Mechanics of sucking: comparison between bottle feeding and breastfeeding

Angel Moral, Ignasi Bolibar, Gloria Seguranyes, Josep M Ustrell, Gloria Sebastiá, Cristina Martínez-Barba, Jose Ríos, Angel Moral, Ignasi Bolibar, Gloria Seguranyes, Josep M Ustrell, Gloria Sebastiá, Cristina Martínez-Barba, Jose Ríos

Abstract

Background: There is very little evidence of the similarity of the mechanics of maternal and bottle feeding. We assessed the mechanics of sucking in exclusive breastfeeding, exclusive bottle feeding, and mixed feeding. The hypothesis established was that physiological pattern for suckling movements differ depending on the type of feeding. According to this hypothesis, babies with breastfeeding have suckling movements at the breast that are different from the movements of suckling a teat of babies fed with bottle. Children with mixed feeding mix both types of suckling movements.

Methods: Cross-sectional study of infants aged 21-28 days with only maternal feeding or bottle feeding (234 mother-infant pairs), and a randomized open cross-over field trial in newborns aged 21-28 days and babies aged 3-5 months with mixed feeding (125 mother-infant pairs). Primary outcome measures were sucks and pauses.

Results: Infants aged 21-28 days exclusively bottle-fed showed fewer sucks and the same number of pauses but of longer duration compared to breastfeeding. In mixed feeding, bottle feeding compared to breastfeeding showed the same number of sucks but fewer and shorter pauses, both at 21-28 days and at 3-5 months. The mean number of breastfeedings in a day (in the mixed feed group) was 5.83 +/- 1.93 at 21-28 days and 4.42 +/- 1.67 at 3-5 months. In the equivalence analysis of the mixed feed group, the 95% confidence interval for bottle feeding/breastfeeding ratio laid outside the range of equivalence, indicating 5.9-8.7% fewer suction movements, and fewer pauses, and shorter duration of them in bottle feeding compared with breastfeeding.

Conclusions: The mechanics of sucking in mixed feeding lay outside the range of equivalence comparing bottle feeding with breastfeeding, although differences were small. Children with mixed feeding would mix both types of sucking movements (breastfeeding and bottle feeding) during the learning stage and adopt their own pattern.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Evolution of mechanical parameters per minute of feeding.

References

    1. Goldfield EC, Richardson MJ, Lee KG, Margetts S. Coordination of sucking, swallowing, and breathing and oxygen saturation during early infant breast-feeding and bottle-feeding. Pediatr Res. 2006;60:450–455. doi: 10.1203/01.pdr.0000238378.24238.9d.
    1. Scheel CE, Schanler RJ, Lau C. Does the choice of bottle nipple affect the oral feeding performance of very-low-birthweight (VLBW) infants? Acta Paediatr. 2005;94:1266–1272. doi: 10.1080/08035250510027255.
    1. Weber F, Woolridge MW, Baum JD. An ultrasonographic study of the organisation of sucking and swallowing by newborn infants. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1986;28:19–24.
    1. Nowak AJ, Smith WL, Erenberg A. Imaging evaluation of artificial nipples during bottle feeding. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1994;48:40–42.
    1. Medoff-Cooper B, McGrath JM, Shults J. Feeding patterns of full-term and preterm infants at forty weeks postconceptional age. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2002;23:231–236.
    1. Jain L, Sivieri E, Abbasi S, Bhutani VK. Energetics and mechanics of nutritive sucking in the preterm and term neonate. J Pediatr. 1987;111:894–898. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3476(87)80213-5.
    1. Qureshi MA, Vice FL, Taciak VL, Bosma JF, Gewolb IH. Changes in rhythmic suckle feeding patterns in term infants in the first month of life. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002;44:34–39. doi: 10.1017/S0012162201001621.
    1. Bromiker R, Arad I, Loughran B, Netzer D, Kaplan M, Medoff-Cooper B. Comparison of sucking patterns at introduction of oral feeding and at term Israeli and American preterm infants. Acta Paediatr. 2005;94:201–204. doi: 10.1080/08035250510025914.
    1. Pickler RH, Best AM, Reyna BA, Gutcher G, Wetzel PA. Predictors of nutritive sucking in preterm infants. J Perinatol. 2006;26:693–699. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7211590.
    1. Fadavi S, Punwani IC, Vidyasagar D. Mechanics and energetics of nutritive sucking: a functional comparison of commercially available nipples. J Pediatr. 1997;130:740–745. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3476(97)80016-9.
    1. Mathew O. Nipple units for newborn infants: a functional comparison. Pediatrics. 1988;81:688–691.
    1. Mathew O, Belan M, Thopil CK. Sucking patterns of neonates during bottle feeding: comparison of different nipple units. Am J Perinatol. 1992;9:265–269. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-994786.
    1. Chang YJ, Lin CP, Lin YJ, Lin CH. Effects of single-hole and cross-cut nipple units on feeding efficiency and physiological parameters in premature infants. J Nurs Res. 2007;15:215–223.
    1. Larsson E. Sucking, chewing, and feeding habits and the development of crossbite: a longitudinal study of girls from birth to 3 years of age. Angle Orthod. 2001;71:116–119.
    1. Warren JJ, Bishara SE. Duration of nutritive and nonnutritive sucking behaviors and their effects on the dental arches in the primary dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121:347–356. doi: 10.1067/mod.2002.121445.
    1. Warren JJ, Slayton RL, Bishara SE, Levy SM, Yonezu T, Kanellis MJ. Effects of nonnutritive sucking habits on occlusal characteristics in the mixed dentition. Pediatr Dent. 2005;27:445–450.
    1. Usadel W. Die kieferothopädische Prophylaxe beim Säugling und Kleinkind. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z. 1958;12:227.
    1. Newman J, Wilmott B. Breast rejection: a little-appreciated cause of lactation failure. Can Fam Physician. 1990;36:449–453.
    1. Koletzko B, Baker S, Cleghorn G, Neto UF, Gopalan S, Hernell O, Hock QS, Jirapinyo P, Lonnerdal B, Pencharz P, Pzyrembel H, Ramirez-Mayans J, Shamir R, Turck D, Yamashiro Y, Zong-Yi D. Global standard for the composition of infant formula: recommendations of an ESPGHAN coordinated international expert group. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2005;41:584–599. doi: 10.1097/01.mpg.0000187817.38836.42.
    1. Liu JP, Chow SC. Sample size determination for the two one-sided test procedure in bioequivalence. J Pharmacokinet Biophram. 1992;20:101–104. doi: 10.1007/BF01143188.
    1. Medoff-Cooper B, Weininger S, Zukowsky K. Neonatal sucking as a clinical assessment tool: preliminary findings. Nur Res. 1989;38:162–165.
    1. Mizuno K, Ueda A. Changes in sucking performance from nonnutritive sucking to nutritive sucking during breast- and bottle-feeding. Pediatr Res. 2006;59:728–731. doi: 10.1203/01.pdr.0000214993.82214.1c.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner