Literature DB >> 23913547

Cycled light in the intensive care unit for preterm and low birth weight infants.

Iris Morag1, Arne Ohlsson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The potential benefits and harms of different lighting in neonatal units have not been quantified.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of cycled lighting (CL) (approximately 12 hours of light on and 12 hours of light off) with irregularly dimmed light (DL) or near darkness (ND) and with continuous bright light (CBL) on growth in preterm infants at three and six months of age. SEARCH
METHODS: We conducted electronic searches of the literature (in January 2013) of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Issue 12, 2012 (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and abstracts from Pediatric Academic Societies' annual meetings. We searched Controlled-trials.com and Clinicaltrials.gov for ongoing trials and abstracts from the Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) Annual Meetings (2000 to 2013) using the Abstracts2view website on 10 May 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomised trials of CL versus ND or CBL in preterm and low birth weight infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed data collection and analyses according to the methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. MAIN
RESULTS: Six studies enrolling 424 infants compared CL versus ND (including one additional trial identified in this update that enrolled 37 infants). No study reported on weight at three or six months. In one study (n = 40), there was no statistically significant difference in weight at four months between the CL and ND groups. In another study (n = 62), the ratio of day-night activity prior to discharge favoured the CL group (mean difference (MD) 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.19) indicating 18% more activity during the day than during the night in the CL group compared with the ND group. Two studies (n = 189) reported on retinopathy of prematurity (stage ≥ 3). There was no statistically significant difference between the CL and ND groups (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.11, I(2) = 0%; typical risk difference (RD) -0.09, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.01, I(2) = 0%). Two studies (n = 77) reported on length of hospital stay (days). There was a significant reduction in the length of stay between the CL and the ND groups favouring the CL group (MD -13 days, 95% CI -2 to -23). One study (n = 37) reported on less crying at 11 weeks' corrected age (CA) in the CL group compared with the ND group (MD -0.57 hours/24 hours, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.05).There was no heterogeneity for this outcome (I(2) = 0%).Two studies enrolling 82 infants compared CL versus CBL. One study (n = 41) reported higher mean weight at three months' CA in infants cared for in the CL nursery (P value < 0.02) and lower mean number of hours spent awake in 24 hours at three months of age (P value < 0.005). One study (n = 41) reported shorter time on ventilator in the CL compared with the CBL group (MD -18.2 days, 95% CI -31.40 to -5.0). One study (n = 41) reported a shorter time to first oral feeding in the CL group (MD -6.8 days, 95% CI -13.29 to -0.31).For many outcomes, the trends favoured CL versus ND as well as CL versus CBL.We identified no safety issues. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Trials assessing the effect of CL have enrolled 506 infants. Trends for many outcomes favoured CL compared with ND and CL compared with CBL. The studies may have lacked significance due to a lack of statistical power. Future research should focus on comparing CL to ND.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23913547     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006982.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  8 in total

1.  Development of care in the NICU.

Authors:  R D White
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.521

Review 2.  Enhancing sensory experiences for very preterm infants in the NICU: an integrative review.

Authors:  R Pineda; R Guth; A Herring; L Reynolds; S Oberle; J Smith
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 2.521

3.  Timing for the Introduction of Cycled Light for Extremely Preterm Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Debra H Brandon; Susan G Silva; Jinhee Park; William Malcolm; Heba Kamhawy; Diane Holditch-Davis
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 2.228

Review 4.  Rhythms of life: circadian disruption and brain disorders across the lifespan.

Authors:  Ryan W Logan; Colleen A McClung
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 34.870

5.  Cluster Randomised Trials in Cochrane Reviews: Evaluation of Methodological and Reporting Practice.

Authors:  Marty Richardson; Paul Garner; Sarah Donegan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Influence of light exposure at nighttime on sleep development and body growth of preterm infants.

Authors:  Yosuke Kaneshi; Hidenobu Ohta; Keita Morioka; Itaru Hayasaka; Yutaka Uzuki; Takuma Akimoto; Akinori Moriichi; Machiko Nakagawa; Yoshihisa Oishi; Hisanori Wakamatsu; Naoki Honma; Hiroki Suma; Ryuichi Sakashita; Sei-ichi Tsujimura; Shigekazu Higuchi; Miyuki Shimokawara; Kazutoshi Cho; Hisanori Minakami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Perinatal Light Imprinting of Circadian Clocks and Systems (PLICCS): The PLICCS and Cancer Hypothesis.

Authors:  Philip Lewis; Thomas C Erren
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  'In a dark place, we find ourselves': light intensity in critical care units.

Authors:  Hannah J Durrington; Richard Clark; Ruari Greer; Franck P Martial; John Blaikley; Paul Dark; Robert J Lucas; David W Ray
Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp       Date:  2017-02-07
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.