RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feeding efficiency and weight gain in infants with cleft palate fed using 1 of the 2 specialty feeders. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Cleft palate clinic in a tertiary pediatric hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Infants with cleft palate (with or without cleft lip) fed using the Medela SpecialNeeds® Feeder (n = 39) or the Dr. Brown's® Specialty Feeding System (n = 16) and who had documented feeding and growth data available from the time of initial assessment in the first month of life and at subsequent follow-up between 2 and 4 months. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Feeding velocity (mL/min). SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: Calorie velocity (kcal/min), weight gain, and complications associated with poor feeding. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in feeding or calorie velocities were identified between infants with cleft palate fed with the Medela SpecialNeeds® feeder and those fed with the Dr. Brown's® feeder. Mean weight z-scores by month did not differ significantly between the 2 bottle groups at the time of initial assessment (P = .84) and follow-up (P = .20). Mean weight z-scores by month for the infants included in this study fell below the 50th percentile. The proportion of infants who developed otitis media, reflux requiring treatment, or who required hospital admission for nasogastric (NG) feeds did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being adequately powered for the primary outcome, no significant differences were identified between infants fed with the Medela or the Dr. Brown's feeders in terms of feeding velocity, calorie velocity, weight gain, or complications.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Various devices and techniques have been proposed to reduce feeding difficulties experienced by infants with cleft palate. The aim of this review is to identify and assess the scope and quality of evidence for these interventions. METHODS: A systematic review of published literature evaluating feeding interventions for infants with cleft palate (with or without cleft lip) from database inception to 2021 was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Quality appraisal of included studies was conducted using a methodological index for nonrandomized studies, Cochrane, or a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews 2 instruments, according to study type. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria, with the majority (71%) of studies consisting of second-level evidence. Included interventions were specialty bottles (21%), alternative feeding delivery systems (14%), obturators (14%), and educational programs (14%). Specialty bottles and palatal obturators did not appear to offer any substantial growth advantages compared to traditional bottles or no intervention, respectively. Designated education programs for the mothers of infants with clefts had a positive impact on infant growth. CONCLUSIONS: Overall evidence evaluating feeding interventions for infants with cleft palate was moderate to low. While it does not appear that specialized feeding delivery systems or palatal obturators significantly improve growth in infants with clefts compared to children without cleft conditions, education programs do appear to be beneficial.
