Literature DB >> 22638306

Removal of industry-sponsored formula sample packs from the hospital: does it make a difference?

Lori Feldman-Winter1, Xena Grossman, Amudha Palaniappan, Elyse Kadokura, Krystal Hunter, Barry Milcarek, Anne Merewood.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most US hospitals distribute industry-sponsored formula sample packs. No research has examined outcomes associated with sample pack removal as part of a hospital intervention to eliminate sample distribution postpartum.
OBJECTIVE: To examine prospectively hospital-based and breastfeeding outcomes associated with removal of industry-sponsored formula sample packs from the hospital.
METHODS: We enrolled mothers postpartum at Cooper University Hospital, an urban New Jersey hospital, in 2009-2010. For the first 6 months, all women received industry-sponsored formula samples packs (control group); for the next 6 months, all postpartum women received hospital-sponsored bags with no formula at source (intervention group). Research assistants blinded to the design called subjects weekly for 10 weeks to determine feeding practices.
RESULTS: We enrolled 527 breastfeeding women (284 control; 243 intervention). At 10 weeks postpartum, 82% of control and 36% of intervention women (P < .001) reported receiving formula in the "diaper discharge bag." Kaplan-Meyer curves for any breastfeeding showed the intervention was associated with increased breastfeeding (P = .03); however, exclusive breastfeeding was not significantly different between intervention and controls (P = .46). In post hoc analysis, receiving no take-home formula in bottles from the hospital was associated with increased exclusive breastfeeding in control (P = .02) and intervention (P = .03) groups at 10 weeks.
CONCLUSION: Although the hospital-branded replacement contained no formula at source, many women reported receiving bottles of formula from the hospital. Change in practice to remove industry-sponsored formula sample packs was associated with increased breastfeeding over 10 weeks, but the intervention may have had a greater impact had it not been contaminated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22638306     DOI: 10.1177/0890334412444350

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hum Lact        ISSN: 0890-3344            Impact factor:   2.219


  5 in total

1.  Recommendations for Adopting the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes Into U.S. Policy.

Authors:  Jessica Soldavini; Lindsey Smith Taillie
Journal:  J Hum Lact       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 2.219

2.  Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Clinical Protocol #2: Guidelines for Birth Hospitalization Discharge of Breastfeeding Dyads, Revised 2022.

Authors:  Adrienne E Hoyt-Austin; Laura R Kair; Ilse A Larson; Elizabeth K Stehel
Journal:  Breastfeed Med       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 2.335

3.  ABM Clinical Protocol #19: Breastfeeding Promotion in the Prenatal Setting, Revision 2015.

Authors:  Casey Rosen-Carole; Scott Hartman
Journal:  Breastfeed Med       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.817

4.  Compliance with the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative and impact on breastfeeding rates.

Authors:  Summer Sherburne Hawkins; Ariel Dora Stern; Christopher F Baum; Matthew W Gillman
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 5.747

5.  Exposure to marketing of breastmilk substitutes in Mexican women: Sources and scope.

Authors:  Sonia Hernández-Cordero; Mireya Vilar-Compte; Ana Cristina Castañeda-Márquez; Nigel Rollins; Gillian Kingston; Rafael Pérez-Escamilla
Journal:  Int Breastfeed J       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 3.461

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.