Electromyographic analysis of masseter muscle in newborns during suction in breast, bottle or cup feeding

Abstract

BackgroundWhen breastfeeding is difficult or impossible during the neonatal period, an analysis of muscle activity can help determine the best method for substituting it to promote the child’s development. The aim of this study was to analyze the electrical activity of the masseter muscle using surface electromyography during suction in term newborns by comparing breastfeeding, bottle and cup feeding.MethodsAn observational, cross-sectional analytical study was carried out on healthy, clinically stable term infants, assigned to receive either breast, or bottle or cup feeding. Setting was a Baby Friendly accredited hospital. Muscle activity was analyzed when each infant showed interest in sucking using surface electromyography. Root mean square averages (RMS) recorded in microvolts were transformed into percentages (normalization) of the reference value. The three groups were compared by ANOVA; the “stepwise” method of the multiple linear regression analysis tested the model which best defined the activity of the masseter muscle in the sample at a significance level of 5%.ResultsParticipants were 81 full term newborns (27 per group), from 2 to 28 days of life. RMS values were lower for bottle (mean 44.2%, SD 14.1) than breast feeding (mean 58.3%, SD 12.7) (P = 0.003, ANOVA); cup feeding (52.5%, SD 18.2%) was not significantly different (P > 0.05). For every gram of weight increase, RMS increased by 0.010 units.ConclusionsMasseter activity was significantly higher in breastfed newborns than in bottle-fed newborns, who presented the lowest RMS values. Levels of masseter activity during cup-feeding were between those of breast and bottle feeding, and did not significantly differ from either group. This study in healthy full term neonates endorses cup rather than bottle feeding as a temporary substitute for breastfeeding.

Modifying the texture of foods for infants and young children

“…Few studies evaluated the impact of mode of milk feeding (breast, bottle and cup) on oral muscles activities. Based on sEMG measurements, some authors showed that cup feeding as of the first weeks or months (Franca et al, 2014;Gomes et al, 2006) or bottle-feeding with a chewing-like bottle teat (Sakashita et al, 1996) could be an alternative method if the infant cannot be breastfed, because these methods provide muscle activity similar to breastfeeding. Muscle activity was also shown to change with mode of milk feeding because sucking from the bottle results in a hypo activity of the masseter and temporalis muscles and a hyper activity of the buccinator muscle (the muscle forming the anterior part of the cheek), compared to sucking from the breast (Gomes et al, 2006).…”

Acompanhamento fonoaudiológico do aleitamento materno em recém-nascidos nas primeiras horas de vida

“…With regard to Speech Therapy, improving the pattern of natural breastfeeding is fundamental, considering the bony and muscular development of the stomatognathic system, due to the intense muscular activity of the peribucal region (20,26,27) . Breastfeeding also prevents the installation of deleterious oral habits, such as the use of pacifiers and digital suction (10,28) , in addition to enabling the extension of the link (9) and the stimulation of the hearing and the language of the NB (17) .…”

A cluster analysis of the relationship between sucking habits, consistency of food ingested, and taste sensitivity in children

“…A past study (Medeiros, Ferreira, & Felício, 2009) showed a correlation between the duration of breastfeeding and positive aspects of tongue, lip and mandible mobility, while the duration of artificial feeding correlated negatively with masticatory and speech performance in children aged 6-12 years. In addition, past studies observed that bottle-feeding does not stimulate the activity of masticatory muscles and the range of mandibular movement as breastfeeding does (França, Sousa, Aragão, & Costa, 2014;Gomes et al, 2006). Thus, harmful stimuli over long periods of time may impair orofacial functions, such as masticatory performance, influencing the child to avoid harder foods.…”