Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT
Background: Observational data suggest that slowly advancing enteral feeds in preterm infants may reduce necrotising enterocolitis but increase late-onset sepsis. The Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT) compared two rates of feed advancement. Objective: To determine if faster (30 ml/kg/day)...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
NIHR Journals Library
2020-04-01
|
Series: | Health Technology Assessment |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24180 |
id |
doaj-80286550194947feb4b3e82bddc457d2 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Jon Dorling Oliver Hewer Madeleine Hurd Vasha Bari Beth Bosiak Ursula Bowler Andrew King Louise Linsell David Murray Omar Omar Christopher Partlett Catherine Rounding John Townend Jane Abbott Janet Berrington Elaine Boyle Nicholas Embleton Samantha Johnson Alison Leaf Kenny McCormick William McGuire Mehali Patel Tracy Roberts Ben Stenson Warda Tahir Mark Monahan Judy Richards Judith Rankin Edmund Juszczak |
spellingShingle |
Jon Dorling Oliver Hewer Madeleine Hurd Vasha Bari Beth Bosiak Ursula Bowler Andrew King Louise Linsell David Murray Omar Omar Christopher Partlett Catherine Rounding John Townend Jane Abbott Janet Berrington Elaine Boyle Nicholas Embleton Samantha Johnson Alison Leaf Kenny McCormick William McGuire Mehali Patel Tracy Roberts Ben Stenson Warda Tahir Mark Monahan Judy Richards Judith Rankin Edmund Juszczak Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT Health Technology Assessment preterm disability milk feeding infection necrotising enterocolitis survival randomised controlled trial |
author_facet |
Jon Dorling Oliver Hewer Madeleine Hurd Vasha Bari Beth Bosiak Ursula Bowler Andrew King Louise Linsell David Murray Omar Omar Christopher Partlett Catherine Rounding John Townend Jane Abbott Janet Berrington Elaine Boyle Nicholas Embleton Samantha Johnson Alison Leaf Kenny McCormick William McGuire Mehali Patel Tracy Roberts Ben Stenson Warda Tahir Mark Monahan Judy Richards Judith Rankin Edmund Juszczak |
author_sort |
Jon Dorling |
title |
Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT |
title_short |
Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT |
title_full |
Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT |
title_fullStr |
Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT |
title_full_unstemmed |
Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCT |
title_sort |
two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the sift rct |
publisher |
NIHR Journals Library |
series |
Health Technology Assessment |
issn |
1366-5278 2046-4924 |
publishDate |
2020-04-01 |
description |
Background: Observational data suggest that slowly advancing enteral feeds in preterm infants may reduce necrotising enterocolitis but increase late-onset sepsis. The Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT) compared two rates of feed advancement. Objective: To determine if faster (30 ml/kg/day) or slower (18 ml/kg/day) daily feed increments improve survival without moderate or severe disability and other morbidities in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants. Design: This was a multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Randomisation was via a web-hosted minimisation algorithm. It was not possible to safely and completely blind caregivers and parents. Setting: The setting was 55 UK neonatal units, from May 2013 to June 2015. Participants: The participants were infants born at < 32 weeks’ gestation or a weight of < 1500 g, who were receiving < 30 ml/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Interventions: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, the infant was randomised to receive daily feed increments of either 30 ml/kg/day or 18 ml/kg/day. In total, 1400 infants were allocated to fast feeds and 1404 infants were allocated to slow feeds. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was survival without moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age, corrected for gestational age. The secondary outcomes were mortality; moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months corrected for gestational age; death before discharge home; microbiologically confirmed or clinically suspected late-onset sepsis; necrotising enterocolitis (Bell’s stage 2 or 3); time taken to reach full milk feeds (tolerating 150 ml/kg/day for 3 consecutive days); growth from birth to discharge; duration of parenteral feeding; time in intensive care; duration of hospital stay; diagnosis of cerebral palsy by a doctor or other health professional; and individual components of the definition of moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability. Results: The results showed that survival without moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months occurred in 802 out of 1224 (65.5%) infants allocated to faster increments and 848 out of 1246 (68.1%) infants allocated to slower increments (adjusted risk ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.92 to 1.01). There was no significant difference between groups in the risk of the individual components of the primary outcome or in the important hospital outcomes: late-onset sepsis (adjusted risk ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.07) or necrotising enterocolitis (adjusted risk ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.16). Cost–consequence analysis showed that the faster feed increment rate was less costly but also less effective than the slower rate in terms of achieving the primary outcome, so was therefore found to not be cost-effective. Four unexpected serious adverse events were reported, two in each group. None was assessed as being causally related to the intervention. Limitations: The study could not be blinded, so care may have been affected by knowledge of allocation. Although well powered for comparisons of all infants, subgroup comparisons were underpowered. Conclusions: No clear advantage was identified for the important outcomes in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants when milk feeds were advanced in daily volume increments of 30 ml/kg/day or 18 ml/kg/day. In terms of future work, the interaction of different milk types with increments merits further examination, as may different increments in infants at the extremes of gestation or birthweight. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN76463425. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. |
topic |
preterm disability milk feeding infection necrotising enterocolitis survival randomised controlled trial |
url |
https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24180 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT jondorling twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT oliverhewer twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT madeleinehurd twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT vashabari twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT bethbosiak twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT ursulabowler twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT andrewking twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT louiselinsell twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT davidmurray twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT omaromar twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT christopherpartlett twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT catherinerounding twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT johntownend twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT janeabbott twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT janetberrington twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT elaineboyle twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT nicholasembleton twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT samanthajohnson twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT alisonleaf twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT kennymccormick twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT williammcguire twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT mehalipatel twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT tracyroberts twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT benstenson twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT wardatahir twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT markmonahan twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT judyrichards twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT judithrankin twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct AT edmundjuszczak twospeedsofincreasingmilkfeedsforverypretermorverylowbirthweightinfantsthesiftrct |
_version_ |
1724905707702059008 |
spelling |
doaj-80286550194947feb4b3e82bddc457d22020-11-25T02:13:22ZengNIHR Journals LibraryHealth Technology Assessment1366-52782046-49242020-04-01241810.3310/hta2418011/01/25Two speeds of increasing milk feeds for very preterm or very low-birthweight infants: the SIFT RCTJon Dorling0Oliver Hewer1Madeleine Hurd2Vasha Bari3Beth Bosiak4Ursula Bowler5Andrew King6Louise Linsell7David Murray8Omar Omar9Christopher Partlett10Catherine Rounding11John Townend12Jane Abbott13Janet Berrington14Elaine Boyle15Nicholas Embleton16Samantha Johnson17Alison Leaf18Kenny McCormick19William McGuire20Mehali Patel21Tracy Roberts22Ben Stenson23Warda Tahir24Mark Monahan25Judy Richards26Judith Rankin27Edmund Juszczak28Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, CanadaNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKWomen’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON, CanadaNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UKNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKBliss, London, UKNewcastle Neonatal Service, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UKDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UKNewcastle Neonatal Service, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UKDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UKNational Institute for Health Research Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Department of Child Health, University of Southampton, Southampton, UKJohn Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UKCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UKBliss, London, UKSchool of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UKThe Simpson Centre for Reproductive Health, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKSchool of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UKSchool of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UKInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UKInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UKNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKBackground: Observational data suggest that slowly advancing enteral feeds in preterm infants may reduce necrotising enterocolitis but increase late-onset sepsis. The Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT) compared two rates of feed advancement. Objective: To determine if faster (30 ml/kg/day) or slower (18 ml/kg/day) daily feed increments improve survival without moderate or severe disability and other morbidities in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants. Design: This was a multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Randomisation was via a web-hosted minimisation algorithm. It was not possible to safely and completely blind caregivers and parents. Setting: The setting was 55 UK neonatal units, from May 2013 to June 2015. Participants: The participants were infants born at < 32 weeks’ gestation or a weight of < 1500 g, who were receiving < 30 ml/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Interventions: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, the infant was randomised to receive daily feed increments of either 30 ml/kg/day or 18 ml/kg/day. In total, 1400 infants were allocated to fast feeds and 1404 infants were allocated to slow feeds. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was survival without moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age, corrected for gestational age. The secondary outcomes were mortality; moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months corrected for gestational age; death before discharge home; microbiologically confirmed or clinically suspected late-onset sepsis; necrotising enterocolitis (Bell’s stage 2 or 3); time taken to reach full milk feeds (tolerating 150 ml/kg/day for 3 consecutive days); growth from birth to discharge; duration of parenteral feeding; time in intensive care; duration of hospital stay; diagnosis of cerebral palsy by a doctor or other health professional; and individual components of the definition of moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability. Results: The results showed that survival without moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months occurred in 802 out of 1224 (65.5%) infants allocated to faster increments and 848 out of 1246 (68.1%) infants allocated to slower increments (adjusted risk ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.92 to 1.01). There was no significant difference between groups in the risk of the individual components of the primary outcome or in the important hospital outcomes: late-onset sepsis (adjusted risk ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.07) or necrotising enterocolitis (adjusted risk ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.16). Cost–consequence analysis showed that the faster feed increment rate was less costly but also less effective than the slower rate in terms of achieving the primary outcome, so was therefore found to not be cost-effective. Four unexpected serious adverse events were reported, two in each group. None was assessed as being causally related to the intervention. Limitations: The study could not be blinded, so care may have been affected by knowledge of allocation. Although well powered for comparisons of all infants, subgroup comparisons were underpowered. Conclusions: No clear advantage was identified for the important outcomes in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants when milk feeds were advanced in daily volume increments of 30 ml/kg/day or 18 ml/kg/day. In terms of future work, the interaction of different milk types with increments merits further examination, as may different increments in infants at the extremes of gestation or birthweight. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN76463425. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24180pretermdisabilitymilk feedinginfectionnecrotising enterocolitissurvivalrandomised controlled trial |