ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Rectal Stimulation in Premature and Full-Term Newborns: A Narrative Review.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNurse professionals often practice rectal stimulation in a hospital setting to help premature or full-term babies evacuate or to avoid abdominal pain caused by gas colic. Paediatricians also recommend this technique to newborn caregivers, who can carry it out independently at home. To the best of our knowledge, there are no established national guidelines on how to implement this technique safely or what the clinical/care indications are for its use. Our purpose is to synthesise the evidence on the nursing practice of rectal stimulation in preterm and full-term newborns.
methodsA narrative literature review was conducted. A search was conducted across six databases in February, followed by a manual review of the included studies' bibliographies, and another search in October 2023. The search strategy identified studies published without date limits. The articles were screened according to the inclusion criteria.
resultsSixty-two articles were retrieved. Following the screening process, only two articles were selected for inclusion in the final synthesis. Both studies evaluated the effects of enemas and/or rectal stimulation on feeding tolerance and bowel habits in preterm newborns. Even if both studies included information on when rectal stimulation in preterm newborns is indicated and how it is conducted, they are insufficient to provide a clear statement for nursing practice.
conclusionsNowadays, nurses perform rectal stimulation and teach it to caregivers of newborns without shared international or national guidelines or procedures focused on patient safety. It is desirable to conduct scientific studies to inform nursing practice and enhance the quality of nursing care delivered. This review also highlights a critical gap in evidence regarding the use of rectal stimulation in full-term newborns and in community settings.
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.