Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is disrupting normal life globally, every area of life is touched. The pandemic demands quick action and as new information emerges, reliable synthesises and guidelines for care are urgently needed. Breastfeeding protects mother and child; its health benefits are undisputed and based on evidence. To plan and support breastfeeding within the current pandemic, two areas need to be understood: 1) the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 as it applies to breastfeeding and 2) the protective properties of breastfeeding, including the practice of skin-to-skin care. This review aims to summarise how to manage breastfeeding during COVID-19. The summary was used to create guidelines for healthcare professionals and mothers. Methods: Current publications on breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic were reviewed to inform guidelines for clinical practice. Results: Current evidence states that the Coronavirus is not transmitted via breastmilk. Breastfeeding benefits outweigh possible risks during the COVID-19 pandemic and may even protect the infant and mother. General infection control measures should be in place and adhered to very strictly. Conclusions: Breastfeeding should be encouraged, mothers and infant dyads should be cared for together, and skin-to-skin contact ensured throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. If mothers are too ill to breastfeed, they should still be supported to express their milk, and the infant should be fed by a healthy individual. Guidelines, based on this current evidence, were produced and can be distributed to health care facilities where accessible information is needed.

Rationale, aims and objectives: This article aims to provide evidence to guide multidisciplinary clinical practitioners towards successful initiation and long‐term maintenance of oral feeding in preterm infants, directed by the individual infant maturity.Method: A comprehensive review of primary research, explorative work, existing guidelines, and evidence‐based opinions regarding the transition to oral feeding in preterm infants was studied to compile this document.Results: Current clinical hospital practices are described and challenged and the principles of cue‐based feeding are explored. “Traditional” feeding regimes use criteria, such as the infant's weight, gestational age and being free of illness, and even caregiver intuition to initiate or delay oral feeding. However, these criteria could compromise the infant and increase anxiety levels and frustration for parents and caregivers. Cue‐based feeding, opposed to volume‐driven feeding, lead to improved feeding success, including increased weight gain, shorter hospital stay, fewer adverse events, without increasing staff workload while simultaneously improving parents' skills regarding infant feeding. Although research is available on cue‐based feeding, an easy‐to‐use clinical guide for practitioners could not be found. A cue‐based infant feeding regime, for clinical decision making on providing opportunities to support feeding success in preterm infants, is provided in this article as a framework for clinical reasoning.Conclusions: Cue‐based feeding of preterm infants requires care providers who are trained in and sensitive to infant cues, to ensure optimal feeding success. An easy‐to‐use clinical guideline is presented for implementation by multidisciplinary team members. This evidence‐based guideline aims to improve feeding outcomes for the newborn infant and to facilitate the tasks of nurses and caregivers.

Neurodevelopmental supportive care (NDSC) is a well-researched topic and extensive evidence is available on its benefits in terms of the outcome for preterm infants. The programs, strategies, and individual elements of NDSC have been evaluated; however, knowledge and implementation of the developmental care approach is fragmented and the evidence base for elements of NDSC that make up the holistic model is not explicitly documented. The aim of this study was to identify and critically appraise the methodologic quality of relevant research studies and synthesize the current best available evidence of NDSC. A comprehensive investigation of NDSC including studies using research methods other than clinical trials may provide a combination of results from several primary studies, therefore an integrative literature review was utilized as the method of choice. Sixteen research articles were found to be of good methodologic quality and level and strength of evidence after critical appraisal. They described or defined the elements of NDSC explicitly. Extraction of data from these articles contributed to the formulation of 25 conclusion statements. Each of these statements could be grouped under 9 categories that resulted from a process of synthesis, and each of these categories could be substantiated from its literature support, clinical impact, and supporting evidence, including the specific literature references and volume and level of evidence associated with that element of NDSC, providing the evidence base for defining NDSC.

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breastfeeding support services and continuation rates. Methods: Electronic searches were undertaken in seven databases: Academic Search Complete, Springer Nature Journals, CINAHL Medline, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, Masterfile premier, and SocINDEX. Publications following the COVID-19 pandemic between January 2020 and March 2022 were searched for using the following keywords: impact or effect or influence and breastfeeding support and breastfeeding continuation and COVID-19 or coronavirus. Fifteen studies were included for investigation and extracted to identify seven themes related to breastfeeding support during COVID-19. Results: Factors which impacted breastfeeding support during the COVID-19 pandemic included separation, lack of skin-to-skin contact, insufficient support, online breastfeeding support, the impact of the pandemic on breastfeeding rates and experiences, fears of the pandemic, and the need for additional support. The pandemic mostly influenced breastfeeding support negatively, with a small exception occurring where some mothers experienced lockdown as positive since it protected the mother-infant dyad from unwanted visitors. Virtual breastfeeding support was introduced in many contexts; however, practitioners and mothers reported that this could not replace the need for face-to-face support. Conclusion: Breastfeeding is a lifesaving intervention, especially in the face of a disruption such as a pandemic. This work highlights the need for clear, consistent, and evidence-based information about risks, and for key practices to be maintained including not separating mothers and infants, promoting skin-to-skin contact, and ensuring availability of high-quality breastfeeding support.