Cochrane · systematic review · CD009720
Oral stimulation for promoting oral feeding in preterm infants
Greene, Z, O'Donnell, CPF, Walshe, M · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2023 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
8
current version
GRADE rated
5
No studies
3
Included studies
NR
No studies 3 · 37.5%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 50%Low 1 · 12.5%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyOral stimulation compared to standard care for promoting oral feeding in preterm infants
Population: preterm infants
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Time (days) to achieve exclusive oral feeding Oral stimulation vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 292 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Time (days) spent in NICU ‐ not reported Oral stimulation vs standard care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Total hospital stay (days) Oral stimulation vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 249 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Duration (days) of parenteral nutrition ‐ not reported Oral stimulation vs standard care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Oral stimulation compared to non‐oral intervention for promoting oral feeding in preterm infants
Population: preterm infants
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Time (days) to achieve exclusive oral feeding Oral stimulation vs non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | 10 studies · 574 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Time (days) spent in NICU ‐ not reported Oral stimulation vs non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Total hospital stay (days) Oral stimulation vs non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | 10 studies · 591 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Duration (days) of parenteral nutrition Oral stimulation vs non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 268 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention versus standard care
Population: preterm infants
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Days to full oral feeding Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 376 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Weight gain Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 81 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Total hospital stay (days) Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 7 studies · 301 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Duration (days) of parenteral nutrition Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 19 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Exclusive direct breast feeding at discharge Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention vs standard care | RR 1.83 [0.96, 3.48] | 1 study · 59 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Any direct breast feeding at discharge Summary of findings table 1. Oral stimulation intervention vs standard care | RR 1.24 [0.58, 2.66] | 2 studies · 110 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Summary of findings table 2. Oral stimulation intervention versus other non‐oral intervention
Population: preterm infants
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Time (days) to achieve exclusive oral feeding Summary of findings table 2. Oral stimulation intervention vs other non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 256 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Total hospital stay (days) Summary of findings table 2. Oral stimulation intervention vs other non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 352 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Duration (days) of parenteral nutrition Summary of findings table 2. Oral stimulation intervention vs other non‐oral intervention | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 98 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Exclusive direct breast feeding at discharge Summary of findings table 2. Oral stimulation intervention vs other non‐oral intervention | RR 0.96 [0.72, 1.28] | 1 study · 196 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |