{"title":"Effects of Combined Maternal Voice Stimulation and Gravity Feeding Intervention for Low-Birth-Weight Preterm Infants in Neonatal Care.","authors":"Liduan Li, Yanzhu Lin, Huangyi Wu, Ting Huang, Chunling Guo, Chunyan Lin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to investigate the impact and safety of combining maternal voice stimulation with gravity feeding on low-birth-weight preterm infants. The research focuses on key outcomes such as gastric tube indwelling time, feeding transition time, adequate gastrointestinal nutrition time, recovery of birth weight time, length of hospital stay, and oral motor function in preterm infants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 150 low birth weight preterm infants meeting inclusion criteria were recruited from the neonatal care unit and randomly assigned to three groups: traditional nasal feeding, gravity feeding with a homemade bracket, and a combined group receiving both gravity feeding and maternal voice stimulation. The groups were compared using parameters such as feeding intolerance incidence, gastric tube indwelling time, feeding transition time, adequate gastrointestinal nutrition time, recovery of birth weight time, hospital stay, and oral motor function.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The combined group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of feeding intolerance (26% lower than traditional nasal feeding, 18% lower than gravity feeding, P < .001). The traditional nasal feeding group had the highest incidence at 62%. The combined group showed a shorter indwelling time (19.01 ± 11.67 days), compared to the gravity feeding group (23.50 ± 13.04 days) and the traditional nasogastric feeding group (27.43 ± 11.91 days, P = .001). The combined group had a shorter hospital stay (27.09 ± 14.16 days) compared to the gravity feeding group (32.74 ± 13.32 days) and the traditional nasogastric feeding group (33.84 ± 12.42 days, P = .013). The combined group demonstrated a slightly longer recovery time (11.56 ± 4.08 days) than the gravity feeding group (11.14 ± 4.76 days) but significantly shorter than the traditional nasogastric feeding group (14.44 ± 5.42 days, P = .003). The combined group exhibited the highest improvement in oral motor function at 4 weeks after feeding (17.81 ± 0.39 points), surpassing both the gravity feeding group (16.10 ± 0.23 points) and the traditional nasogastric feeding group (15.15 ± 0.07 points, P < .001). The combined group demonstrated a significantly lower feeding transition time than the traditional nasal feeding group (P < .05) and comparable time to the gravity feeding group (P > .05). All the comparison results were statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Maternal voice stimulation combined with gravity feeding shows promising positive effects and high safety for low-birth-weight preterm infants. The combined approach outperformed both gravity feeding alone and traditional nasogastric feeding across various critical parameters. These findings support the potential clinical applicability and merit further consideration for wider implementation as a feeding method in neonatal care settings.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>The observed reductions in feeding intolerance, shortened gastric tube indwelling time, and enhanced oral motor function in low-birth-weight preterm infants receiving combined maternal voice stimulation and gravity feeding highlight a promising clinical approach. These improvements signify the potential for earlier oral feeding initiation, shorter hospital stays, and better overall outcomes in the care of these vulnerable infants.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>This study is limited by its single-center design, potential selection bias, and the absence of blinding. Uncontrolled confounding factors may influence results, and long-term outcomes were not assessed.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice: </strong>Healthcare professionals should cautiously consider the observed benefits of combining maternal voice stimulation with gravity feeding, recognizing the study's limitations. Further research is warranted to validate these findings and explore long-term implications for the care of low-birth-weight preterm infants.</p>","PeriodicalId":7571,"journal":{"name":"Alternative therapies in health and medicine","volume":" ","pages":"372-379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternative therapies in health and medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This study aims to investigate the impact and safety of combining maternal voice stimulation with gravity feeding on low-birth-weight preterm infants. The research focuses on key outcomes such as gastric tube indwelling time, feeding transition time, adequate gastrointestinal nutrition time, recovery of birth weight time, length of hospital stay, and oral motor function in preterm infants.
Methods: A total of 150 low birth weight preterm infants meeting inclusion criteria were recruited from the neonatal care unit and randomly assigned to three groups: traditional nasal feeding, gravity feeding with a homemade bracket, and a combined group receiving both gravity feeding and maternal voice stimulation. The groups were compared using parameters such as feeding intolerance incidence, gastric tube indwelling time, feeding transition time, adequate gastrointestinal nutrition time, recovery of birth weight time, hospital stay, and oral motor function.
Results: The combined group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of feeding intolerance (26% lower than traditional nasal feeding, 18% lower than gravity feeding, P < .001). The traditional nasal feeding group had the highest incidence at 62%. The combined group showed a shorter indwelling time (19.01 ± 11.67 days), compared to the gravity feeding group (23.50 ± 13.04 days) and the traditional nasogastric feeding group (27.43 ± 11.91 days, P = .001). The combined group had a shorter hospital stay (27.09 ± 14.16 days) compared to the gravity feeding group (32.74 ± 13.32 days) and the traditional nasogastric feeding group (33.84 ± 12.42 days, P = .013). The combined group demonstrated a slightly longer recovery time (11.56 ± 4.08 days) than the gravity feeding group (11.14 ± 4.76 days) but significantly shorter than the traditional nasogastric feeding group (14.44 ± 5.42 days, P = .003). The combined group exhibited the highest improvement in oral motor function at 4 weeks after feeding (17.81 ± 0.39 points), surpassing both the gravity feeding group (16.10 ± 0.23 points) and the traditional nasogastric feeding group (15.15 ± 0.07 points, P < .001). The combined group demonstrated a significantly lower feeding transition time than the traditional nasal feeding group (P < .05) and comparable time to the gravity feeding group (P > .05). All the comparison results were statistically significant.
Conclusion: Maternal voice stimulation combined with gravity feeding shows promising positive effects and high safety for low-birth-weight preterm infants. The combined approach outperformed both gravity feeding alone and traditional nasogastric feeding across various critical parameters. These findings support the potential clinical applicability and merit further consideration for wider implementation as a feeding method in neonatal care settings.
Clinical significance: The observed reductions in feeding intolerance, shortened gastric tube indwelling time, and enhanced oral motor function in low-birth-weight preterm infants receiving combined maternal voice stimulation and gravity feeding highlight a promising clinical approach. These improvements signify the potential for earlier oral feeding initiation, shorter hospital stays, and better overall outcomes in the care of these vulnerable infants.
Limitations: This study is limited by its single-center design, potential selection bias, and the absence of blinding. Uncontrolled confounding factors may influence results, and long-term outcomes were not assessed.
Implications for practice: Healthcare professionals should cautiously consider the observed benefits of combining maternal voice stimulation with gravity feeding, recognizing the study's limitations. Further research is warranted to validate these findings and explore long-term implications for the care of low-birth-weight preterm infants.
期刊介绍：
Launched in 1995, Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine has a mission to promote the art and science of integrative medicine and a responsibility to improve public health. We strive to maintain the highest standards of ethical medical journalism independent of special interests that is timely, accurate, and a pleasure to read. We publish original, peer-reviewed scientific articles that provide health care providers with continuing education to promote health, prevent illness, and treat disease. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine was the first journal in this field to be indexed in the National Library of Medicine. In 2006, 2007, and 2008, ATHM had the highest impact factor ranking of any independently published peer-reviewed CAM journal in the United States—meaning that its research articles were cited more frequently than any other journal’s in the field.
Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine does not endorse any particular system or method but promotes the evaluation and appropriate use of all effective therapeutic approaches. Each issue contains a variety of disciplined inquiry methods, from case reports to original scientific research to systematic reviews. The editors encourage the integration of evidence-based emerging therapies with conventional medical practices by licensed health care providers in a way that promotes a comprehensive approach to health care that is focused on wellness, prevention, and healing. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine hopes to inform all licensed health care practitioners about developments in fields other than their own and to foster an ongoing debate about the scientific, clinical, historical, legal, political, and cultural issues that affect all of health care.
分享
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
