Method of home tube feeding and 2-3-year neurodevelopmental outcome

OBJECTIVE

To describe the Bayley Scales of Infant Development 3rd Edition (Bayley-III) of infants discharged home receiving tube feeds.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of infants discharged with nasogastric or gastrostomy tube feeds and completed a Bayley-III assessment at 2-3-years of age through a neonatal follow-up program. Results were reported using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of infants discharged with nasogastric feeds, median Bayley-III scores were in the low-average to average range, and full oral feeds were achieved in 75%. Of infants discharged with gastrostomy tube feeds, median Bayley-III scores were in the extremely low range, and full oral feeds were achieved in 36%. Our data set did not demonstrate a distinct patient demographic that correlated to the type of feeding tube at discharge.

CONCLUSION

Neurodevelopmental outcome at 2-3 years does not appear to be negatively impacted by the decision to discharge an infant from the NICU with home NG feedings.

Higher versus lower protein intake in formula-fed term infants

BACKGROUND

Many infants are fed infant formulas to promote growth. Some formulas have a high protein content (≥ 2.5 g per 100 kcal) to accelerate weight gain during the first year of life. The risk-benefit balance of these formulas is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of higher protein intake versus lower protein intake in healthy, formula-fed term infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, OpenGrey, clinical trial registries, and conference proceedings in October 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of healthy formula-fed infants (those fed only formula and those given formula as a complementary food). We included infants of any sex or ethnicity who were fed infant formula for at least three consecutive months at any time from birth. We excluded quasi-randomized trials, observational studies, and infants with congenital malformations or serious underlying diseases. We defined high protein content as 2.5 g or more per 100 kcal, and low protein content as less than 1.8 g per 100 kcal (for exclusive formula feeding) or less than 1.7 g per 100 kcal (for complementary formula feeding).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from trials, and a fifth review author resolved discrepancies. We performed random-effects meta-analyses, calculating risk ratios (RRs) or Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs (1185 infants) conducted in high-income countries. Seven trials (1629 infants) compared high-protein formula against standard-protein formula, and four trials (256 infants) compared standard-protein formula against low-protein formula. The longest follow-up was 11 years. High-protein formula versus standard-protein formula We found very low-certainty evidence that feeding healthy term infants high-protein formula compared to standard-protein formula has little or no effect on underweight (MD in weight-for-age z-score 0.05 SDs, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.19; P = 0.51, I2 = 61%; 7 studies, 1629 participants), stunting (MD in height-for-age z-score 0.15 SDs, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.35; P = 0.14, I2 = 73%; 7 studies, 1629 participants), and wasting (MD in weight-for-height z-score -0.12 SDs, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.07; P = 0.20, I2 = 94%; 7 studies, 1629 participants) in the first year of life. We found very low-certainty evidence that feeding healthy infants high-protein formula compared to standard-protein formula has little or no effect on the occurrence of overweight (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.51; P = 0.51; 1 study, 1090 participants) or obesity (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.59 to 6.48; P = 0.27; 1 study, 1090 participants) at five years of follow-up. No studies reported all-cause mortality. Feeding healthy infants high-protein formula compared to standard-protein formula may have little or no effect on the occurrence of adverse events such as diarrhea, vomiting, or milk hypersensitivity (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.13; P = 0.44, I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 445 participants; low-certainty evidence) in the first year of life. Standard-protein formula versus low-protein formula We found very low-certainty evidence that feeding healthy infants standard-protein formula compared to low-protein formula has little or no effect on underweight (MD in weight-for-age z-score 0.0, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.43; P = 0.99, I2 = 81%; 4 studies, 256 participants), stunting (MD in height-for-age z-score -0.01, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.35; P = 0.96, I2 = 73%; 4 studies, 256 participants), and wasting (MD in weight-for-height z-score 0.13, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.56; P = 0.54, I2 = 95%; 4 studies, 256 participants) in the first year of life. No studies reported overweight, obesity, or all-cause mortality. Feeding healthy infants standard-protein formula compared to low-protein formula may have little or no effect on the occurrence of adverse events such as diarrhea, vomiting, or milk hypersensitivity (Peto OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.40; P = 0.28, I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 206 participants; low-certainty evidence) in the first four months of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are unsure if feeding healthy infants high-protein formula compared to standard-protein formula has an effect on undernutrition, overweight, or obesity. There may be little or no difference in the risk of adverse effects between infants fed with high-protein formula versus those fed with standard-protein formula. We are unsure if feeding healthy infants standard-protein formula compared to low-protein formula has any effect on undernutrition. There may be little or no difference in the risk of adverse effects between infants fed with standard-protein formula versus those fed with low-protein formula. The findings of six ongoing studies and two studies awaiting classification studies may change the conclusions of this review.

"I was always struggling": Caregivers' experiences of transitioning a child from oral to long-term non-oral feeding at an out-patient hospital clinic in South Africa

BACKGROUND

As the prevalence of paediatric dysphagia increases, the need for long-term non-oral feeding has also increased. Despite these developments, little is known about caregiver experiences of transitioning a child onto long-term non-oral feeds, and the factors which influence the process of decision-making and the provision of consent to do so. This paper aims to explore these factors.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants recruited from the multidisciplinary out-patient non-oral feeding clinic at a hospital. Interviews explored caregiver experiences of decision-making and the process of providing consent when transitioning their child to non-oral feeds, as well as the support structures available to the caregivers. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed, then analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2013) and content analysis (Neuendorf, 2016).

RESULTS

Challenges to care and quality of life, access to information and culturally relevant counselling, and the involvement of family members and significant others emerged as prominent themes. Findings suggest that quality of life was the most common motivating factor for transitioning a child to non-oral feeding methods. Several participants suggested that support and information sharing via digital platforms were both useful and effective.

IMPLICATIONS

The findings highlight caregivers' needs for improved access to information and social support. The findings hold implications for training of healthcare providers working in similar contexts and for models of service delivery which ensure that family-centred intervention can be delivered in culturally and contextually relevant ways. With widespread access to smartphones, counselling should include digital messaging as a way of providing support and information sharing. Future research should focus on the complexities of counselling and the process of informed consent in settings impacted by diverse cultural, contextual and linguistic barriers, as well as the potential value of mobile health (mhealth) in ensuring improved health outcomes.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy in Children: An Update to the ESPGHAN Position Paper

BACKGROUND

The European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) position paper from 2015 on percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) required updating in the light of recent clinical knowledge and data published in medical journals since 2014.

METHODS

A systematic review of medical literature from 2014 to 2020 was carried out. Consensus on the content of the manuscript, including recommendations, was achieved by the authors through electronic and virtual means. The expert opinion of the authors is also expressed in the manuscript when there was a lack of good scientific evidence regarding PEGs in children in the literature.

RESULTS

The authors recommend that the indication for a PEG be individualized, and that the decision for PEG insertion is arrived at by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) having considered all appropriate circumstances. Well timed enteral nutrition is optimal to treat faltering growth to avoid complications of malnutrition and body composition. Timing, device choice and method of insertion is dependent on the local expertise and after due consideration with the MDT and family. Major complications such as inadvertent bowel perforation should be avoided by attention to good technique and by ensuring the appropriate experience of the operating team. Feeding can be initiated as early as 3 hours after tube placement in a stable child with iso-osmolar feeds of standard polymeric formula. Low-profile devices can be inserted initially using the single-stage procedure or after 2-3 months by replacing a standard PEG tube, in those requiring longer-term feeding. Having had a period of non-use and reliance upon oral intake for growth and weight gain-typically 8-12 weeks-a PEG may then safely be removed after due consultation. In the event of non-closure of the fistula the most successful method for closing it, to date, has been a surgical procedure, but the Over-The-Scope-Clip (OTSC) has recently been used with considerable success in this scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory for the best possible treatment of children with PEGs. Morbidity and mortality are minimized through team decisions on indications for insertion, adequate planning and preparation before the procedure, subsequent monitoring of patients, timing of the change to low-profile devices, management of any complications, and optimal timing of removal of the PEG.

Jejunalsonden bei Kindern und Jugendlichen

Die Ernährung über eine jejunale Sonde wird immer häufiger bei jenen Kindern notwendig, deren kalorischer Bedarf durch gastrale Ernährung nicht ausreichend gedeckt werden kann. Ursächlich hierfür können die Intoleranz gastral zugeführter Nahrung oder eine ausgeprägte gastroösophageale Refluxkrankheit (GÖRK) sein. Da nach Anlage der Jejunalsonde häufig regelmäßige Sondenwechsel notwendig werden, ist eine jejunale Sonde oft nur eine vorübergehende Lösung bis zur perkutanen Anlage eines Jejunostomas (mit oder ohne Antirefluxoperation) oder als Alternative vor einer etwaigen Antirefluxoperation.

Bevor eine jejunale Sonde gelegt wird, sollte eine Nahrungsintoleranz aufgrund anatomischer oder nicht gastrointestinal bedingter Probleme ausgeschlossen werden.

Die Versorgung eines Kindes, bei dem die Anlage einer jejunalen Sonde geplant ist, sollte durch ein multidisziplinäres Team, bestehend aus u. a. einem Kindergastroenterologen/einer Kindergastroenterologin, einer Ernährungsfachkraft, einem Psychologen/einer Psychologin und einem Logopäden/einer Logopädin, erfolgen. Das multidisziplinäre Team sollte bereits vor Indikationsstellung die Nahrung anpassen, das Kind logopädisch evaluiert haben und die Familie psychologisch und medizinisch mitbetreuen.

Eine adäquate Planung, welche auch ethische Aspekte beinhaltet, garantiert, dass sowohl der Patient/die Patientin, die Eltern und Betreuungspersonen wie auch das behandelnde Team ein klares Verständnis der Indikation und Gründe für die Anlage einer jejunalen Sonde haben. Dabei sollten auch die Fortsetzung einer möglichen oralen Ernährung und eine Sondenentwöhnung diskutiert werden.

Diese Übersicht beinhaltet Handlungsempfehlungen zur Indikationsstellung für den Einsatz jejunaler Sonden, gepaart mit praktischen Überlegungen, welche die Verwendung und die Sicherheit der jejunalen Sondenernährung im Kindes- und Jugendalter optimieren sollen.

Enteral and parenteral nutrition therapy for neonates at a neonatal unit: a longitudinal retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The goals of nutrition therapy include providing adequate growth and development, avoiding a negative energy and nitrogen balance, and preventing complications.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the nutrition therapy received by newborns at the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of a public maternity hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

METHODS

Retrospective longitudinal observational study in which data were collected on newborns admitted to NICU, in Rio de Janeiro, in 2016. The time that elapsed before commencement of parenteral and trophic enteral nutritional, time to reach full enteral nutrition, type of diet at the beginning of trophic enteral nutrition and at discharge from the NICU, and the relationship between birth weight and nutritional therapy were evaluated.

RESULTS

Trophic enteral nutrition began after 24.42 (SD +20.23) hours, on average, and the mean time to reach full enteral nutrition was 10.0 (SD +5.51) days. Newborns with a birth weight below 1500 g had a longer hospital stay (p = .002), longer oxygen therapy (p = .009), a longer time before commencement of enteral feeding (p = .005), and took longer to reach full enteral feeding (p = .010).

CONCLUSIONS

The institutional nutritional therapy practices were consistent with those proposed in the literature, but more support is needed for breastfeeding in this group.

Breastfeeding the Critically Unwell Child: A Call to Action

Introduction

Breastfeeding rates among children who have a serious illness or congenital condition are lower than the general population. There are many barriers to maintaining lactation during a child's illness, and specific training issues among staff working in pediatric departments.

Method

This is a narrative review of some of the most common challenges highlighted during a literature search prior to a research study that is being undertaken to explore this phenomenon in greater detail.

Results

There are many identified challenges for families of sick children. Lactation may be threatened or discontinued if the barriers are not adequately addressed. Lactation professionals working in any setting may work with families who are coping with difficulties that require more support.

Conclusion

Breastfeeding sick children, and those with complex medical conditions, requires adaptations and more specialized skills. Many families feel unsupported by their medical teams. Recommendations are made for collaborative working between pediatric medicine and surgery, nursing, oncology, radiology, dietetics, anesthetics, pain management, play therapy, child psychology, palliative care, social support, and lactation support.

Nutrition in late preterm infants

Late preterm infants comprise the majority of preterm infants, yet there are few data to support best nutritional practice for these infants. Breastmilk is considered the best choice of enteral feeding for late preterm infants. However, supplementation of breastmilk may be indicated to promote optimal growth. Preterm formulas can be used for supplementation of breastmilk or as a breastmilk substitute but there is little evidence for their use in the late preterm infant. Feeding difficulties are common and some infants require intravenous nutritional support soon after birth. Others require tube feeding until full sucking feeds are established. Future research should focus on whether nutritional support of late preterm babies pending exclusive breastfeeding influences growth, body composition and long-term outcomes of late preterm infants and, if so, how nutritional interventions can optimise these outcomes.

The Use of Jejunal Tube Feeding in Children: A Position Paper by the Gastroenterology and Nutrition Committees of the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition 2019

OBJECTIVES

Jejunal tube feeding (JTF) is increasingly becoming the standard of care for children in whom gastric tube feeding is insufficient to achieve caloric needs. Given a lack of a systematic approach to the care of JTF in paediatric patients, the aim of this position paper is to provide expert guidance regarding the indications for its use and practical considerations to optimize its utility and safety.

METHODS

A group of members of the Gastroenterology and Nutrition Committees of the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition and of invited experts in the field was formed in September 2016 to produce this clinical guide. Seventeen clinical questions treating indications and contraindications, investigations before placement, techniques of placement, suitable feeds and feeding regimen, weaning from JTF, complications, long-term care, and ethical considerations were addressed.A systematic literature search was performed from 1982 to November 2018 using PubMed, the MEDLINE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was applied to evaluate the outcomes.During a consensus meeting, all recommendations were discussed and finalized. In the absence of evidence from randomized controlled trials, recommendations reflect the expert opinion of the authors.

RESULTS

A total of 33 recommendations were voted on using the nominal voting technique.

CONCLUSIONS

JTF is a safe and effective means of enteral feeding when gastric feeding is insufficient to meet caloric needs or is not possible. The decision to place a jejunal tube has to be made by close cooperation of a multidisciplinary team providing active follow-up and care.

Perceptions of Gastrostomy Buttons Among Caregivers of Children With Special Health Care Needs

INTRODUCTION

Children with special health care needs (CSHCN) have chronic conditions that generally are classified as developmental disabilities. Children with developmental disabilities are at high risk of malnutrition. Gastrostomy buttons are frequently used to provide enteral nutrition for children with developmental disabilities.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to understand caregivers' perceptions regarding gastrostomy button placement for CSHCN.

METHODS

Caregivers (N = 257) were recruited from CSHCN peer support groups to complete an online survey regarding perceptions of gastrostomy button placement. Kolmogorov-Smirnov testing found that results were not normally distributed. Nonparametric testing with Spearman rank correlation was used to determine the relationship between Overall Satisfaction With Choice and all other perception variables.

RESULTS

The findings suggested overall satisfaction and willingness to accept gastrostomy button placement earlier.

CONCLUSION

Gastrostomy button placement has diverse effects for children with developmental disabilities and their families. Health care professionals must be knowledgeable about the positive and negative outcomes to effectively educate families as they consider gastrostomy placement.

Blended diets for gastrostomy fed children and young people: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The present review aimed to identify what is known about the use of blended diets in gastrostomy fed children and young people (i.e. children and young people refers to those who are aged up to 25 years with special educational needs or a disability in accordance with Part 3 of the Children and Family Act 2014; within the review, the word children is used for simplicity but encompasses young people too) and to identify gaps in the literature on this topic to inform future research and policy.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was used searching the online databases PUBMED, PsychINFO, CINAHL, SCOPUS and AMED, EMBASE for articles that addressed issues pertaining to blended diets. The review identified a broad range of literature, regardless of study design, and described and evaluated the quality, range and nature of research activity related to the use of blenderised diets.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were included in the review. The studies focused on nutrition, equipment, the views of carers and patients, and the views of professionals. Several studies described the lack of evidence regarding pros and cons of blended diets and highlighted the need for further research into the field.

CONCLUSIONS

There were gaps in the evidence base regarding the impact of blended diets on the health and well-being of the children who receive them and upon the carers who feed the children. The nutritional impact of blended diets is not fully understood and the knowledge and views of professionals involved in the care of those receiving blended diets varies.

ASPEN Safe Practices for Enteral Nutrition Therapy [Formula: see text]

Enteral nutrition (EN) is a valuable clinical intervention for patients of all ages in a variety of care settings. Along with its many outcome benefits come the potential for adverse effects. These safety issues are the result of clinical complications and of process-related errors. The latter can occur at any step from patient assessment, prescribing, and order review, to product selection, labeling, and administration. To maximize the benefits of EN while minimizing adverse events requires that a systematic approach of care be in place. This includes open communication, standardization, and incorporation of best practices into the EN process. This document provides recommendations based on the available evidence and expert consensus for safe practices, across each step of the process, for all those involved in caring for patients receiving EN.

What's in the Bottle? A Review of Infant Formulas

Infant formulas are designed to be a substitute for breast milk. Since they are sole source of nutrition for growing and developing infants, they are highly regulated by the government. All ingredients in infant formulas must be considered "generally recognized as safe." Manufacturers are continually modifying their products to make them more like breast milk. Functional ingredients added to infant formula include long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, nucleotides, prebiotics, and probiotics. The most common breast milk substitutes are standard cow's milk-based term infant formulas, which include subcategories of organic and breast milk supplementation, and come in standard dilutions of 19 or 20 calories per ounce. In addition to standard cow's milk-based term infant formulas, there is a line of term infant formulas marketed for signs and symptoms of intolerance. These products include modifications in lactose content, partially hydrolyzed protein, added probiotics, or added rice starch. There are also specialized formulas for medical conditions such as prematurity, gastrointestinal disorders, allergy, disorders of fat metabolism, and renal insufficiency. Infants on specialty formulas should be monitored closely by medical professionals. Formulas come in ready-to-feed, liquid concentrate, and powder forms. Each offers advantages and disadvantages. Each step in the formula mixing process or each manipulation required for the feeding is another opportunity to introduce bacteria to the formula. There are guidelines for preparing formula in institutions. Standard dilution and mixing instructions are different for each formula, so individual recipes are needed. Caregivers should also be educated on proper hygiene when preparing formula at home.