-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is international uncertainty and little guidance regarding oral feeding on nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) respiratory support. The aim of this study is to investigate current practice in the UK when deciding to offer oral feeds to infants on nCPAP/HFNC. A novel survey was designed and conducted using Qualtrics. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants in speech and language therapy, medicine and nursing via professional associations. Participants completed the 41-item survey which explored oral feeding practices for infants on nCPAP/HFNC. The survey included closed-choice and open-ended questions. Descriptive statistics using SPSS, were used to analyse quantitative findings. A frequency count and thematic analysis were used to describe qualitative data. 103 responses were analysed. Regarding frequency of oral feeding on nCPAP, most respondents (45%) never fed; 30% rarely fed; 21% sometimes fed; 3% often fed, and 1% always fed (n = 73). Regarding HFNC, most respondents (48%) sometimes fed; 23% often fed; 1% always fed and 28% never or rarely fed (n = 69). 58% of respondents followed no guidelines when making decisions regarding oral feeding on nCPAP/HFNC, and 42% did or had guidelines in development (n = 83). Qualitative analysis identified the importance of the multidisciplinary team (MDT), infant readiness and the evidence-base when orally feeding an infant on nCPAP/HFNC. A continuum of conflict was acknowledged ranging from agreement amongst the MDT to disagreement within and between disciplines. More clinicians feed on HFNC than on nCPAP and there is little in the way of guidelines to support decision-making leading to variation in practice. Further research is recommended, including empirical studies using instrumental assessment of swallow safety, to guide clinicians with their decision-making.

在英国(UK)接受鼻持续气道正压通气(nCPAP)和高流量鼻导管(HFNC)呼吸支持的婴儿中,卫生保健专业人员的口腔喂养实践调查。
国际上对于鼻持续气道正压通气(nCPAP)和高流量鼻插管(HFNC)呼吸支持的口服喂养存在不确定性和缺乏指导。本研究的目的是调查目前在英国的做法,当决定提供口服喂养婴儿在nCPAP/HFNC。我们设计并使用Qualtrics进行了一项新颖的调查。采用有目的抽样的方法,通过专业协会招募语言治疗、医学和护理专业的参与者。参与者完成了41项调查,探讨了nCPAP/HFNC对婴儿口腔喂养的做法。调查包括封闭式选择和开放式问题。使用SPSS进行描述性统计,分析定量结果。使用频率计数和专题分析来描述定性数据。对103份答复进行了分析。关于nCPAP口服喂养的频率,大多数应答者(45%)从不喂养;30%很少进食;21%有时进食;3%经常饲喂,1%始终饲喂(n = 73)。对于HFNC,大多数受访者(48%)有时会吃;23%经常喂食;1%总是喂食,28%从不或很少喂食(n = 69)。58%的受访者在决定口服nCPAP/HFNC时没有遵循任何指南,42%的受访者制定了或正在制定指南(n = 83)。定性分析确定了多学科团队(MDT)、婴儿准备情况和口服nCPAP/HFNC喂养婴儿的证据基础的重要性。从MDT之间的协议到学科内部和学科之间的分歧,各方都承认存在连续的冲突。更多的临床医生依赖HFNC而不是nCPAP,而且几乎没有指导方针来支持导致实践变化的决策。建议进一步研究,包括使用仪器评估吞咽安全性的实证研究,以指导临床医生的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Dysphagia
Dysphagia 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
15.40%
发文量
149
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Dysphagia aims to serve as a voice for the benefit of the patient. The journal is devoted exclusively to swallowing and its disorders. The purpose of the journal is to provide a source of information to the flourishing dysphagia community. Over the past years, the field of dysphagia has grown rapidly, and the community of dysphagia researchers have galvanized with ambition to represent dysphagia patients. In addition to covering a myriad of disciplines in medicine and speech pathology, the following topics are also covered, but are not limited to: bio-engineering, deglutition, esophageal motility, immunology, and neuro-gastroenterology. The journal aims to foster a growing need for further dysphagia investigation, to disseminate knowledge through research, and to stimulate communication among interested professionals. The journal publishes original papers, technical and instrumental notes, letters to the editor, and review articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书