| Popis: |
Evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggests that three-hourly feeding is safe and might help achieve full feeds earlier in preterm infants. We systematically compared the benefits and harms of three-hourly and two-hourly feeding schedules in preterm infants. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) and trial registries until November 16, 2021, for RCTs comparing the two feeding schedules. We did a random-effects meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4 software. The primary outcome was the incidence of stage II or III necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). Other outcomes were the incidence of any stage NEC, mortality, time to full enteral feeds, and hospital stay. Six trials (872 participants) are included. There was no significant difference in the incidence of stage II/III NEC (3 trials; 530 participants; RR 1.39; 95% CI: 0.53, 3.65; IIn stable preterm infants (1000-1500 g), three-hourly feeding can be followed safely. In infants 1000 g, there is insufficient evidence to advise on an optimal feeding interval, although a 2-h interval might be preferable.Prospero Registration Number: CRD42021246568.• Most of the units follow two-hourly feeding schedules without any evidence. • Recent trials suggest that the three hourly feeding schedules can be safely followed in stable preterm infants.• Low certainty evidence suggests that three-hourly feeding is safe in stable preterm infants (1000-1500 grams). • In infants with birthweight1000 grams, two-hourly feeding may be considered as it was associated with a shorter time to full feeds in subgroup analysis. |
