skip to content
Dovepress - Open Access to Scientific and Medical Research
View our mobile site

8852

Traditional open-bay versus single-family room neonatal intensive care unit: a comparison of selected nutrition outcomes

Original Research

(1996) Views  (618) Full article downloads

Authors: Christina Erickson, Kendra Kattelmann, Jessica Remington, et al

Published Date March 2011 Volume 2011:1 Pages 15 - 20
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRN.S15539

Christina Erickson1, Kendra Kattelmann1, Jessica Remington1, Cuirong Ren2, Carol C Helseth3, Dennis C Stevens3
1Department of Health and Nutritional Sciences, 2Department of Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA; 3Sanford Children's Hospital, Sioux Falls, SD, USA

Background: In contrast to the traditional open-bay–type design of the neonatal intensive care unit (tNICU), infants in developmentally appropriate NICU (dNICU) are housed in individual rooms with greater control of light and noise. Previous reports have documented positive influence of the dNICU in cardiorespiratory status, physiologic stability, and weight gain of the infants. The objective of this study was to explore selected nutrition outcomes of infants in the dNICU versus tNICU.
Method: A prospective cohort study was conducted on infants with birth weight of 1500 g or less cared for in dNICU (n = 42) or tNICU (n = 31). Differences between days to reach full parenteral nutrition, full enteral nutrition, or full bottling were determined using analysis of covariance controlling for gestational age, birth weight, and clinical risk index for babies (CRIB) acuity score.
Results: There were no differences between the two groups in days to reach full parenteral and bottle feeding. The infants in the dNICU took fewer days to reach full enteral nutrition (20.8 days, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 17, 24.6 (dNICU) vs 23.3 days, 95% CI: 17.1, 29.6 (tNICU), P = 0.04) than those in the tNICU.
Conclusions: Although the two groups of infants only differed in the days to reach full enteral feeding, it is important to remember that the lack of difference may be clinically significant. Clinically, the infants in the dNICU were younger (gestational age) and sicker (CRIB acuity score) than the infants in the tNICU. Consequently, the results of this study support the change to dNICU, as the private room model provides a supportive environment for growth as evidenced by similar nutritional outcome measures. More research is needed to determine the effect of the dNICU on nutrition outcomes.

Keywords: NICU, neonate, infant, feeding







Readers of this article also read:

Berberine: metabolic and cardiovascular effects in preclinical and clinical trials
Critical appraisal of the role of glucosamine and chondroitin in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee
Ego mechanisms of defense are associated with patients’ preference of treatment modality independent of psychological distress in end-stage renal disease
Can a gentamicin-specific chart reduce neonatal medication errors?
Morgellons disease: Analysis of a population with clinically confirmed microscopic subcutaneous fibers of unknown etiology
Nephroprotective action of glycosaminoglycans: why the pharmacological properties of sulodexide might be reconsidered
Dashboards in neonatology
Neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis
Evaluation of factors influencing stable microbubble test results in preterm neonates at 30–33 gestational weeks
A quantitative way to estimate clinical off-target effects for human membrane brain targets in CNS research and development