| Literature DB >> 34181888 |
Franciane R Dos Anjos1, Adriane M Nakato2, Paula Karina Hembecker2, Percy Nohama2, Ana Lúcia F Sarquis3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of hydrotherapy and tactile-kinesthetic stimulation on the birth weight of preterm infants admitted in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.Entities:
Keywords: Hydrotherapy; Massage; Neonatal intensive care unit; Preterm infant; Weight
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34181888 PMCID: PMC9432265 DOI: 10.1016/j.jped.2021.04.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pediatr (Rio J) ISSN: 0021-7557 Impact factor: 2.990
Figure 1Flowchart of the sample.
TKSG, tactile-kinesthetic stimulation group; HTG, hydrotherapy group; HH, heart rate; RR, respiratory rate; SpO2, peripheral oxygen saturation; ºC, Celsius degrees.
Characteristics of the sample (n = 44).
| TKSG ( | HG ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gestacional age (weeks) | 31.8 ± 1.3 | 32.0 ± 1.5 | 0.50 |
| Gender | |||
| Girl | 13 (59.1%) | 12 (54.5%) | 0.87 |
| Boy | 9 (40.1%) | 10 (45.4%) | |
| Birth weight (g) | 1.7 ± 0.2 | 1.7 ± 0.2 | 0.26 |
t - Student Test.
Fisher's exact test CI: 95%.
Figure 2Distribution of weight gain rates between the assessment times according to the study groups.
Note: Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA, Mann–Whitney post-hoc test - comparison between groups: D2-D1: p = 0.22; D3-D2: p = 0.41; D4-D3: p = 0.78; D5-D4: p = 0.34; D6-D5 = 0.21 Friedman's ANOVA: GETC: p = 0.43; GH: p < 0.001.
Figure 3Distribution of mean values of newborns' diets according to study groups.
Note: ANOVA for repeated measures: comparison between groups - At birth: p = 0.89; D1: p = 0.77; D2: p = 0.84; D3: p = 0.79; D4: p = 0.92; D5: p = 0.62. Comparison between measurements in the same group: TKSG - D1 to D6: p < 0.001; HG: D1 to D6: p < 0.001.