Kathryn Wouk1, Sandraluz Lara-Cinisomo2, Alison M Stuebe3, Charles Poole4, Jessica L Petrick5, Kathryn M McKenney6. 1. Carolina Global Breastfeeding Institute, Department of Maternal and Child Health, and khouk@live.unc.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Department of Kinesiology and Community Health, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois; 3. Carolina Global Breastfeeding Institute, Department of Maternal and Child Health, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; 4. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; 5. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland. 6. School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Breastfeeding duration and exclusivity among Latinas fall below recommended levels, indicating a need for targeted interventions. The effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions for Latinas remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the documented effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions on any and exclusive breastfeeding among Latinas. DATA SOURCES: English-language publications in Medline, CINAHL, and Embase were searched through May 28, 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Fourteen prospective, controlled studies describing 17 interventions met inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Extracted study characteristics include study design, population characteristics, intervention components, timing and intensity of delivery, provider type, control procedures, and outcome measures. RESULTS: Random-effects meta-analyses estimated risk differences (RDs) between breastfeeding mothers in intervention and control arms of each study and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) within which 95% of intervals cover the true value estimated by a future study. Interventions increased any breastfeeding at 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 months (RD 0.04 [95% PI -0.15 to 0.23] and 0.08 [-0.08 to 0.25], respectively) and exclusive breastfeeding at 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 months (0.04 [-0.09 to 0.18] and 0.01 [-0.01 to 0.02]). Funnel plot asymmetry suggested publication bias for initiation and 1- to 3-month any breastfeeding. Estimates were slightly larger among interventions with prenatal and postpartum components, 3 to 6 patient contacts, and delivery by an International Board Certified Lactation Consultant or lay provider. LIMITATIONS: The published evidence for Latinas is limited, and studies have varying methodologic rigor. CONCLUSIONS: Breastfeeding interventions targeting Latinas increased any and exclusive breastfeeding compared with usual care.
CONTEXT: Breastfeeding duration and exclusivity among Latinas fall below recommended levels, indicating a need for targeted interventions. The effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions for Latinas remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the documented effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions on any and exclusive breastfeeding among Latinas. DATA SOURCES: English-language publications in Medline, CINAHL, and Embase were searched through May 28, 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Fourteen prospective, controlled studies describing 17 interventions met inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Extracted study characteristics include study design, population characteristics, intervention components, timing and intensity of delivery, provider type, control procedures, and outcome measures. RESULTS: Random-effects meta-analyses estimated risk differences (RDs) between breastfeeding mothers in intervention and control arms of each study and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) within which 95% of intervals cover the true value estimated by a future study. Interventions increased any breastfeeding at 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 months (RD 0.04 [95% PI -0.15 to 0.23] and 0.08 [-0.08 to 0.25], respectively) and exclusive breastfeeding at 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 months (0.04 [-0.09 to 0.18] and 0.01 [-0.01 to 0.02]). Funnel plot asymmetry suggested publication bias for initiation and 1- to 3-month any breastfeeding. Estimates were slightly larger among interventions with prenatal and postpartum components, 3 to 6 patient contacts, and delivery by an International Board Certified Lactation Consultant or lay provider. LIMITATIONS: The published evidence for Latinas is limited, and studies have varying methodologic rigor. CONCLUSIONS: Breastfeeding interventions targeting Latinas increased any and exclusive breastfeeding compared with usual care.
Authors: Jeanne-Marie Guise; Valerie Palda; Carolyn Westhoff; Benjamin K S Chan; Mark Helfand; Tracy A Lieu Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2003 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166