Enhanced rapid review of the applicability of ultrasound in the assessment of sucking, swallowing and laryngeal function in the paediatric population.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has renewed interest in the use of ultrasound (US) amongst dysphagia-trained clinicians working with infants and children. US is a portable, minimally intrusive tool which carries reduced risk of aerosol-generation provoked by other instrumental swallowing assessment tools such as fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). For this reason, US could be a valuable addition to the dysphagia assessment toolkit. A recently published rapid review of US evidence for the assessment of swallowing and laryngeal function in the adult population provided a framework for this neonatal and paediatric review. AIMS: This enhanced rapid review aimed to establish the applicability of US as an instrumental assessment tool for sucking, swallowing and laryngeal function in the neonatal and paediatric populations. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A rapid review of six electronic databases was conducted to identify articles using US to assess sucking, swallowing or laryngeal function in the selected populations, compared with varied reference tests. Abstract screening was completed according to pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria with 10% of articles assessed by a second screener. Data was extracted from the included studies using a pre-developed form. A modified QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess study quality. Results from the included studies were summarised and grouped into sucking, swallowing and laryngeal function data. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Twelve studies using US in the assessment of swallowing and/or laryngeal function met inclusion criteria. No studies using US for assessment of sucking met the inclusion criteria. All were peer-reviewed, primary studies across a range of clinical populations and with a wide geographical spread. Five studies had an overall low risk of bias. Seven studies had at least one domain where risk of bias was judged as high. All studies had high applicability. The two studies assessing swallowing differed in terms of aims and use of US. The studies assessing laryngeal function predominately investigated vocal fold movement and laryngeal pathology. Sensitivity and specificity data were provided or calculated from raw data for nine of the laryngeal function studies (respective ranges of 75%-100% and 80%-100%). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Emerging evidence exists to support the use of US as adjunct to clinical assessment of swallowing and laryngeal function in the neonatal and paediatric population. A paucity of evidence to support use of US in the assessment of sucking exists. Further research is needed to establish evidence-based assessment and analysis protocols as well as development of paediatric data.

Promotion of early and exclusive breastfeeding in neonatal care units in rural Rwanda: a pre- and post-intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Early initiation of breastfeeding after birth and exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months improves child survival, nutrition and health outcomes. However, only 42% of newborns worldwide are breastfed within the first hour of life. Small and sick newborns are at greater risk of not receiving breastmilk and often require additional support for feeding. This study compares breastfeeding practices in Rwandan neonatal care units (NCUs) before and after the implementation of a package of interventions aimed to improve breastfeeding. METHODS: This pre-post intervention study was conducted at two district hospital NCUs in rural Rwanda from October-December 2017 (pre-intervention) and September 2018-March 2019 (post-intervention). Only newborns admitted before their second day of life (DOL) were included. Data were extracted from patient charts for clinical and demographic characteristics, feeding, and patient outcomes. Exclusive breastfeeding at discharge was based on last recorded infant feeding on the day of discharge. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate factors associated with exclusive breastfeeding at discharge. RESULTS: Pre-intervention, 255 newborns were admitted in the NCUs and 793 were admitted in post-intervention. Exclusive breastfeeding on the day of birth (DOL0) increased from 5.4% (12/255) to 35.9% (249/793). At discharge, exclusive breastfeeding increased from 69.6% (149/214) to 87.0% (618/710). The mortality rate decreased from 16.1% (41/255) to 10.5% (83/793). Factors associated with greater odds of exclusive breastfeeding at discharge included admission during the post-intervention period (aOR 4.91; 95% CI 1.99, 12.11), and admission for infection (aOR 2.99; 95% CI 1.13, 7.93). Home deliveries (aOR 0.15; 95% CI 0.05, 0.47), preterm delivery (aOR 0.36; 95% CI 0.15, 0.87) and delayed first breastmilk feed (aOR 0.04 for DOL3 vs. DOL0; 95% CI 0.01, 0.35) reduced odds of exclusive breastfeeding at discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Expansion and adoption of evidenced-based guidelines, using innovative approaches, aimed at the unique needs of small and sick newborns may help to improve earlier initiation of breastfeeding, decrease mortality, and improve exclusive breastfeeding on discharge from hospital among small and sick newborns. These interventions should be replicated in similar settings to determine their effectiveness.