Early Maternal Feeding Versus Traditional Delayed Feeding After Cesarean Section: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND

Cesarean section is on the rise all over the world; it has become a safe surgery due to better anesthesia, asepsis, blood transfusion and antibiotics. Traditionally, the patients are kept nil orally till they pass flatus. This study was performed to find out acceptance and tolerability of early feeding, its side effects and complications if any.

METHODS

This comparative study was conducted in a service hospital. There were two groups of 70 cases each where one was administered early feeding and the second group was put on standard delayed feeding as is traditionally done in most of the hospitals. Gastrointestinal outcomes and other parameters were noted in both the groups and analyzed.

RESULTS

During the study period, every alternate willing case without any exclusion criteria was allotted to each group. Early feeding was started 6 h after surgery in the study group, whereas it was withheld till passage of flatus in the control group. Appearance of bowel sounds and passage of flatus were earlier in study group (21.6 and 34.5 h, respectively) as compared with control group (31.7 and 49.2 h, respectively). There were no complications or side effects of early feeding.

CONCLUSION

There is no justification to withholding oral feeds as is traditionally done. Early feeding should be initiated without fear of any side effects. Patients have an early postoperative recovery; it is cost-effective and results in higher patient satisfaction.