Paediatric gastroesophageal reflux disease and parental mental health: Prevalence and predictors.

OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to estimate the prevalence of common mental health difficulties in parents who have an infant with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GORD), and to identify psychological predictors of parental anxiety, depression, and well-being, as a platform for subsequent intervention development. METHODS: Parents of infants with GORD (N = 309) completed online psychometric measures of potential predictors (self-compassion, illness appraisals, and illness uncertainty), potential confounders (sleep quality, relationship satisfaction, social support, and infant feeding satisfaction), and mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, and wellbeing). The outcome measures were repeated eight-weeks later (N = 103). RESULTS: At the first time-point, 66% of participants exceed the clinical cut off for generalised anxiety disorder and 63% exceeded that for a depressive disorder. Both had significantly reduced eights-weeks later. Greater self-compassion predicted lower anxiety and depression, and better well-being, in both cross-sectional and longitudinal data, including when all confounders were controlled for. Illness uncertainty and illness appraisals were less consistent predictors. No robust differences were found between parents of infants with silent GORD and those with GORD with visible regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Parents of infants with GORD showed high rates of anxiety and depression, which were elevated compared to those that have been found in perinatal and general population samples. Self-compassion was a consistent predictor of better mental health and has promise as a proximal intervention target. Future research could benefit from examining the efficacy of a compassion-focussed intervention in this population.

Efficacy and Safety of a Colic Relief Remedy in Infantile Colic.

Infantile colic is the most frequent reason of infant and parental distress. An open-label single-group clinical study was conducted primarily to evaluate the effect of 14-day colic relief remedy administration (1.25 ml orally during colic episode) on average daily crying time in infants compared to baseline. In addition, the percentage of responders, sleep pattern, frequency and severity of gastrointestinal symptoms, tolerability of the product and percentage population with relapse of symptoms post product discontinuation were evaluated. Thirty infants aged 3 to 16 weeks with no significant clinical illness were enrolled in the study with their caregivers. Daily inconsolable crying time and flatulence were significantly reduced (P < .05) within a week of intervention and a sustained effect was observed after discontinuation of the product. The findings of the present study indicate that this product effectively reduced abdominal distension and pain, resulting in a significant decrease in the daily crying of the infants. Trial registration: The study was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India (CTRI) (http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/login.php) bearing Reg. No: CTRI/2021/03/031762, Date: March 8, 2021.

Use of anti-reflux medications in infants under 1 year of age: a retrospective drug utilization study using national prescription reimbursement data.

Non-specific symptoms such as irritability, vomiting, and back arching during the infant period are often attributed to gastroesophageal reflux. While numerous studies have shown no significant benefit to the use of acid suppressant medications in this population, these medications are frequently prescribed in response to these symptoms. Our goals were to understand how often children were being prescribed this medication. To do this, data was extracted from a national database for reimbursement of prescribed medications through the General Medical Services scheme (GMS). Infants aged less than 1 year and eligible for reimbursement under GMS were included for analysis. A total of 450 infants per 10,000 eligible population received an anti-reflux preparation from the following drug classes (H2 antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, or alginate preparations) in 2018. This is compared with that in 2009 where only 137 per 10,000 eligible infants received these medications. This increase was predominantly attributable to an increase in ranitidine prescriptions.Conclusion: Despite a change in clinical guidelines, anti-reflux preparations are increasingly being prescribed to infants aged less than 1 year. The reasons behind the increase in prescriptions containing these medications cannot be ascertained from this data. This may suggest a proportion of these prescriptions may be unwarranted in this population. What is Known: • The prescription of PPIs in infants has increased in a number of countries. • Use of anti-reflux medications has a very poor evidence base in infancy. What is New: • This data focuses only on an infant age group in a "well" cohort. • Ranitidine may contribute to increased acid-suppressant use in infancy.

Making Sense of Studies That Claim Benefits of Frenotomy in the Absence of Classic Tongue-Tie.

By performing an in-depth analysis of one high profile example, this article aims to help breastfeeding support professionals understand the methodological flaws that characterize recent studies claiming to show the efficacy of frenotomy for the diagnoses of posterior tongue-tie and upper lip-tie. The example study does not address definitional confusion or control for the effects of the passage of time. It does not consider the effects of caring attention, validation, and lactation consultant support. It also does not consider the extensive research over the past three decades that has established that reflux in the first 6 months of life is benign, even though increased reflux frequency may correlate with unsettled infant behavior. The study authors relied on the hypothesis that reflux is caused by excessive air swallowing in infants with poor latch due to posterior tongue-tie and upper lip-tie, which lacks credible physiological mechanisms or supporting evidence. The authors' claim that conducting a randomized controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of frenotomy would be unethical contradicts the basic principles of good science. This article argues that our breastfeeding women and their babies deserve the most rigorous scientific methods available, and acknowledgment of the biases inherent in less rigorous research, if we are to make appropriate decisions concerning intervention with frenotomy and to prevent unnecessary oral surgery.