Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Apr;16(2):143-50.
doi: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000255.

Assessment Tools for Evaluation of Oral Feeding in Infants Younger Than 6 Months

Britt F Pados  1 , Jinhee Park, Hayley Estrem, Araba Awotwi
Affiliations
Review

Assessment Tools for Evaluation of Oral Feeding in Infants Younger Than 6 Months

Britt F Pados et al. Adv Neonatal Care. 2016 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Feeding difficulty is common in infants younger than 6 months. Identification of infants in need of specialized treatment is critical to ensure appropriate nutrition and feeding skill development. Valid and reliable assessment tools help clinicians objectively evaluate feeding.

Purpose: To identify and evaluate assessment tools available for clinical assessment of bottle- and breastfeeding in infants younger than 6 months.

Methods/search strategy: CINAHL, HaPI, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for "infant feeding" and "assessment tool." The literature (n = 237) was reviewed for relevant assessment tools. A secondary search was conducted in CINAHL and PubMed for additional literature on identified tools.

Findings/results: Eighteen assessment tools met inclusion criteria. Of these, 7 were excluded because of limited available literature or because they were intended for use with a specific diagnosis or in research only. There are 11 assessment tools available for clinical practice. Only 2 of these were intended for bottle-feeding. All 11 indicated that they were appropriate for use with breastfeeding. None of the available tools have adequate psychometric development and testing.

Implications for practice: All of the tools should be used with caution. The Early Feeding Skills Assessment and Bristol Breastfeeding Assessment Tool had the most supportive psychometric development and testing.

Implications for research: Feeding assessment tools need to be developed and tested to guide optimal clinical care of infants from birth through 6 months. A tool that assesses both bottle- and breastfeeding would allow for consistent assessment across feeding methods.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding: There is no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow chart to guide selection of a feeding assessment tool. * Indicates recommended.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Rommel N, De Meyer AM, Feenstra L, Veereman-Wauters G. The complexity of feeding problems in 700 infants and young children presenting to a tertiary care institution. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2003 Jul;37(1):75–84. - PubMed
    1. Perrin JM, Anderson LE, Van Cleave J. The rise in chronic conditions among infants, children, and youth can be met with continued health system innovations. Health Affairs. 2014 Dec;33(12):2099–2105. - PubMed
    1. Thoyre SM. Feeding outcomes of extremely premature infants after neonatal care. JOGNN. 2007 Jul-Aug;36(4):366–375. - PubMed
    1. Jadcherla SR, Vijayapal AS, Leuthner S. Feeding abilities in neonates with congenital heart disease: A retrospective study. J Perinat Neonat Nur. 2009 Feb;29(2):112–118. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lindberg L, Ostberg M, Isacson IM, Dannaeus M. Feeding disorders related to nutrition. Acta Paediatr. 2006 Apr;95(4):425–429. - PubMed

Publication types