Evidence Hub

Role of Feeding Strategy Bundle with Acid-Suppressive Therapy in Infants with Esophageal Acid Reflux Exposure: A Randomized Controlled Trial

S. Jadcherla, Kathryn A. Hasenstab, Lai Wei, Erika K. Osborn, S. Viswanathan, I. Gulati, J. Slaughter, C. Di Lorenzo

Pediatric Research, 2020

76 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

Objective To test the hypothesis that a feeding bundle concurrent with acid suppression is superior to acid suppression alone in improving gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) attributed-symptom scores and feeding outcomes in neonatal ICU infants. Methods Infants ( N = 76) between 34 and 60 weeks’ postmenstrual age with acid reflux index > 3% were randomly allocated to study (acid-suppressive therapy + feeding bundle) or conventional (acid-suppressive therapy only) arms for 4 weeks. Feeding bundle included: total fluid volume 0.05). Conclusions Feeding strategy modifications concurrent with acid suppression are not superior to PPI alone in improving GERD symptoms or discharge feeding, short-term and long-term outcomes. Impact Conservative feeding therapies are thought to modify GERD symptoms and its consequences. However, in this randomized controlled trial in convalescing neonatal ICU infants with GERD symptoms, when controlling for preterm or full-term birth and severity of esophageal acid reflux index, the effectiveness of acid suppression plus a feeding modification bundle (volume restriction, intra- and postprandial body positions, and prolonged feeding periods) vs. acid suppression alone, administered over a 4-week period was not superior in improving symptom scores or feeding outcomes. Restrictive feeding strategies are of no impact in modifying GERD symptoms or clinically meaningful outcomes. Further studies are needed to define true GERD and to identify effective…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 76 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free