Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews No study reported on parental or family quality of life, infant sleep duration per 24 h, or parental satisfaction. Low-allergen maternal diet versus a diet containing potential allergens: one study (90 infants) found that 35/47 (74%) of infants responded (reduction in cry/fuss duration of 25%) to a low-allergen maternal diet, compared with 16/43 (37%) of infants with a maternal diet containing potential allergens (37% di erence; 95% confidence interval (CI) 18 to 56; P < 0.001). Low-allergen diet or soy milk formula versus standard diet or cow's milk formula and dicyclomine hydrochloride: one study (120 infants) found that 10/15 (66.6%) breastfed babies responded to dicyclomine hydrochloride and a normal diet, compared with 10/16 (62.5%) on a low-allergen diet, while 24/45 (53.3%) standard formula-fed babies taking dicyclomine hydrochloride improved compared with 29/44 (65.9%) on soy milk formula. Response was defined as a reduction of crying to less than one hour per day a er 48 hours of treatment, with remission persisting for one month. Hydrolysed formula versus standard formula: one study (43 infants) reported that the number of infants who responded to the intervention (cried for less than 3 hours per day on at least 3 days a week) was 8/23 in the whey hydrolysate group versus 5/20 in the standard formula group (χ 2 using yate's correction = 0.20, P = 0.65). The same study (43 infants) reported a greater reduction in crying time postintervention with hydrolysed formula (104 min/d, 95% CI 55 to 155) than with standard formula (3 min/d, 95% CI −63 to 67); di erence = 101 min/d, 95% CI 25 to 179; P = 0.02). The author confirmed there were no adverse e ects. Hydrolysed formula or dairy-and soy-free maternal diet versus standard diet/formula and parental education or counselling: one study (21 infants) found that crying time decreased to 2.03 h/d (SD 1.03) in the hydrolysed or dairy-and soy-free maternal diet group compared with 1.08 h/d (SD 0.7) in the parent education or counselling group, nine days postintervention. Partially hydrolysed, lower lactose, whey-based formulae containing oligosaccharide versus standard formula with simethicone: one study (267 infants) found both groups experienced decreased colic episodes a er seven days (partially hydrolysed formula: from 5.99 episodes (SD 1.84) to 2.47 episodes (SD 1.94); standard formula: from 5.41 episodes (SD 1.88) to 3.72 episodes (SD 1.98)); 95% CI 95% −0.7 to −1.8; P < 0.001). This di erence was significant a er two weeks (partially hydrolysed: 1.76 episodes (SD 1.60); standard formula: 3.32 episodes (SD 2.06); P < 0.001). The study author confirmed there were no adverse e ects. Lactase enzyme supplementation versus placebo: three studies (138 infants) assessed this comparison, but they are cross-over trials that did not report data from before washout. There were no adverse e ects in any of the studies. Extract of Foeniculum vulgare, Matricariae recutita, and Melissa o icinalis versus placebo: one study (93 infants) ...
The aim of this review was to investigate if probiotics given to healthy babies prevent infantile colic, and if they are safe. Key messagesAlthough probiotics make little or no di erence to the occurrence of infantile colic, they may reduce crying time and there were no safety concerns. We still require more research to work out if the onset of colic can be reduced. What did the review study?Infantile colic a ects a large number of infants and their families worldwide. Infantile colic is a problem characterised by episodes of inconsolable crying lasting for longer than three hours per day, for more than three days a week, for at least three weeks.Probiotics are live bacteria that, when ingested, can be beneficial for patients. Probiotics are cheap and readily available, and there is recent research investigating their use for this problem. What were the main results of the review?This review included six studies. The infants in the probiotics group were given di erent types of probiotics, and in di erent doses, and compared to infants who were given a placebo (dummy medicine).The review found that, compared to placebo, probiotics made little or no di erence to the occurrence of infantile colic, but appeared to reduce crying time. There was no di erence in the reporting of side e ects, with only four serious events reported in one large study, and these were clinically unlikely to be linked to the taking of either of the study products. How up-to-date was this review?We searched for studies that had been published up to January 2018.
BackgroundInfantile colic has an effect on both infants and their parents, who become exhausted and concerned as they attempt to comfort their child. Common approaches have focused upon physical treatments to reduce symptoms, with inconclusive evidence as to their effectiveness. An alternative approach seeks to provide training, support and psychological interventions for parents. This approach is known as parent training programmes. Programmes can include soothing techniques, advice on feeding or normalisation material in any form. The teaching format can vary including face-to-face courses, online learning, printed materials, home visits and remote support and counselling. Here, we aim to collate the evidence on the effectiveness of these interventions and examine their effectiveness at reducing infantile colic symptoms and parental anxiety levels, and their safety. Objectives 1. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of parent training programmes for managing colic in infants under four months of age. 2. To identify the educational content and attributes of such published programmes. Search methodsIn June 2019 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases and two trials registers. We also handsearched conference abstracts, inspected the references of included studies and contacted leaders in the field for more trials. Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs investigating the effectiveness of any form of parental training programmes, alone or in combination, versus another intervention(s) or control, on infantile colic. Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias within the included studies. We used Review Manager 5 to analyse the data. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE methodology. Main resultsOur search found 6064 records from which we selected 20 for full-text review. From these, we identified seven studies with 1187 participants that met our inclusion criteria. All of the studies included infants under the age of four months suffering from infantile colic. Four studies were conducted in the USA, one in Canada, one in the Netherlands and one in Iran. Four studies stated their funding sources, which included national research institutes, foundations and nutritional companies. Five studies assessed parent training versus a control group that received reassurance or routine care; and of these, one study was three-armed and also examined the effectiveness of using a specialised baby seat. One study examined parent training programmes against a milk-exclusion diet and one study assessed a parent training Parent training programmes for managing infantile colic (Review)
This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:1. To assess the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic probiotics for preventing or reducing colic in infants.2. To identify the likely effective probiotic strains for such an approach.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.