Citation Information :
Boyd RS, Grooby ES, Bhuiyan H, Anaya DV, Rad HN, Malhotra A, Marzbanrad F. Infafeed Monitor Pilot Study: Measuring Ingested Milk Volumes in Neonates. 2025; 4 (1):19-24.
Aim: This study evaluates the technical feasibility of Infafeed, a novel noninvasive prototype for measuring ingested milk volumes in neonates, offering an objective assessment to support breastfeeding.
Materials and methods: A single-center pilot study was conducted. Twenty-four newborn infants (mean gestational age: 37 ± 1 weeks, birth weight: 2.88 ± 0.63 kg) receiving bottle or syringe feeds were recruited. Two cases were excluded due to data-saving errors, and two more were removed due to excessive noise. The Infafeed monitor recorded feeding sounds via a microphone placed on the infant's neck, while a secondary microphone captured background noise for cancellation. Power spectral density analysis was performed to differentiate swallow and nonswallow events, and a linear regression model was used to estimate feed volumes based on 20 recordings.
Results: Spectral analysis revealed a significant difference in swallow vs nonswallow spectral power in bottle-fed infants. Total power in the 400−600 Hz frequency band showed the strongest correlation with milk volume per swallow (r = 0.94). The linear regression model achieved a mean absolute error of 6.44 mL for estimated feed volumes.
Conclusion: The Infafeed monitor demonstrated feasibility for neonatal feeding assessment. The observed acoustic differences between swallow and nonswallow periods provide a foundation for automated swallow detection, which can enhance milk volume estimation. Further studies with a larger cohort are required to improve accuracy and evaluate the technical and clinical applicability.
Clinical significance: Maternal concern about insufficient milk supply is a leading cause of premature cessation of exclusive breastfeeding. The Infafeed monitor has the potential to provide a noninvasive, objective tool for assessing neonatal milk intake, reducing unnecessary supplementation, enabling early identification of feeding problems, and supporting breastfeeding continuation. If validated in larger studies, this device could enhance breastfeeding support strategies in both clinical and home settings.
World Health Organization. Exclusive breastfeeding for six months best for babies everywhere [Internet]. 2011. Available from: https://www.who.int/news/item/15-01-2011-exclusive-breastfeeding-for-six-months-best-for-babies-everywhere.
Victora CGP, Bahl RMD, Barros AJDP, et al. Breastfeeding in the 21st century: Epidemiology, mechanisms, and lifelong effect. Lancet 2016;387(10017):475−490. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01024-7.
Balogun OO, Dagvadorj A, Anigo KM, et al. Factors influencing breastfeeding exclusivity during the first 6 months of life in developing countries: A quantitative and qualitative systematic review. Matern Child Nutr 2015;11(4):433−451. DOI: 10.1111/mcn.12180.
Gianni ML, Bettinelli ME, Manfra P, et al. Breastfeeding difficulties and risk for early breastfeeding cessation. Nutrients 2019;11(10):2266. DOI: 10.3390/nu11102266.
Li R, Fein SB, Chen J, et al. Why mothers stop breastfeeding: Mothers’ self-reported reasons for stopping during the first year. Pediatrics 2008;122(Suppl 2):S69−S76. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2008-1315i.
Brown CRL, Dodds L, Legge A, et al. Factors influencing the reasons why mothers stop breastfeeding. Can J Public Health 2014;105(3):e179−e185. DOI: 10.17269/cjph.105.4244.
Odom EC, Li R, Scanlon KS, et al. Reasons for earlier than desired cessation of breastfeeding. Pediatrics 2013;131(3):e726−e732. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2012-1295.
Kent JC, Prime DK, Garbin CP. Principles for maintaining or increasing breast milk production. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2012;41(1):114−121. DOI: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2011.01313.x.
Galipeau R, Dumas L, Lepage M. Perception of not having enough milk and actual milk production of first-time breastfeeding mothers: Is there a difference? Breastfeed Med 2017;12:210−217. DOI: 10.1089/bfm.2016.0183.
Kent JC, Ashton E, Hardwick CM, et al. Causes of perception of insufficient milk supply in Western Australian mothers. Matern Child Nutr 2021;17(1):e13080. DOI: 10.1111/mcn.13080.
Kent JC, Hepworth AR, Langton DB, et al. Impact of measuring milk production by test weighing on breastfeeding confidence in mothers of term infants. Breastfeed Med 2015;10(6):318−325. DOI: 10.1089/bfm.2015.0025.
Sacco LM, Caulfield LE, Gittelsohn J, et al. The conceptualization of perceived insufficient milk among Mexican mothers. J Hum Lact 2006;22(3):277−286. DOI: 10.1177/0890334406287817.
Pados BF, Park J, Estrem H, et al. Assessment tools for evaluation of oral feeding in infants younger than 6 months. Adv Neonatal Care 2016;16(2):143−150. DOI: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000255.
Altuntas N, Kocak M, Akkurt S, et al. LATCH scores and milk intake in preterm and term infants: A prospective comparative study. Breastfeed Med 2015;10(2):96−101. DOI: 10.1089/bfm.2014.0042.
Torabinia M, Rosenblatt SD, Mosadegh B. A review of quantitative instruments for understanding breastfeeding dynamics. Glob Chall 2021;5(10):2100019. DOI: 10.1002/gch2.202100019.
Vetter-Laracy S, Osona B, Roca A, et al. Neonatal swallowing assessment using fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Pediatr Pulmonol 2018;53(4):437−442. DOI: 10.1002/ppul.23946.
Reynolds J, Carroll S, Sturdivant C. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing: A multidisciplinary alternative for assessment of infants with dysphagia in the neonatal intensive care unit. Adv Neonatal Care 2016;16(1):37−43. DOI: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000245.
Mills N, Lydon AM, Davies-Payne D, et al. Imaging the breastfeeding swallow: Pilot study utilizing real-time MRI. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol 2020;5(3):572−579. DOI: 10.1002/lio2.397.
Perrella SL, Nancarrow K, Rea A, et al. Estimates of preterm infants’ breastfeeding transfer volumes are not reliably accurate. Adv Neonatal Care 2020;20(5):E93−E99. DOI: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000721.
Emmanouilidou D, McCollum ED, Park DE, et al. Adaptive noise suppression of pediatric lung auscultations with real applications to noisy clinical settings in developing countries. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2015;62(9):2279−2288. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2015.2422698.
Cichero JAY, Murdoch BE. Acoustic signature of the normal swallow: Characterization by age, gender, and bolus volume. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2002;111(7):623−632. DOI: 10.1177/000348940211100710.
Youmans SR, Stierwalt JAG. Normal swallowing acoustics across age, gender, bolus viscosity, and bolus volume. Dysphagia 2011;26(4):374−384. DOI: 10.1007/s00455-010-9323-z.
Vice FL, Heinz JM, Giuriati G, et al. Cervical auscultation of suckle feeding in newborn infants. Dev Med Child Neurol 1990;32(9):760−768. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1990.tb08479.x.
Vice FL, Bamford O, Heinz JM, et al. Correlation of cervical auscultation with physiological recording during suckle-feeding in newborn infants. Dev Med Child Neurol 1995;37(2):167−179. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1995.tb11986.x.
