Dataset Information

Effectiveness of interventions on early neurodevelopment of preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

As preterm infants' neurodevelopment is shaped by NICU-related factors during their hospitalization, it is essential to evaluate which interventions are more beneficial for their neurodevelopment at this specific time. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions initiated during NICU hospitalization on preterm infants' early neurodevelopment during their hospitalization and up to two weeks corrected age (CA).

Methods

This systematic review referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017047072). We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, and Web of Science from 2002 to February 2020 and included randomized controlled/clinical trials conducted with preterm infants born between 24 and 36^6/7 weeks of gestation. All types of interventions instigated during NICU hospitalization were included. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias and quality of evidence.

Results

Findings of 12 studies involving 901 preterm infants were synthesized. We combined three studies in a meta-analysis showing that compared to standard care, the NIDCAP intervention is effective in improving preterm infants' neurobehavioral and neurological development at two weeks CA. We also combined two other studies in a meta-analysis indicating that parental participation did not significantly improve preterm infants' neurobehavioral development during NICU hospitalization. For all other interventions (i.e., developmental care, sensory stimulation, music and physical therapy), the synthesis of results shows that compared to standard care or other types of comparators, the effectiveness was either controversial or partially effective.

Conclusions

The overall quality of evidence was rated low to very low. Future studies are needed to identify interventions that are the most effective in promoting preterm infants' early neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization or close to term age. Interventions should be appropriately designed to allow comparison with previous studies and a combination of different instruments could provide a more global assessment of preterm infants' neurodevelopment and thus allow for comparisons across studies.

Trial registration

Prospero CRD42017047072 .

SUBMITTER: Aita M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8082967 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Previous systematic reviews have examined preterm infants' long-term neurodevelopment after neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) discharge, although none have explored the effectiveness of interventions on preterm infants' neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization. The aim of this review is to evaluate whether interventions, i.e., sensory stimulation, parental involvement, and control of environment, improve preterm infants' neurodevelopment during their NICU hospitalization. METHODS:Experimental studies such as randomized controlled/clinical trials (RCTs) and cluster RCT will be included in this systematic review. Selected studies will be published in English or in French, in the past 15 years from 2002 to 2017. The following electronic databases will be searched to locate relevant studies: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science. For all steps in selecting studies, agreement will be reached between two experts in neonatology. Data extraction will be performed independently by the two same experts and will then be compared. The Cochrane assessment tool will be used to screen the studies for risk of bias. A meta-analysis will be performed if the included studies are sufficiently homogeneous. Results will be analyzed using a standardized mean difference (with a 95% confidence interval). Statistical heterogeneity will be evaluated using the ? 2 test at the significance level of 0.1 and the I 2 with the classification suggested by PRISMA-P. If possible, subgroup analyses will be carried out considering preterm infants' gestational age, length of NICU hospitalization, and the characteristics of the intervention such as who delivered it, the type, the dose, the frequency, and the duration. Data synthesis will be performed using the RevMan 5.1 software. Publication bias and selection of variables in publication will be examined using the graphical method of funnel plot and with the statistical test of Egger. Quality of the evidence of all outcomes will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. DISCUSSION:The results of this systematic review will highlight which interventions are effective for promoting preterm infants' neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization and will contribute to the body of knowledge in neonatal care by providing guidance for NICU clinical practice and research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42017047072.

Project description:Blood loss in the first days of life has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality in very preterm infants. In this systematic review we included randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of interventions to preserve blood volume in the infant from birth, reduce the need for sampling, or limit the blood sampled. Mortality and major neurodevelopmental disabilities were the primary outcomes. Included studies underwent risk of bias-assessment and data extraction by two review authors independently. We used risk ratio or mean difference to evaluate the treatment effect and meta-analysis for pooled results. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. We included 31 trials enrolling 3,759 infants. Twenty-five trials were pooled in the comparison delayed cord clamping or cord milking vs. immediate cord clamping or no milking. Increasing placental transfusion resulted in lower mortality during the neonatal period (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.00; participants = 595; trials = 5; I2 = 0%, moderate certainty of evidence) and during first hospitalization (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51, 0.96; 10 RCTs, participants = 2,476, low certainty of evidence). The certainty of evidence was very low for the other primary outcomes of this review. The six remaining trials compared devices to monitor glucose levels (three trials), blood sampling from the umbilical cord or from the placenta vs. blood sampling from the infant (2 trials), and devices to reintroduce the blood after analysis vs. conventional blood sampling (1 trial); the certainty of evidence was rated as very low for all outcomes in these comparisons. Increasing placental transfusion at birth may reduce mortality in very preterm infants; However, extremely limited evidence is available to assess the effects of other interventions to reduce blood loss after birth. In future trials, infants could be randomized following placental transfusion to different blood saving approaches. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42020159882.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Preterm infants requiring assisted ventilation are at significant risk of both pulmonary and cerebral injury. Inhaled Nitric Oxide, an effective therapy for pulmonary hypertension and hypoxic respiratory failure in the full term infant, has also been studied in preterm infants. The most recent Cochrane review of preterm infants includes 11 studies and 3,370 participants. The results show a statistically significant reduction in the combined outcome of death or chronic lung disease (CLD) in two studies with routine use of iNO in intubated preterm infants. However, uncertainty remains as a larger study (Kinsella 2006) showed no significant benefit for iNO for this combined outcome. Also, trials that included very ill infants do not demonstrate significant benefit. One trial of iNO treatment at a later postnatal age reported a decrease in the incidence of CLD. The aim of this individual patient meta-analysis is to confirm or refute these potentially conflicting results and to determine the extent to which patient or treatment characteristics may explain the results and/or may predict benefit from inhaled Nitric Oxide in preterm infants. METHODS/DESIGN: The Meta-Analysis of Preterm Patients on inhaled Nitric Oxide (MAPPiNO) Collaboration will perform an individual patient data meta-analysis to answer these important clinical questions. Studies will be included if preterm infants receiving assisted ventilation are randomized to receive inhaled Nitric Oxide or to a control group. The individual patient data provided by the Collaborators will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis where possible. Binary outcomes will be analyzed using log-binomial regression models and continuous outcomes will be analyzed using linear fixed effects models. Adjustments for trial differences will be made by including the trial variable in the model specification. DISCUSSION: Thirteen (13) trials, with a total of 3567 infants are eligible for inclusion in the MAPPiNO systematic review. To date 11 trials (n = 3298, 92% of available patients) have agreed to participate. Funding was successfully granted from Ikaria Inc as an unrestricted grant. A collaborative group was formed in 2006 with data collection commencing in 2007. It is anticipated that data analysis will commence in late 2009 with results being publicly available in 2010.

Project description:BackgroundParental sensitivity is the interaction process by which parents (a) recognize cues from their infant, (b) interpret these cues adequately, (c) identify an appropriate response and (d) apply this response in an appropriate time frame. In the neonatal intensive care unit, parents of preterm infants often encounter factors hampering the establishment of their parental sensitivity. Parents report the need to be in proximity to and to participate in their preterm infant's care in order to develop their sensitivity to their newborn infant. To do so, the effectiveness of interventions promoting their parental sensitivity has been evaluated with randomized controlled trials. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of early interventions promoting parental sensitivity of preterm infants' parents.Methods/designA search will be done in the following databases: CINAHL, PubMed in addition to Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Scopus and ProQuest. No restriction for the years of publication will be considered. Two experts will be conducting independently each step of the review. All studies of randomized controlled trials of early interventions, for parents of preterm infants, implemented in the neonatal intensive care unit before the infant has reached 37 weeks of corrected gestational age, will be considered eligible. Primary outcome is parental sensitivity. Depending on the availability and quality of data, a meta-analysis will be done. Alternatively, a qualitative synthesis of data is planned. The systematic review follows the PRISMA recommendations. Finally, risk of bias and quality of the evidence of included studies will be assessed.DiscussionTo our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review to examine the effect of early interventions that promote parental sensitivity of parents of preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit. The results of this review will guide development of best practice guidelines and recommendations for further research and will have implications for neonatal clinical practice.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016047083.

Project description:ObjectiveBefriending is an emotional supportive relationship in which one-to-one companionship is provided on a regular basis by a volunteer. It is commonly and increasingly offered by the voluntary sector for individuals with distressing physical and mental conditions. However, the effectiveness of this intervention on health outcomes is largely unknown. We aim to conduct a systematic review of the benefits of befriending.DesignSystematic review.MethodsA systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental trials of befriending for a range of physical and mental health indications including depression, anxiety, mental illness, cancer, physical illness and dementia. Main outcomes included patient-relevant and disease-specific outcomes, such as depression, loneliness, quality of life, self-esteem, social support and well-being.ResultsA total of 14 trials (2411 participants) were included; 7 were judged at low risk of bias. Most trials showed improvement in symptoms associated with befriending but these associations did not reach statistical significance in all trials. Befriending was significantly associated with better patient-reported outcomes across primary measures (standardised mean difference 0.18 (95% CI, -0.002 to 0.36, I2=26%, seven trials)). However, there was no significant benefit on single outcomes, including depression, quality of life, loneliness ratings, self-esteem measures, social support structures and well-being.ConclusionsThere was moderate quality evidence to support the use of befriending for the treatment of individuals with different physical and mental health conditions. This evidence refers to an overall improvement benefit in patient-reported primary outcomes, although with a rather small effect size. The current evidence base does not allow for firm conclusions on more specific outcomes. Future trials should hypothesise a model for the precise effects of befriending and use specified inclusion and outcome criteria.

Project description:BackgroundPreterm infants are at greater risk for neurodevelopmental disabilities than full term infants. Interventions supporting parents to improve the quality of the infant's environment should improve developmental outcomes for preterm infants. Many interventions that involve parents do not measure parental change, nor is it clear which intervention components are associated with improved parental outcomes. The aim of this review was to categorize the key components of early intervention programs and determine the direct effects of components on parents, as well as their preterm infants.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched between 1990 and December 2011. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included an early intervention for preterm infants, involved parents, and had a community component. Of 2465 titles and abstracts identified, 254 full text articles were screened, and 18 met inclusion criteria. Eleven of these studies reported maternal outcomes of stress, anxiety, depressive symptoms, self-efficacy, and sensitivity/responsiveness in interactions with the infant. Meta-analyses using a random effects model were conducted with these 11 studies.ResultsInterventions employed multiple components categorized as (a) psychosocial support, (b) parent education, and/or (c) therapeutic developmental interventions targeting the infant. All interventions used some form of parenting education. The reporting quality of most trials was adequate, and the risk of bias was low based on the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Meta-analyses demonstrated limited effects of interventions on maternal stress (Z = 0.40, p = 0.69) and sensitivity/responsiveness (Z = 1.84, p = 0.07). There were positive pooled effects of interventions on maternal anxiety (Z = 2.54, p = 0.01), depressive symptoms (Z = 4.04, p <.0001), and self-efficacy (Z = 2.05, p = 0.04).ConclusionsPositive and clinically meaningful effects of early interventions were seen in some psychosocial aspects of mothers of preterm infants. This review was limited by the heterogeneity of outcome measures and inadequate reporting of statistics. IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Interventions for preterm infants and their mothers should consider including psychosocial support for mothers. If the intervention involves mothers, outcomes for both mothers and preterm infants should be measured to better understand the mechanisms for change.

Project description:BackgroundRespiratory distress syndrome (RDS) is the most common cause of respiratory failure in preterm infants. Treatment consists of respiratory support and exogenous surfactant administration. Commonly, surfactant is administered intratracheally. However, this requires airway instrumentation and subsequent fluid instillation which may be harmful. Surfactant nebulization (SN) may offer a safe and effective alternative for surfactant administration, but the clinical efficacy is not yet established. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials will summarize the available evidence to determine the effectiveness and safety of SN for the prevention of intubation and subsequent mechanical ventilation at 72 h after birth.MethodsA systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library will be performed, and all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs from published articles, presentations, and trial registries will be included in this meta-analysis. Titles and abstracts of all records identified in the search will be screened by two reviewers independently. Data on preterm infants (≤ 37 weeks) receiving nebulized surfactant in the first 72 h after birth for the treatment or prevention of RDS will be evaluated. Primary outcome is the intubation rate by 72 h after birth, and secondary outcomes include peridosing safety effects as well as major neonatal morbidities. Risk of bias will be assessed using the revised Cochrane ROB tool, and subgroup analyses will be performed to evaluate potential confounding factors. Publication bias will be assessed by examining a funnel plot. The meta-analysis will be performed using a fixed-effects model.DiscussionThis review will provide an evidence-based tool for information about surfactant nebulization, illustrating the current knowledge and hopefully revealing potential novel avenues for researchers and clinicians alike.Systematic review registrationThis review is registered with the publicly available resource PROSPERO ( CRD42020175625 ).