From: Review of the assessment and management of neonatal abstinence syndrome
Reference | Study design | Study objective | Index vs. reference group(s) | Assessment tool | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Abdel-Latif, 2006[38] | Retrospective Cohort | To determine association between breastfeeding and NAS outcomes | Breastfed infants with NAS (n = 85) | Finnegan Score | Rx for NAS: OR = 0.36 (CI 0.18–0.71)* |
 |  | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 105) |  | Mean LOS: 14.7 (SD 14.9) vs. 19.1 (SD 15.0) days* | |
Dryden, 2009[42] | Retrospective Cohort | To determine association between breastfeeding and NAS outcomes | Breastfed infants with NAS (n = 99) | Modified Lipsitz | Rx for NAS: OR = 0.55 (CI 0.34–0.88)* |
 |  | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 351) |  |  | |
McQueen, 2011[39] | Retrospective Cohort | To determine association between breastfeeding and NAS outcomes | Breastfed infants with NAS (n = 8) | Modified Finnegan | Mean # of NAS scores: 25.0 (SD 23.5) vs. 56.2 (SD 39.1) vs. 95.6 (SD 34.6)* |
 |  | Combination-fed infants with NAS (n = 11) |  | Mean NAS score 4.9 (SD 2.9) vs. 6.5 (SD 3.7) vs. 6.9 (SD 4.2)* | |
 |  | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 9) |  |  | |
Pritham, 2012[43] | Retrospective Cohort | To determine association between breastfeeding and NAS outcomes | Breastfed with NAS (n = 14) | Not specified | Mean LOS: -3.3 (SE 1.7) days |
 |  | Infants combination-fed with NAS (n = 22) |  |  | |
 |  | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 96) |  |  | |
O’Connor, 2013[40] | Case Series | To describe association between breastfeeding and NAS outcomes | Breastfed infants with NAS (n = 65) | Modified Finnegan | Mean NAS score: 8.83 (SD 3.56) vs. 9.65 (SD 2.58) |
 |  | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 20) |  | Rx for NAS: 23.1% vs. 30.0% | |
Wachman, 2013[9] | Prospective Cohort | To determine association of genetic variables with NAS outcomes | Breastfed infants with NAS (n = 38) | Modified Finnegan | Rx for NAS: 50% vs. 77%* |
 |  | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 48) |  | Mean LOS: 15.8 (CI 11.5–20.1) vs. 27.4 (CI 22.5–32.3) days* | |
Welle-Strand, 2013[41] | Ambi-directional Cohort | To determine association between breastfeeding and NAS | Breastfed infants with NAS (n = 95) | Modified Finnegan | Rx for NAS: 53% vs. 80%* |
 |  | outcomes | Formula-fed infants with NAS (n = 29) |  | Mean length of Rx: 28.6 (SD 19.1) vs. 46.7 (SD 26.3) days* |
Hunseler, 2013[44] | Retrospective Cohort | To describe association between rooming-in and NAS outcomes | NAS infants exposed to rooming-in (n = 24) | Finnegan | Finnegan Score > 12: 6.3% vs. 6.4% |
 |  | Control NAS infants (n = 53) |  | Rx for NAS: 79.2% vs. 88.7% | |
 |  |  |  | Mean length of Rx: 27 vs. 32.5 days | |
 |  |  |  | Mean LOS: 38 vs. 41.5 days | |
Abrahams, 2007[45] | Retrospective Cohort | To describe association between rooming-in and NAS outcomes | Infants with NAS exposed to rooming-in (n = 32) | Modified Finnegan | Mean length of Rx: 5.9 vs. 18.6 days*; 5.9 vs. 18.6 days* |
 |  |  | Control infants with NAS (n = 38) (historical comparison) |  | Mean LOS: 11.8 vs. 23.5 days; 11.8 vs. 25.9 days* |
 |  | Control infants with NAS (n = 36) (from another institution) |  |  | |
D’Apolito, 1999[46] | Nonblinded Random Assignment of Rx | To determine the association between infants sleeping in a rocking bed vs. controls with NAS outcomes | Infants with NAS exposed to rocking bed (n = 7) | Finnegan | Mean NAS score on day 7 of intervention: 10.2 (SD 2.1) vs. 8.0 (SD 1.8) |
 |  | Control infants with NAS (n = 7) |  |  | |
Oro, 1988[47] | Randomized Assignment of Rx with Matched Controls | To determine the association between infants sleeping in a waterbed vs. controls and NAS outcomes | Infants with NAS exposed to a waterbed (n = 15) | Finnegan | Maximum NAS score: 6.2 (SD 0.7) vs. 6.4 (SD 1.0) |
 |  | Control infants with NAS (n = 15) |  | Mean LOS: 10.5 (SD 1.2) vs. 11.5 (SD 3.4) days | |
Maichuk, 1999[48] | Randomized to Intervention; Nurses Blinded to Hypothesis | To determine the association between sleeping position with NAS outcomes | Infants with NAS placed in prone position (n = 25) | Finnegan | Maximum NAS score: 10.52 (SD 2.08) vs. 13.17 (SD 2.03)* |
 |  | Infants with NAS placed in the supine position (n = 23) |  | Mean NAS score: 5.11 (SD 0.64) vs. 7.60 (SD 0.70)* | |
Filippelli, 2012[49] | Case Series | To describe the possible effects of NIA on infants with NAS | Infants with NAS exposed to NIA (n = 54) | Not applicable | Chart review revealed improvements in calming, sleep, and feeding |