评估新生儿戒断综合征的营养选择和结果:回顾性综述。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Juan A Gallegos, Laura Serke, Yana Feygin, Kahir Jawad, Tonya Robinson, Sucheta Telang
{"title":"评估新生儿戒断综合征的营养选择和结果:回顾性综述。","authors":"Juan A Gallegos, Laura Serke, Yana Feygin, Kahir Jawad, Tonya Robinson, Sucheta Telang","doi":"10.1055/a-2418-9886","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong> The rising incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has amplified the importance of nonpharmacological interventions in its management, which include the selection of feedings. With the goal of obtaining an accurate assessment of the effects of current feeding practices in NAS infants in our neonatal intensive care unit, we conducted a retrospective review of NAS infants at our hospital over a 3-year period to determine their nutritional selections and evaluate their length of stay (LOS), length of treatment (LOT), and growth outcomes.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong> Retrospective chart review of term infants (≥37 weeks of gestation) with NAS. Maternal and infant demographics and characteristics were recorded. Infants were grouped based on majority (>50% of total feeding) nutritional selections and LOS, LOT, and growth parameters were evaluated. Linear regression was used to compare group outcomes. Significance was set at a <i>p</i>-value <0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> A total of 70 infants were included and grouped based on majority feeds into maternal breast milk (MBM), standard term formula (STF), low lactose formula (LLF), and extensively hydrolyzed formula (EHF) groups. Feeding selections were provider-dependent and infants were placed on MBM or STF as an initial selection. In all infants included in our review, LLF was selected as the first choice following MBM or STF for increased gastrointestinal (GI) disturbance-related Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring scores and changed to EHF if LLF failed to improve the GI-related symptoms. The STF-fed infants had the shortest LOS, and none of these infants required pharmacological treatment. The LOT and LOS were similar in the MBM- and LLF-fed groups. Infants who were EHF fed had the longest LOT and LOS. All feeding groups demonstrated appropriate growth.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Nutritional selections in our NAS infants were modified for the severity of their withdrawal symptoms. All nutritional modifications driven by severity of withdrawal symptoms supported favorable growth outcomes in the infants.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>· Our NAS infants were fed with multiple types of nutrition.. · Infants with severe NAS required more elemental feeds.. · All formula selections supported favorable growth..</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Nutritional Selection and Outcomes in Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome: A Retrospective Review.\",\"authors\":\"Juan A Gallegos, Laura Serke, Yana Feygin, Kahir Jawad, Tonya Robinson, Sucheta Telang\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2418-9886\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong> The rising incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has amplified the importance of nonpharmacological interventions in its management, which include the selection of feedings. With the goal of obtaining an accurate assessment of the effects of current feeding practices in NAS infants in our neonatal intensive care unit, we conducted a retrospective review of NAS infants at our hospital over a 3-year period to determine their nutritional selections and evaluate their length of stay (LOS), length of treatment (LOT), and growth outcomes.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong> Retrospective chart review of term infants (≥37 weeks of gestation) with NAS. Maternal and infant demographics and characteristics were recorded. Infants were grouped based on majority (>50% of total feeding) nutritional selections and LOS, LOT, and growth parameters were evaluated. Linear regression was used to compare group outcomes. Significance was set at a <i>p</i>-value <0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> A total of 70 infants were included and grouped based on majority feeds into maternal breast milk (MBM), standard term formula (STF), low lactose formula (LLF), and extensively hydrolyzed formula (EHF) groups. Feeding selections were provider-dependent and infants were placed on MBM or STF as an initial selection. In all infants included in our review, LLF was selected as the first choice following MBM or STF for increased gastrointestinal (GI) disturbance-related Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring scores and changed to EHF if LLF failed to improve the GI-related symptoms. The STF-fed infants had the shortest LOS, and none of these infants required pharmacological treatment. The LOT and LOS were similar in the MBM- and LLF-fed groups. Infants who were EHF fed had the longest LOT and LOS. All feeding groups demonstrated appropriate growth.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Nutritional selections in our NAS infants were modified for the severity of their withdrawal symptoms. All nutritional modifications driven by severity of withdrawal symptoms supported favorable growth outcomes in the infants.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>· Our NAS infants were fed with multiple types of nutrition.. · Infants with severe NAS required more elemental feeds.. · All formula selections supported favorable growth..</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2418-9886\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2418-9886","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:新生儿禁欲综合征(NAS)发病率的上升提高了非药物干预在其管理中的重要性,其中包括喂养的选择。为了准确评估本院新生儿重症监护室目前的喂养方法对 NAS 婴儿的影响,我们对本院 3 年内的 NAS 婴儿进行了回顾性研究,以确定他们的营养选择,并评估他们的住院时间(LOS)、治疗时间(LOT)和生长结果:研究设计:对患有 NAS 的足月婴儿(妊娠期≥37 周)进行回顾性病历审查。记录母婴人口统计学特征。根据大多数(>50%的总喂养量)营养选择对婴儿进行分组,并对LOS、LOT和生长参数进行评估。采用线性回归比较各组结果。显著性以 p 值为标准:共纳入 70 名婴儿,并根据多数喂养情况将其分为母乳组(MBM)、标准足月配方奶组(STF)、低乳糖配方奶组(LLF)和广泛水解配方奶组(EHF)。喂养方式的选择取决于医疗服务提供者,婴儿最初选择的是母乳或 STF。在纳入我们研究的所有婴儿中,如果与胃肠道(GI)紊乱相关的芬尼根新生儿戒断评分(Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring)得分增加,则在使用 MBM 或 STF 后首选 LLF,如果 LLF 无法改善 GI 相关症状,则改用 EHF。STF喂养的婴儿的LOS时间最短,而且这些婴儿都不需要药物治疗。MBM喂养组和LLF喂养组的LOT和LOS相似。以 EHF 喂养的婴儿的 LOT 和 LOS 最长。所有喂养组都表现出适当的生长:结论:NAS 婴儿的营养选择是根据其戒断症状的严重程度进行调整的。所有根据戒断症状严重程度进行的营养调整都有助于婴儿获得良好的生长结果:- 我们的NAS患儿接受了多种类型的营养喂养。- 严重NAS的婴儿需要更多的元素饲料。- 所有配方奶粉的选择都有利于婴儿的生长
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating Nutritional Selection and Outcomes in Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome: A Retrospective Review.

Objective:  The rising incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has amplified the importance of nonpharmacological interventions in its management, which include the selection of feedings. With the goal of obtaining an accurate assessment of the effects of current feeding practices in NAS infants in our neonatal intensive care unit, we conducted a retrospective review of NAS infants at our hospital over a 3-year period to determine their nutritional selections and evaluate their length of stay (LOS), length of treatment (LOT), and growth outcomes.

Study design:  Retrospective chart review of term infants (≥37 weeks of gestation) with NAS. Maternal and infant demographics and characteristics were recorded. Infants were grouped based on majority (>50% of total feeding) nutritional selections and LOS, LOT, and growth parameters were evaluated. Linear regression was used to compare group outcomes. Significance was set at a p-value <0.05.

Results:  A total of 70 infants were included and grouped based on majority feeds into maternal breast milk (MBM), standard term formula (STF), low lactose formula (LLF), and extensively hydrolyzed formula (EHF) groups. Feeding selections were provider-dependent and infants were placed on MBM or STF as an initial selection. In all infants included in our review, LLF was selected as the first choice following MBM or STF for increased gastrointestinal (GI) disturbance-related Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring scores and changed to EHF if LLF failed to improve the GI-related symptoms. The STF-fed infants had the shortest LOS, and none of these infants required pharmacological treatment. The LOT and LOS were similar in the MBM- and LLF-fed groups. Infants who were EHF fed had the longest LOT and LOS. All feeding groups demonstrated appropriate growth.

Conclusion:  Nutritional selections in our NAS infants were modified for the severity of their withdrawal symptoms. All nutritional modifications driven by severity of withdrawal symptoms supported favorable growth outcomes in the infants.

Key points: · Our NAS infants were fed with multiple types of nutrition.. · Infants with severe NAS required more elemental feeds.. · All formula selections supported favorable growth..

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信