Bessell Alyson, Hooper Lee, Shaw William C, Reilly Sheena, Reid Julie, Glenny Anne-Marie
Department of Oral and Dental Sciences, University of Bristol, Lower Maudlin Street, Bristol, UK, BS1 2LY.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Feb 16;2011(2):CD003315. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003315.pub3.
Cleft lip and cleft palate are common birth defects, affecting about one baby of every 700 born. Feeding these babies is an immediate concern and there is evidence of delay in growth of children with a cleft as compared to those without clefting. In an effort to combat reduced weight for height, a variety of advice and devices are recommended to aid feeding of babies with clefts.
This review aims to assess the effects of these feeding interventions in babies with cleft lip and/or palate on growth, development and parental satisfaction.
The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 27 October 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 27 October 2010), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 27 October 2010), PsycINFO via OVID (1950 to 27 October 2010) and CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 27 October 2010). Attempts were made to identify both unpublished and ongoing studies. There was no restriction with regard to language of publication.
Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of feeding interventions for babies born with cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and palate up to the age of 6 months (from term).
Studies were assessed for relevance independently and in duplicate. All studies meeting the inclusion criteria were data extracted and assessed for validity independently by each member of the review team. Authors were contacted for clarification or missing information whenever possible.
Five RCTs with a total of 292 babies, were included in the review. Comparisons made within the RCTs were squeezable versus rigid feeding bottles (two studies), breastfeeding versus spoon-feeding (one study) and maxillary plate versus no plate (two studies). No statistically significant differences were shown for any of the primary outcomes when comparing bottle types, although squeezable bottles were less likely to require modification. No difference was shown for infants fitted with a maxillary plate compared to no plate. However, there was some evidence of an effect on weight at 6 weeks post-surgery in favour of breastfeeding when compared to spoon-feeding (mean difference 0.47; 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.74).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Squeezable bottles appear easier to use than rigid feeding bottles for babies born with clefts of the lip and/or palate, however, there is no evidence of a difference in growth outcomes between the bottle types. There is weak evidence that breastfeeding is better than spoon-feeding following surgery for cleft. There was no evidence to suggest that maxillary plates assist growth in babies with clefts of the palate. No evidence was found to assess the use of any types of maternal advice and/or support for these babies.
唇腭裂是常见的出生缺陷,每700个出生婴儿中约有1个受影响。喂养这些婴儿是当务之急,有证据表明,与非唇腭裂儿童相比,唇腭裂儿童生长发育迟缓。为了应对身高别体重降低的问题,人们推荐了各种建议和装置来帮助喂养唇腭裂婴儿。
本综述旨在评估这些喂养干预措施对唇裂和/或腭裂婴儿的生长、发育及家长满意度的影响。
检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册库(至2010年10月27日)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2010年第4期)、通过OVID检索的MEDLINE(1950年至2010年10月27日)、通过OVID检索的EMBASE(1980年至2010年10月27日)、通过OVID检索的PsycINFO(1950年至2010年10月27日)以及通过EBSCO检索的CINAHL(1980年至2010年10月27日)。试图识别未发表和正在进行的研究。对发表语言没有限制。
纳入的研究为针对出生至6个月(足月起)的唇裂、腭裂或唇腭裂婴儿喂养干预的随机对照试验(RCT)。
由两名独立人员对研究的相关性进行评估。所有符合纳入标准的研究均进行数据提取,并由综述团队的每位成员独立评估其有效性。如有可能,会联系作者进行澄清或获取缺失信息。
本综述纳入了5项RCT,共292名婴儿。RCT内的比较包括可挤压奶瓶与硬质奶瓶(两项研究)、母乳喂养与匙喂(一项研究)以及上颌板与无板(两项研究)。比较奶瓶类型时,任何主要结局均未显示出统计学显著差异,尽管可挤压奶瓶不太可能需要改装。与无板相比,佩戴上颌板的婴儿未显示出差异。然而,有一些证据表明,与匙喂相比,母乳喂养在术后6周对体重有影响(平均差异为0.47;95%置信区间为0.20至0.74)。
对于唇裂和/或腭裂婴儿,可挤压奶瓶似乎比硬质奶瓶更易于使用,然而,没有证据表明两种奶瓶类型在生长结局上存在差异。有微弱证据表明唇裂手术后母乳喂养优于匙喂。没有证据表明上颌板有助于腭裂婴儿的生长。未找到评估针对这些婴儿的任何类型母亲建议和/或支持使用情况的证据。