| Literature DB >> 28070352 |
Netalie Shloim1, McJ Rudolf2, R G Feltbower1, L Mohebati3, M Hetherington1.
Abstract
We examined mealtime interactions to assess whether they varied according to maternal body mass index, country and mode of feeding in 41 Israeli and UK mother-infant dyads. Feeding behaviours were coded using the Simple Feeding Element Scale. Significantly, more UK mothers breastfed during the filmed meal compared to Israeli mothers. Mealtime interactions did not vary according to maternal body mass index or country. Women who breastfed (as opposed to those who bottle fed or fed solids) provided fewer distractions during the meal, a more ideal feeding environment and fed more responsively.Entities:
Keywords: breastfeeding; feeding cues; infants; mealtime interactions; obesity
Year: 2015 PMID: 28070352 PMCID: PMC5193277 DOI: 10.1177/2055102915579605
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Health Psychol Open ISSN: 2055-1029
The Simple Feeding Elements Scale (SFES): description of elements.
| Element | Description of element |
|---|---|
| Setting | Absence of distractions during the meal such as no TV, no toys and so on. A less ideal feeding occurs while the infant is watching the TV while eating. |
| Positioning | Infant and caregiver face each other during the meal. A less ideal positing is while an eye-contact is impossible. |
| Mood and atmosphere | Caregiver enjoys the mealtime interaction compared to caregivers feeling annoyed or irritated during the feed. |
| Child participation | Infant is encouraged to participate in self-feeding. A less positive feed is while the caregiver restrains infants’ attempts to self-feed, by removing the plate, for example. |
| Pacing | Caregiver allows the infant to set the pace of eating. |
| Avoids feeding while distracted | Caregiver avoids feeding the infant when distracted. |
| Avoids feeding while disengaging | Caregiver avoids feeding when the infant needs a break (i.e. is disengaging). |
| Qualitative aspects of verbal communication | Caregiver avoids using commands or negative comments during the mealtime such as ‘eat this’, ‘no more of this’ and so on. |
| Quantitative aspects of verbal communications | Caregiver talks to the infant during the mealtime. A less ideal feed is while no vocalization is observed. |
| Fruits, vegetables and breast milk | The meal contains fruits, vegetables and/or breast milk. |
Participants’ characteristics.
| Mean (SD) | Median | IQR | Missing data (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mother’s age (years) | 41 | 34.1 (3.8) | 33 | 26–40 | – |
| Israel | 23 | 34.6 (4.1) | 26 | 26–40 | – |
| The United Kingdom | 18 | 33.8 (2.9) | 29 | 29–40 | – |
| Number of children before pregnancy | |||||
| None | 14 (35) | – | |||
| One or more | 26 (65) | – | 1 | 0–8 | 2.2 |
| Level of education | |||||
| No degree | 3 (7) | – | 5 | 4–5 | 4.4 |
| Degree or higher | 36 (93) | – | |||
| Mother’s BMI (kg/m2) | |||||
| ⩾18.5 < 25 | 28 (68) | 24 (3.4) | 24.3 | 18.1–32.8 | 8.8 |
| ⩾25 | 13 (32) | ||||
| Ever breastfed | |||||
| Yes | 32 (78) | – | – | – | 8.8 |
| No | 9 (22) | – | – | – | |
| Duration of breastfeeding | |||||
| Less than 12 weeks | 4 (12) | 22 | |||
| 12 weeks or more | 31 (88) | ||||
| Breastfeeding during filming | |||||
| Israel | 6 (26) | – | |||
| The United Kingdom | 14 (77) | _ | |||
| Other feeding during meal | |||||
| Israel | 17 (74) | _ | |||
| The United Kingdom | 4 (23) | _ | |||
| Infant’s age at filming (weeks) | |||||
| 40 | 21.5 (9.4) | 23 | 5–24 | 2.5 | |
| Israel | 23 | 17.7 (6.4) | 20 | 5–24 | 2.5 |
| The United Kingdom | 17 | 23.7 (3.7) | 24 | 16–27 | 2.5 |
| Infant’s weight (kg) | 40 | 6.5 (1.3) | 6.8 | 3.3–9.2 | 2.5 |
| Infant’s | 33 | −0.89 (1.09) | _ | −3.07[ | 12 |
BMI: body mass index; SD: standard deviation; IQR: interquartile range.
Levels of education: 4 = no degree; 5 = degree or higher qualification.
One baby was born pre-term, so the Z-score was excluded from this range.
The Simple Feeding Elements Scale (SFES) distribution of scores divided by total sample size, BMI and type of filmed feeding.
| Setting | Positioning | Mood and atmosphere | Child participation | Pacing | Feeding while distracted | Feeding while disengaging | Qualitative aspects of verbal communication | Quantitative aspects of verbal communication | Fruit and vegetables | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Less ideal | 2 (5%) | 7 (7%) | 1 (3%) | 4 (10%) | 6 (15%) | 6 (15%) | 15 (37%) | 2 (5%) | 9 (22%) | – |
| Average | 8 (20%) | 8 (20%) | 9 (22%) | 5 (12%) | 8 (19%) | 6 (13%) | 4 (10%) | 18 (44%) | ||
| More ideal | 8 (19%) | 6 (14%) | ||||||||
| Less ideal | 2 (8%) | 5 (18%) | 2 (8%) | 2 (8%) | 5 (18%) | 10 (37%) | 1 (4%) | 6 (22%) | ||
| Average | 4 (15%) | 7 (26%) | 8 (30%) | 6 (22%) | 5 (18%) | 3 (11%) | 2 (8%) | 9 (33%) | ||
| More ideal | 5 (19%) | 3 (11%) | ||||||||
| Less ideal | 1 (7%) | 2 (13%) | 1 (7%) | 2 (13%) | 3 (20%) | 2 (13%) | 6 (40%) | 1 (7%) | ||
| Average | 3 (20%) | 5 (33%) | 3 (20%) | 1 (7%) | 3 (20%) | 1 (7%) | 2 (13%) | |||
| More ideal | 2 (14%) | 2 (13%) | 7 (47%) | |||||||
| Less ideal | 1 (5%) | 3 (14%) | 1 (5%) | 2 (10%) | 4 (19%) | 1 (5%) | 2 (10%) | |||
| Average | 1 (5%) | 2 (9%) | 2 (10%) | 2 (10%) | 1 (5%) | 3 (14%) | 1 (5%) | 3 (14%) | ||
| More ideal | 2 (10%) | 3 (14%) | ||||||||
| Less ideal | 1 (5%) | 4 (20%) | 1 (5%) | 2 (10%) | 6 (30%) | 4 (20%) | 1 (5%) | 6 (30%) | ||
| Average | 7 (35%) | 6 (30%) | 7 (35%) | 2 (10%) | 6 (30%) | 3 (15%) | 3 (15) | |||
| More ideal | 7 (25%) | 7 (35%) | 5 (25%) | 6 (30%) |
BMI: body mass index.
Figure 1.Percentages of participants with more ideal scores distributed by participants’ BMI.
No significant differences.
Figure 2.Percentages of participants with more ideal scores distributed by mode of feeding.
*Significant at p < 0.05 using Mann–Whitney test with mode of feeding as the main effect.
Simple Feeding Elements Scale (SFES) bivariate correlation matrix of mean scores.
| Setting | Positioning | Mood and atmosphere | Child participation | Pacing | Feeding while distracted | Feeding while disengaging | Qualitative verbal | Quantitative verbal | Fruit and vegetables | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Setting | 1.00 | |||||||||
| Positioning | 0.21 | 1.00 | ||||||||
| Mood and atmosphere | 0.41 | 0.09 | 1.00 | |||||||
| Child participation | 0.11 | −0.42 | 0.19 | 1.00 | ||||||
| Pacing | 0.18 | −0.48 | 0.14 | 0.62 | 1.00 | |||||
| Feeding while distracted | 0.50 | −0.09 | 0.41 | 0.39 | 0.62 | 1.00 | ||||
| Feeding while disengaging | 0.08 | −0.36 | 0.24 | 0.48 | 0.65 | 0.60 | 1.00 | |||
| Qualitative verbal | 0.06 | −0.70 | 0.09 | 0.65 | 0.69 | 0.31 | 0.51 | 1.00 | ||
| Quantitative verbal | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.45 | −0.13 | 0.00 | 0.08 | −0.03 | −0.16 | 1.00 | |
| Fruit and vegetables | 0.21 | −0.17 | 0.17 | 0.40 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.46 | 0.21 | −0.07 | 1.00 |
Spearman’s correlation test.
Correlation is significant at the <0.05 level (two-tailed).
Correlation is significant at the <0.01 level (two-tailed).
Figure 3.Percentages of participants with more ideal scores distributed by country.
No significant differences.