ArticleBMJ open2016
Effectiveness of a nurse educational oral feeding programme on feeding outcomes in neonates: protocol for an interrupted time series design.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Evaluation de la Formation Des infirmières à la Stimulation de l'oralité Des Nouveau-nés Dans Une unité de Réanimation néonatale et Néonatologie : Impact Sur Les Connaissances, Les Pratiques et Sur la qualité Des Soins
A Cue-based Developmental Approach Toward the Preterm Infants During Feeding Transition Period - Explore Clinical Facts, Evaluate Intervention Effects and Develop Clinical Guideline
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Oral Feeding Challenges in Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs): A National Survey in China.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOral feeding is a complex physiological process. Several scales have been developed to assess the ability of the neonate to begin suck feedings and assist caregivers in determining feeding advancement. However, feeding premature neonates remains an ongoing challenge and depends above all on caregivers' feeding expertise. We will evaluate the effect of a nurse training programme on the achievement of full oral feeding with premature neonates. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study design will be an interrupted time series design with 3 phases: (1) A 6-month baseline period; (2) a 22-month intervention period and (3) a 6-month postintervention period. The intervention will consist of an educational programme, for nurses and assistant nurses, on feeding patterns in neonates. The training modules will be composed of a 2-day conference, 2 interactive multidisciplinary workshops, and routine practice nurse coaching. A total of 120 nurses and 12 assistant nurses, who work at the neonatal unit during the study period, will participate in the study. All premature neonates of <34 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA) will be included. The primary outcome will be the age of tube withdrawal PMA and chronological age are taken into account. The secondary outcomes will be the transition time, length of hospital stay, competent suckle feeding without cardiorespiratory compromise, rate of neonates presenting with feeding issues or feeding rejection signs, and current neonatal pathologies or deaths during hospital stay. A segmented regression analysis will be performed to assess the impact of the programme. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for the study was obtained from the Hospital Ethics Committee, and the Institutional Review Board, as well as the French Data Protection Agency. The findings from the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, national and international conference presentations and public events. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02404272 (https://clinicaltrials.gov).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.