Evidence Hub

Time to Full Enteral Feeding for Very Low-Birth-Weight Infants Varies Markedly Among Hospitals Worldwide But May Not Be Associated With Incidence of Necrotizing Enterocolitis: The NEOMUNE-NeoNutriNet Cohort Study

M. D. de Waard, Yan-Qi Li, Yan-Na Zhu, A. Ayede, J. Berrington, F. Bloomfield, O. Busari, B. Cormack et al.

JPEN - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2018

2,947 participants · 58 citations

Abstract

Background: Transition to enteral feeding is difficult for very low-birth-weight (VLBW; ≤1500 g) infants, and optimal nutrition is important for clinical outcomes. Method: Data on feeding practices and short-term clinical outcomes (growth, necrotizing enterocolitis [NEC], mortality) in VLBW infants were collected from 13 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in 5 continents (n = 2947). Specifically, 5 NICUs in Guangdong province in China (GD), mainly using formula feeding and slow feeding advancement (n = 1366), were compared with the remaining NICUs (non-GD, n = 1581, Oceania, Europe, United States, Taiwan, Africa) using mainly human milk with faster advancement rates. Results: Across NICUs, large differences were observed for time to reach full enteral feeding (TFF; 8–33 days), weight gain (5.0–14.6 g/kg/day), Δz-scores (−0.54 to −1.64), incidence of NEC (1%–13%), and mortality (1%–18%). Adjusted for gestational age, GD units had longer TFF (26 vs 11 days), lower weight gain (8.7 vs 10.9 g/kg/day), and more days on antibiotics (17 vs 11 days; all P < .001) than non-GD units, but NEC incidence and mortality were similar. Conclusion: Feeding practices for VLBW infants vary markedly around the world. Use of formula and long TFF in South China was associated with more use of antibiotics and slower weight gain, but apparently not with more NEC or higher mortality. Both infant- and hospital-related factors influence feeding practices for preterm infants. Multicenter, randomized…

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: 2,947 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