OBJECTIVES: Sucking problems in preterm infants can be specified by means of visual observation. The Neonatal Oral-Motor Assessment Scale (NOMAS) is the visual observation method most commonly used to assess the non-nutritive sucking (NNS) and nutritive sucking (NS) skills of infants up to approximately 8 weeks postterm. During the first 2 min of a regular feeding the infant's sucking skill is assessed, either immediately or on video. Although NOMAS has been used since 1993, little is known about the method's reliability. The aim of our study was to determine the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of NOMAS.METHODS: The 75 infants included in this study were born at 26-36 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA). Four observers participated in the study. They were trained and certified to administer NOMAS in the Netherlands by M.M. Palmer between 2000 and 2002.RESULTS: We found the test-retest agreement of NOMAS to be 'fair' to 'almost perfect' (Cohen's kappa [kappa] between 0.33 and 0.94), whereas the inter-rater agreement with respect to the diagnosis was 'moderate' to 'substantial' (Cohen's kappa, between 0.40 and 0.65). As a diagnostic tool, however, the current version of NOMAS cannot be used for both full-term and preterm infants. For a measuring instrument such as NOMAS, one should aim at reliability coefficients for inter-rater and test-retest agreement of at least 0.8. A Cohen's kappa of 0.6 or less we find unacceptable. Nonetheless, by observing sucking and swallowing according to a protocol much useful information can be gathered about the development of an infant's sucking skills. For instance, whether the infant is able to co-ordinate sucking and swallowing, whether the infant can maintain sucking, swallowing and breathing during the continuous phase and whether the infant is able to suck rhythmically with equally long bursts. In addition, NOMAS offers useful aids for intervention.CONCLUSIONS: NOMAS should be re-adjusted in order to improve inter-rater agreement, and at the same time current insights into the development of sucking and swallowing should be incorporated in the method.
A significant contributor to the global threat of obesity is excessive gestational weight gain (GWG). The aim of this article is to explore Dutch primary care midwives’ behaviors in promoting healthy GWG.
Aim The aim of this study is to gain more insight into child and environmental factors that influence gross motor development (GMD) of healthy infants from birth until reaching the milestone of independent walking, based on longitudinal research. Background A systematic search was conducted using Scopus, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and CINAHL to identify studies from inception to February 2020. Studies that investigated the association between child or environmental factors and infant GMD using longitudinal measurements of infant GMD were eligible. Two independent reviewers extracted key information and assessed risk of bias of the selected studies, using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool (QUIPS). Strength of evidence (strong, moderate, limited, conflicting and no evidence) for the factors identified was described according to a previously established classification. Results In 36 studies, six children and 11 environmental factors were identified. Five studies were categorized as having low risk of bias. Strong evidence was found for the association between birthweight and GMD in healthy full-term and preterm infants. Moderate evidence was found for associations between gestational age and GMD, and sleeping position and GMD. There was conflicting evidence for associations between twinning and GMD, and breastfeeding and GMD. No evidence was found for an association between maternal postpartum depression and GMD. Evidence for the association of other factors with GMD was classified as ‘limited’ because each of these factors was examined in only one longitudinal study. Conclusion Infant GMD appears associated with two child factors (birthweight and gestational age) and one environmental factor (sleeping position). For the other factors identified in this review, insufficient evidence for an association with GMD was found. For those factors that were examined in only one longitudinal study, and are therefore classified as having limited evidence, more research would be needed to reach a conclusion.
