The Effects of Non-Nutritive Sucking and Pre-Feeding Oral Stimulation on Time to Achieve Independent Oral Feeding for Preterm Infants

Background: The survival rates of preterm infants has increased over the last years, but oral feeding difficulties are the most common problems encountered by them Objectives: This study aimed at comparing the effects of non-nutritive sucking (NNS) and pre-feeding oral stimulation on feeding skills, length of hospital stay and weight gain of 26-32 weeks gestational age preterm infants in NICU, to determine the more effective intervention. Patients and Methods: Thirty-two preterm infants were assigned randomly into three groups. One intervention group received pre-feeding oral stimulation program and the other received non-nutritive sucking stimulation, while the control group received a sham intervention. Gestational age of infants was calculated during 1, 4 and 8 oral feeding and discharge time from NICU. The infants’ weights were measured weekly from birth and at discharge time. Results: Mean gestational age on 8 time oral feeding per day, in 3 groups was not significant (P = 0.282). Although NNS and pre-feeding oral stimulation groups has fulfilled this criterion 7.55 and 6.07 days sooner than the control group, respectively (a result which is of great clinical and economic importance), but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Weight gaining at discharge time in NNS group was significantly higher than control and pre-feeding oral stimulation groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: This study revealed that pre-feeding oral stimulation and NNS programs both were effective on oral feeding skills and weight gaining of the immature newborns. Yet, it seems that NNS program was more effective than pre-feeding oral stimulation on weight gaining.

Hospital Care for Newborn Babies: Quality Assessment, A Systematic Review

Context: Neonatal mortality rate is declining globally. The aim of the present study is to identify relevant indicators for assessing newborn care in hospitals by a systematic review. Evidence Acquisition: A search on electronic data base and manual searches of personal files for studies on quality indicators of newborn care were carried out. Searching 9 bibliographic databases, we found 85 articles of which 22 exactly related ones were selected and studied. Hand search yielded 1 record were also searched and 2 records were included. Results: A list of 87 structure, process and outcome indicators was formulated from the articles. Also 26 excess measures were identified in gray literature. After removing duplicates, and categorizing in 3 domains, 18 measures were input, 41 process and 34 outcome measures. Conclusions: These 93 indicators provide a framework for assessing how well the hospitals are providing neonatal care. These measures should be discussed in each context expert panels to address nationally applicable indices of neonatal care and may be adapted for local health settings.

Assessment of laboratory test utilization for HIV/AIDS care in urban ART clinics of Lilongwe, Malawi

Background The 2011 Malawi HIV guidelines promote CD4 monitoring for pre-ART assessment and considering HIVRNA monitoring for ART response assessment, while some clinics used CD4 for both. We assessed clinical ordering practices as compared to guidelines, and determined whether the samples were successfully and promptly processed. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of all patients seen in from August 2010 through July 2011,, in two urban HIV-care clinics that utilized 6-monthly CD4 monitoring regardless of ART status. We calculated the percentage of patients on whom clinicians ordered CD4 or HIVRNA analysis. For all samples sent, we determined rates of successful labprocessing, and mean time to returned results. Results Of 20581 patients seen, 8029 (39%) had at least one blood draw for CD4 count. Among pre-ART patients, 2668/2844 (93.8%) had CD4 counts performed for eligibility. Of all CD4 samples sent, 8082/9207 (89%) samples were successfully processed. Of those, mean time to processing was 1.6 days (s.d 1.5) but mean time to results being available to clinician was 9.3 days (s.d. 3.7). Regarding HIVRNA, 172 patients of 17737 on ART had a blood draw and only 118/213 (55%) samples were successfully processed. Mean processing time was 39.5 days (s.d. 21.7); mean time to results being available to clinician was 43.1 days (s.d. 25.1). During the one-year evaluated, there were multiple lapses in processing HIVRNA samples for up to 2 months. Conclusions Clinicians underutilize CD4 and HIVRNA as monitoring tools in HIV care. Laboratory processing failures and turnaround times are unacceptably high for viral load analysis. Alternative strategies need to be considered in order to meet laboratory monitoring needs.