| Literature DB >> 36197184 |
Luca Vismara1,2,3, Andrea Gianmaria Tarantino3,4, Andrea Bergna4, Giuliana Bianchi5, Cristina Bragalini3, Elisa Billò3, Fulvio Dal Farra4, Francesca Buffone3,4,6, Massimo Agosti5.
Abstract
Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is evolving in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) setting. Studies showed its efficacy in length of stay and hospitalization costs reduction. Moreover, it was suggested that OMT has a modulatory effect on the preterm infants' autonomic nervous system (ANS), influencing saturation and heart rate. Even if OMT is based on the palpatory examination of the somatic dysfunctions (SD), there are controversies about its identification and clinical relevance. The objective of this study was to evaluate the inter-rater reliability, clinical characteristics, and functional correlation of the SD Grade score with the heart rate variability (HRV) and the salivary cortisol (sCor) using a multivariate linear model approach. To evaluate those features, we implemented an ad hoc SD examination for preterm infants that was performed by 2 trained osteopaths. It was based on the new variability model of SD that includes an SD Grade assessment procedure. The ANS features were assessed by frequency parameters of HRV studying high frequency (HF), low frequency (LF), and HF/LF, whereas sCor was tested with a radioimmunoassay. The ANS assessment was standardized and performed before SD testing. Sixty-nine premature infants were eligible. SD Grade showed excellent concordance between the blinded raters. Using SD Grade as a grouping variable, the infants presented differences in GA, Apgar, pathological findings, length of stay, and ventilatory assistance. In our multivariate model, HF, LF, and LF/HF resulted linearly correlated with SD Grade. Instead, sCor presented a linear correlation with 5' Apgar and respiratory distress syndrome but not with SD Grade. SD Grade was in line with the natural history of the underdevelopment due to prematurity. Our models indicate that the cardiac vagal tone is linearly related with SD Grade. This finding may improve the multidisciplinary decision making inside NICU and the management of modifiable factors, like SD, for cardiac vagal tone regulation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36197184 PMCID: PMC9509086 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030565
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
Overall sample characteristics and stratification of somatic dysfunction grade.
| Variable | OverallN = 69 | Grade 2N = 29 | Grade 3N = 40 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male, n (%) | 35 (50.7) | 14 (40.0) | 21 (60.0) | .729 |
| Twins, n (%) | 35 (46.4) | 15 (42.7) | 20 (57.1) | .888 |
| Birth weight, kg | 1.12 (0.92–1.33) | 1.20 (1.00–1.43) | 1.07 (0.87–1.15) | .006 |
| Discharge weight, kg | 2.01 (1.83–2.25) | 1.98 (1.81–2.23) | 2.03 (1.84–2.27) | .712 |
| Weight gain, kg | 0.83 (0.63–1.17) | 0.73 (0.55–1.07) | 1.03 (0.70–1.45) | .048 |
| VLBW, n (%) | 42 (60.9) | 22 (52.4) | 20 (47.6) | – |
| ELBW, n (%) | 22 (31.9) | 7 (31.8) | 15 (68.1) | .117 |
| Gestational age, wk | 29.0 (27.4–30.5) | 30.3 (28.9–31.4) | 28.3 (26.3–29.4) | <.001 |
| GA < 28 d, n (%) | 45 (65.2) | 23 (51.1) | 22 (48.9) | - |
| GA > 28 d, n (%) | 24 (34.8) | 6 (25.0) | 18 (75.0) | .036 |
| APGAR 1 min, pt | 6.5 (5–8) | 7 (5–8) | 5 (5–7) | .131 |
| APGAR 5 min, pt | 8 (8–9) | 8 (8–9) | 8 (7–8) | .025 |
| C-section, n (%) | 39 (56.5) | 20 (51.3) | 19 (48.7) | .076 |
| IUGR, n (%) | 9 (13.1) | 6 (66.6) | 3 (33.3) | .108 |
| SGA, n (%) | 4 (5.8) | 1 (25) | 3 (75) | .477 |
| RDS, n (%) | 44 (63.7) | 14 (31.8) | 30 (68.1) | .023 |
| PDA, n (%) | 33 (47.8) | 13 (39.3) | 20 (60.6) | .671 |
| BPD, n (%) | 9 (13.4) | 4 (44.5) | 5 (55.6) | .875 |
| Jaundice, n (%) | 26 (37.6) | 7 (26.9) | 19 (73.1) | .048 |
| Infections, n (%) | 17 (24.6) | 6 (35.3) | 11 (64.7) | .517 |
| HF, ms2 | 13.2 (9.14–20.1) | 17.15 (13–22.7) | 10.3 (8.4–16.6) | .001 |
| LF, ms2 | 86.7 (79.5–90.3) | 82.8 (77.2–87) | 88.9 (83.2–91.2) | .003 |
| LF/HF, ms2 | 6.3 (3.9–10) | 4.8 (3.5–6.7) | 8.7 (5–11.4) | .001 |
| Salivary cortisol, ng/mL | 13 (8–21.5) | 10 (8–15) | 16.5 (10.5–26) | .021 |
| LOS, dd | 50 (41–69) | 43 (31–61) | 54 (46.5–82) | .012 |
| TOF, dd | 40 (31–57) | 36.5 (27–34) | 41 (35–29) | .165 |
| TAR, dd | 17.5 (2–48) | 1 (2–44) | 28 (12–59) | .006 |
Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare continuous variables and Chi-squared test was calculated for categorical variables with P value < .05.
BPD = bronchopulmonary dysplasia, C-section = Cesarian section, ELBW = extremely low birth weight, GA = gestational age, HF = high frequencies, IUGR = intrauterine growth restriction, LF = low frequencies, LF/HF = low frequencies/high frequencies, LOS = length of stay, N = number of infants, PDA = patent ductus arteriosus, RDS = respiratory distress syndrome, SGA = small for gestational age, TAR = time to autonomous respiration, TOF = time to oral feeding, VLBW = very low birth weight.
Figure 2.These regression plots show how the independent variables, SD Grade and APGAR 5’, affect LF, HF, LF/HF, and sCor. The Y-axis represents the LF/HF values after frequency domain transformation expressed in ms2. Statistical significance (P value), coefficient of determination (R-squared), 95% confidence interval and line of best fit are showed for each plot. HF = high frequency, LF = low frequency, sCor = salivary cortisol, SD = somatic dysfunction.
Figure 3.Regression plots show the interaction between salivary cortisol and HRV. The Y-axis represents the LF/HF values after frequency domain transformation expressed in ms2. Statistical significance (P value), coefficient of determination (R-squared), 95% confidence interval, and line of best fit are shown for each plot. HF = high frequency, HRV = heart rate variability, LF = low frequency.
Results of multivariate linear regression LH/HF and salivary cortisol (sCor).
| HFł | LFⱡ | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | 95% CI | Estimate | 95% CI | |||
| Gestational age | −0.78 | −2.07; 0.51 | .248 | 0.56 | −0.77; 1.88 | .406 |
| SD Grade | −6.43 | −10.6; −2.2 | .003 | 5.68 | 1.36; 10.1 | .011 |
| RDS | 0.82 | −3.85; 5.48 | .728 | −1.44 | −6.24; 3.36 | .551 |
| APGAR 5’ | 1.39 | −0.99; 3.77 | .248 | −1.23 | −3.69; 1.21 | .317 |
A multivariate linear regression model was implemented for HF, LF, LF/HF, and sCor separately. The goodness of fit, as expressed by R2, was 0.19ł, 0.16ⱡ, 0.14+, and 0.18¥.
CI = confidence interval, HF = high frequencies, LF = low frequencies, RDS = respiratory distress syndrome, sCor = salivary cortisol, SD Grade = somatic dysfunction grade.