Related Experiment Videos
Nonnutritive sucking and necrotizing enterocolitis
Insights
Nonnutritive sucking (NNS) may not protect preterm infants from necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). This study found no definitive link, suggesting larger prospective research is needed to confirm NNS benefits.
Area of Science:
- Neonatal research
- Pediatric gastroenterology
Background:
- Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a serious condition affecting preterm infants.
- Nonnutritive sucking (NNS) is a practice used in neonatal care.
- The potential protective role of NNS against NEC requires further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To explore the potential protective effect of nonnutritive sucking (NNS) against the development of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective chart review of 12 preterm infants.
- Comparison of infants who developed NEC with those who did not, examining clinical correlates.
- Groups analyzed included a control group (no NNS, developed NEC) and an experimental group (received NNS, did not develop NEC).
Main Results:
- The number of clinical correlates associated with NEC ranged from one to four in infants who developed NEC.
- For infants receiving NNS, the range of clinical correlates was one to five.
- No definitive conclusion could be drawn regarding the protective effect of NNS.
Conclusions:
- This study could not establish that NNS protects preterm infants from NEC.
- Larger prospective studies are necessary to confirm any protective effects.
- Future research should investigate the impact of NNS on gastric motility, enzyme, and hormone secretion.
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to explore the possible protective effect of nonnutritive sucking (NNS) against the development of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). A retrospective chart review was conducted to examine the histories of 12 preterm infants who were enrolled in a longitudinal study of the effects of NNS on energy expenditure, weight gain, and feeding readiness. Six infants were enrolled in the control group; they did not receive NNS but did develop NEC. Six infants were in the experimental group and did not develop NEC. The groups were compared on the basis of clinical correlates associated with NEC. These included race, gender, birth weight, five-minute Apgar, maternal bleeding, maternal age, and length of ruptured membranes. For infants who developed NEC, the number of clinical correlates ranged from one to four. For infants who received NNS, the range of clinical correlates was from one to five. It is not possible to conclude from this study that NNS protects preterm infants from NEC. Prospective studies of larger sample sizes that involve examination of the effect of NNS on gastric motility and enzyme and hormone secretion are needed.