Literature DB >> 24856433

A randomized comparative trial of early initiation of oral maternal feeding versus conventional oral feeding after cesarean delivery.

Shabeen N Masood1, Yasir Masood2, Uzma Naim3, Muhammad F Masood4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of two maternal feeding policies-early versus conventional oral feeding-after cesarean delivery.
METHODS: This prospective multicenter randomized comparative trial was conducted at tertiary care hospitals in Sindh, Pakistan, from 2010 to 2012. Women with an uncomplicated cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were allocated to an intervention of early (after 2 hours) or conventional (after 18 hours) initiation of oral feeding. Outcomes included maternal ambulation, maternal satisfaction, gastrointestinal functions, and length of hospital stay.
RESULTS: In total, 1174 women (n=587 per group) were included in the final analysis. Gastrointestinal complications were not significantly different between the two groups. Lower intensities of thirst and hunger and a higher rate of maternal satisfaction were observed in the early feeding group (P<0.05), and 53.8% of women in this group were able to ambulate within 15 hours of surgery, compared with 27.9% of women in the conventional feeding group. The frequencies of readmission, febrile morbidity, and wound infection were insignificant.
CONCLUSION: Early oral dietary initiation after cesarean delivery resulted in early ambulation, greater maternal satisfaction, and reduced length of hospital stay, with no detrimental outcomes, making this practice cost-effective. Hence, day-care cesarean delivery might be an option in resource-constrained settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-TRC-13003651, http://www.chictr.org.
Copyright © 2014 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Day-care cesarean delivery; Early ambulation; Early oral maternal feeding; Length of hospital stay; Maternal satisfaction; Maternal thirst and hunger

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24856433     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet        ISSN: 0020-7292            Impact factor:   3.561


  6 in total

1.  Early Maternal Feeding Versus Traditional Delayed Feeding After Cesarean Section: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Sukesh Kumar Kathpalia
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2016-12-01

Review 2.  [Effects of Early Oral Feeding versus Delayed Oral Feeding on Bowel Function, Gastrointestinal Complications and Surgical Recovery after Cesarean Section under Regional Anesthesia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis].

Authors:  HyoJin Kim; YeongKyung Jeon; SoYoung Yoon; GeumMoon Lee
Journal:  J Korean Acad Nurs       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 0.984

3.  Quality improvement initiative to address bed shortage in the maternity ward at the National Referral Hospital.

Authors:  Sangay Tshering; Namkha Dorj; Renuka Monger; Sonam Sonam; Nirmala Koirala
Journal:  Health Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-07

4.  A randomized controlled trial comparing early versus late oral feeding after cesarean section under regional anesthesia.

Authors:  Apinun Luksanachinda Mawson; Sommart Bumrungphuet; Jittima Manonai
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2019-09-13

5.  Comparison of early and on-demand maternal feeding after Caesarean delivery: a prospective randomised trial.

Authors:  Esra Ozbasli; Ozguc Takmaz; Faruk Suat Dede; Mete Gungor
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 1.858

6.  Early Versus Delayed Oral Feeding after Uncomplicated Cesarean Section under Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Adamu O Ogbadua; Teddy E Agida; Godwin O Akaba; Olumide A Akitoye; Bissallah A Ekele
Journal:  Niger J Surg       Date:  2018 Jan-Jun
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.