ABSTRACT Aim This study aimed to retrieve, evaluate, and synthesize the best available evidence on noise management in neonatal wards to establish a foundational basis for implementing effective noise control practices. Methods Guided by the “6S” evidence pyramid model, a systematic search was performed across multiple sources including clinical decision support systems, guideline repositories, professional websites, and major databases up to April 12, 2025. Literature types encompassed guidelines, evidence summaries, expert consensuses, and systematic reviews. Following quality appraisal, two researchers independently extracted and synthesized the evidence. Results Sixteen publications were included: one guideline, six evidence summaries, six systematic reviews, and three expert consensuses. From these, 33 pieces of best evidence were synthesized and categorized into five key domains: noise sources, measurement techniques, threshold levels, reduction interventions, and clinical effects of noise. Conclusions This work provides a scientifically rigorous and comprehensive evidence summary for neonatal ward noise management, offering valuable guidance for clinical practice. Successful application requires adaptation to local contexts. Developing tailored, evidence‐based implementation plans is recommended to bridge the evidence‐practice gap and enhance neonatal outcomes. Implications for Clinical Practice Given neonates' heightened vulnerability, standardized noise management in the NICU is crucial. This summary provides clinicians with a robust, evidence‐based framework to develop localized protocols. Its implementation is expected to improve the acoustic environment, thereby promoting physiological stability, supporting neurodevelopment, and reducing noise‐related complications. Reporting Method This evidence summary followed the reporting specifications of the Fudan University Center for Evidence‐Based Nursing (Joanna Briggs Institute methodology) and was registered (ES20257726). Patient or Public Contribution No Patient or Public Contribution.
Xie et al. (2026) studied this question.