检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]中国医学科学院北京协和医学院北京协和医学院协和医院儿科,100730 [2]北京协和医学院护理学院,100144
出 处:《中华现代护理杂志》2016年第24期3489-3493,共5页Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
摘 要:目的:评价经口喂养促进项目,即联合使用由国外引进的早产儿口腔运动干预方案中文版早产儿准备经口喂养评估量表,对早产儿经口喂养表现、经口喂养进程、经口喂养结局的影响。方法选择符合纳入标准、出生胎龄〈34周的早产儿62例,按照入院先后分为对照组和实验组,实验组( n=30)接受常规早产儿治疗和护理,喂养前使用早产儿准备经口喂养评估量表评价其经口喂养准备,喂养前给予5 min的口腔按摩刺激加非营养性吸吮,每天1次;干预时间从患儿开始管饲喂养至可完全经口喂养。对照组( n=32)接受与实验组患儿相同的常规早产儿治疗和护理,同时每天1次喂养前由干预者站在暖箱或婴儿床前5 min“假干预”。比较两组经口喂养表现、开始经口喂养和实现完全经口喂养的矫正胎龄、每日体重和住院时间。结果对照组从管饲喂养过渡到经口喂养时间(13.88±7.51)d,实验组提前至(8.07±6.73)d,两组经口喂养过渡时间和实现完全经口喂养的矫正胎龄比较,差异有统计学意义( t=3.200,P〈0.05)。两组在开始经口喂养和完全经口喂养时的经口喂养表现、住院期间和经口喂养过渡期的体重增长情况、住院时间方面差异无统计学意义( P〉0.05)。结论经口喂养促进项目有利于改善早产儿的经口喂养。Objective To explore the effect of oral feeding promotion program, which combined utilization of preterm infant oral motor intervention ( PIOMI) from abroad and the Chinese version of preterm infant oral feeding readiness assessment scale (PIOFRAS), on the performance, process and outcome of oral feeding in preterm infants.Methods A total of 62 infants born before 34 weeks of gestation were divided into control group and experimental group according to the order of admission. Both groups received the same routine care. The infants in the experimental group ( n=30 ) received the assessment of oral feeding readiness by PIOFRAS before feeding, and were given oral massage and non-nutritive sucking for 5 minutes once a day. The intervention started from gavage feeding to total oral feeding. While the control group ( n=32) received a sham intervention that nurses stood beside the warm box or the baby′s bed for 5 minutes once a day before feeding. The oral feeding performance, the corrective gestational age of initiation of oral feeding and achieving full oral feeding, daily bodyweight and length of hospital stay were recorded. Results The transitional time from the initiation of oral feeding to full oral feeding in experimental group was shorter than that in control group[(8.07± 6.73) d vs (13. 88±7.51)d], and the difference was statistically significant (t=3.200,P〈0.05). There were no significant differences in the feeding performance, weight gain and length of hospital stay between two groups (P〉0.05).Conclusions The oral feeding promotion program can improve the oral feeding of preterm infants.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.175