47
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Treating infant colic with the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri: double blind, placebo controlled randomised trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective To determine whether the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 reduces crying or fussing in a broad community based sample of breastfed infants and formula fed infants with colic aged less than 3 months.

          Design Double blind, placebo controlled randomised trial.

          Setting Community based sample (primary and secondary level care centres) in Melbourne, Australia.

          Participants 167 breastfed infants or formula fed infants aged less than 3 months meeting Wessel’s criteria for crying or fussing: 85 were randomised to receive probiotic and 82 to receive placebo.

          Interventions Oral daily L reuteri (1×10 8 colony forming units) versus placebo for one month.

          Main outcomes measures The primary outcome was daily duration of cry or fuss at 1 month. Secondary outcomes were duration of cry or fuss; number of cry or fuss episodes; sleep duration of infant at 7, 14, and 21 days, and 1 and 6 months; maternal mental health (Edinburgh postnatal depression subscale); family functioning (paediatric quality of life inventory), parent quality adjusted life years (assessment of quality of life) at 1 and 6 months; infant functioning (paediatric quality of life inventory) at 6 months; infant faecal microbiota (microbial diversity, colonisation with Escherichia coli), and calprotectin levels at 1 month. In intention to treat analyses the two groups were compared using regression models adjusted for potential confounders.

          Results Of 167 infants randomised from August 2011 to August 2012, 127 (76%) were retained to primary outcome; of these, a subset was analysed for faecal microbial diversity, E coli colonisation, and calprotectin levels. Adherence was high. Mean daily cry or fuss time fell steadily in both groups. At 1 month, the probiotic group cried or fussed 49 minutes more than the placebo group (95% confidence interval 8 to 90 minutes, P=0.02); this mainly reflected more fussing, especially for formula fed infants. The groups were similar on all secondary outcomes. No study related adverse events occurred.

          Conclusions L reuteri DSM 17938 did not benefit a community sample of breastfed infants and formula fed infants with colic. These findings differ from previous smaller trials of selected populations and do not support a general recommendation for the use of probiotics to treat colic in infants.

          Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN95287767.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          PEDIATRICS

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments.

            As part of the validation of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument comparisons were made between five multiattribute utility (MAU) instruments, each purporting to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL). These were the AQoL, the Canadian Health Utilities Index (HUI) 3, the Finnish 15D, the EQ-5D (formerly the EuroQoL) and the SF6D (derived from the SF-36). The paper compares absolute utility scores, instrument sensitivity, and incremental differences in measured utility between different instruments predicted by different individuals. The AQoL predicted utilities are similar to those from the HUI3 and EQ-5D. By contrast the 15D and SF6D predict systematically higher utilities, and the differences between individuals are significantly smaller. There is some evidence that the AQoL has greater sensitivity to health states than other instruments. It is concluded that at present no single MAU instrument can claim to be the 'gold standard', and that researchers should select an instrument sensitive to the health states they are investigating. Caution should be exercised in treating any of the instrument scores as representing a trade-off between length of life and HRQoL.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Proc Natl Acad Sci USA

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: paediatrician
                Role: associate professor
                Role: professor
                Role: statistician
                Role: honours student
                Role: research fellow
                Role: paediatric gastroenterologist/allergist
                Role: paediatrician
                Role: professor
                Role: professor
                Journal
                BMJ
                BMJ
                bmj
                BMJ : British Medical Journal
                BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
                0959-8138
                1756-1833
                2014
                1 April 2014
                : 348
                : g2107
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Royal Children’s Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
                [2 ]Murdoch Childrens Research Institute Victoria, Australia
                [3 ]The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
                [4 ]Developmental Neurosciences and Child Health, Child and Family Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: V Sung Centre for Community Child Health, Royal Children’s Hospital, Parkville, Vic 3052, Australia valerie.sung@ 123456rch.org.au
                Article
                sunv015994
                10.1136/bmj.g2107
                3972414
                24690625
                553526d4-5198-4ffb-b17b-de7afb15b995
                © Sung et al 2014

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.

                History
                : 3 March 2014
                Categories
                Research

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article