| Literature DB >> 24564836 |
Sarah Haroon, Jai K Das, Rehana A Salam, Aamer Imdad, Zulfiqar A Bhutta.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Exclusive Breastfeeding (EBF) rates remain low in both low-income and high-income countries despite World Health Organization recommendations for EBF till 6 months. Breastfeeding has been shown to have a protective effect against gastrointestinal infections, among other benefits. Large-scale interventions focusing on educating mothers about breastfeeding have the potential to increase breastfeeding prevalence, especially EBF, up to recommended standards and also to decrease infant morbidity.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24564836 PMCID: PMC3847366 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-S3-S20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Figure 1Search strategy flow diagram
Summary of findings for the effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on exclusive breastfeeding rates.
| Quality Assessment | Summary of Findings | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | 6 RCTs [ | Studies used different follow up periods and recall criteria. Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. | 6 of 15 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 10 out of 15 studies were conducted in developed countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions. | 4093 | 6316 | 1.43 [1.09, 1.87] | Random effects meta-analysis due to heterogeneity. |
| 30 | 22 RCTs, 8 QE [ | Studies used different follow up periods. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. | 15 of 30 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 19 of 30 studies were conducted in developed countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 1512 | 1276 | 1.30 [1.19, 1.42] | Random effects meta-analysis due to heterogeneity. |
| 53 | 34 RCTs, 19 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. | 21 of 53 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 29 of 53 studies were conducted in developed countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 5481 | 4897 | 1.90 [1.54, 2.34] | Random effects meta-analysis due to heterogeneity. |
Figure 2Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of exclusive breastfeeding for 1 to 5 months
Summary of findings for the effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on predominant and partial breastfeeding rates.
| Quality Assessment | Summary of Findings | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | 5 RCTs, 1 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices | None of the studies suggest benefit. Insignificant heterogeneity | 3 studies were conducted in developing countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 33 | 59 | 0.66 [0.43, 1.01] | Fixed effects meta-analysis; insignificant heterogeneity. |
| 13 | 10 RCTs, 3 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices | 2 studies suggest benefit. | 8 of 13 studies were conducted in developed countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 1433 | 707 | 1.08 [0.55, 2.13] | Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity. |
| 6 | 2 RCT, 4 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. | 1 of 6 studies suggests benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 1 of 6 studies was conducted in a developing country | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 101 | 99 | 1.21 [0.79, 1.87] | Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity. |
| 11 | 8 RCTs, 3 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. | None of the studies suggest benefit. Insignificant heterogeneity | 5 of 11 studies were conducted in developing countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 112 | 151 | 0.88 [0.72, 1.08] | Fixed effects meta-analysis; insignificant heterogeneity |
| 20 | 11 RCTs, 9 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. | None of the studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 9 of 20 studies were conducted in developing countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 524 | 578 | 0.87 [0.75, 1.02] | Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity. |
Figure 3Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of predominant breastfeeding for 1-5 months
Figure 4Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of partial breastfeeding for 1 to 5 months
Summary of findings for effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on ‘no breastfeeding’ rates.
| Quality Assessment | Summary of Findings | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38 | 21 RCTs, 17 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). | Most studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 10 of 38 studies were conducted in developing countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 48026 | 39843 | 0.68 [0.54, 0.87] | Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity |
| 33 | 21 RCTs, 12 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). | 10 of 33 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 4 of 33 studies were conducted in developing countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 770 | 1018 | 0.70 [0.62, 0.80] | Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity. |
| 73 | 41 RCTs, 32 QE [ | Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). | 25 of 73 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity | 16 of 73 studies were conducted in developing countries | Pooled results for different types of interventions | 15473 | 17578 | 0.82 [0.77, 0.89] | Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity |
Figure 5Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of no breastfeeding for 1 to 5 months
Estimates of effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on exclusive, predominant, partial and no breastfeeding rates in developing countries: Recommendations for LiST model.
| Feeding practice and time interval | Relative Risk (95% CI) |
|---|---|
| Exclusive breastfeeding rate at day 1 | 2.57 [1.39, 4.77] |
| Exclusive breastfeeding rate at <1 month | 1.35 [1.15, 1.58] |
| Exclusive breastfeeding rate at 1-5 months | 2.88 [2.11, 3.93] |
| Predominant breastfeeding rate at <1 month | 0.67 [0.42, 1.06] |
| Predominant breastfeeding rate at 1-5 months | 1.23 [0.49, 3.08] |
| Partial breastfeeding rate at day 1 | 0.84 [0.61, 1.15] |
| Partial breastfeeding rate at <1 month | 0.94 [0.72, 1.24] |
| Partial breastfeeding rate at 1-5 months | 0.83 [0.65, 1.06] |
| ‘No breastfeeding’ rate at day 1 | 0.58 [0.44, 0.78] |
| ‘No breastfeeding’ rate at <1 month | 0.51 [0.29, 0.90] |
| ‘No breastfeeding’ rate at 1-5 months | 0.56 [0.45, 0.69] |