Abstract
AIM: Examine the meaning of 'successful feeding' for parents of infants at risk for feeding difficulties and how this meaning evolved from 1 to 24 months post-term age. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of responses to an open-ended question from a U.S. longitudinal mixed methods study. METHODS: At 1-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-months post-term, parents completed surveys which included the question: What is 'successful feeding' to you? Using conventional content analysis, 864 responses from parents of 254 infants were coded into the following categories: Child Behaviour, Positive Response, Intake, and Time. Themes characterizing each category were identified. RESULTS: Child Behaviour, Positive Response, and Intake were common at all time points. Responses related to Time (e.g., eating in a timely manner) were least frequent at 1, 6, and 12 months and were no longer mentioned thereafter. Demonstrating feeding skill/ability and satiety were common themes at all time points. Adequate quantity of food and no adverse response (e.g., emesis, choking) were common themes at 1 month; both decreased thereafter. The perception that the child was engaged in eating and eating nutritionally adequate food increased as children aged. CONCLUSION: Parents' perspectives of successful feeding focused on indicators of their child's development and emotional and physical well-being. As their children aged, ate increasingly complex foods, and developed physiologic stability, the meaning of success focused less on the amount of intake and avoidance of an adverse response and more on child well-being. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Nurses and feeding specialists can incorporate parents' views of success as they provide feeding support. IMPACT: Children having a positive behavioural and affective response to eating, and adequate intake provide evidence to parents of their success in achieving feeding goals. Understanding issues of importance to parents is an essential component of family-centered care of children with feeding difficulties. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution. REPORTING METHOD: The authors have adhered to the Standards for reporting qualitative research.