Morteza Ghojazadeh 1 , Sakineh Hajebrahimi 1 , Fatemeh Pournaghi-Azar 2 , Mohammad Mohseni 3 , Naser Derakhshani 4 , Saber Azami-Aghdash 5 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Evaluating the effect of Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) on breastfeeding success shows conflicting results. Regarding the importance of breastfeeding and uncertainties about its effect, this study intended to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on the effect of KMC on success of breastfeeding. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, required data were collected by searching the following keywords: breastfeeding, Breast-Feeding, "skin-to-skin", "Kangaroo Mother Care", randomized clinical trial. The following databases were searched: Google Scholar, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Two authors independently extracted the data. To estimate the Breast-Feeding outcome variables, CMA2 software was used. The risk of bias of studies was assessed with the criteria developed in the Cochrane Handbook. RESULTS: Twenty articles were included. In the KMC and CNC groups, 1,432 and 1,410 neonates were examined. Breastfeeding success rate was higher in the KMC group within different time slots, however this difference was not statistically significant (RR=1.11(95CI, 0.93-1.34) and RR=1.13(95%CI, 0.92-1.34) based on the time slot and birth weight, respectively). The inter-groups differences in the mean scores of Infant Breast-Feeding Assessment Tool (IBFAT) were statistically significant (P<0.05). Breastfeeding was initiated very sooner in the KMC group, suggesting a statistically significant inter-groups difference -0.72(95%CI, from -0.92 to -0.53) (P<0.05). Majority of the studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Findings indicated a superiority of KMC over CNC in terms of breastfeeding success. Assessment of the complications and costs of KMC implementation is recommended. Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Evaluating the effect of Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) on breastfeeding success shows conflicting results. Regarding the importance of breastfeeding and uncertainties about its effect, this study intended to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on the effect of KMC on success of breastfeeding. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, required data were collected by searching the following keywords: breastfeeding, Breast-Feeding, "skin-to-skin", "Kangaroo Mother Care", randomized clinical trial. The following databases were searched: Google Scholar, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Two authors independently extracted the data. To estimate the Breast-Feeding outcome variables, CMA2 software was used. The risk of bias of studies was assessed with the criteria developed in the Cochrane Handbook. RESULTS: Twenty articles were included. In the KMC and CNC groups, 1,432 and 1,410 neonates were examined. Breastfeeding success rate was higher in the KMC group within different time slots, however this difference was not statistically significant (RR=1.11(95CI, 0.93-1.34) and RR=1.13(95%CI, 0.92-1.34) based on the time slot and birth weight, respectively). The inter-groups differences in the mean scores of Infant Breast-Feeding Assessment Tool (IBFAT) were statistically significant (P<0.05). Breastfeeding was initiated very sooner in the KMC group, suggesting a statistically significant inter-groups difference -0.72(95%CI, from -0.92 to -0.53) (P<0.05). Majority of the studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Findings indicated a superiority of KMC over CNC in terms of breastfeeding success. Assessment of the complications and costs of KMC implementation is recommended. Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.
Entities: Chemical
Species
Keywords:
Breastfeeding; conventional neonatal care; kangaroo mother care; randomized clinical trial; skin-to-skin; systematiczzm321990review.
Mesh： See more »
Year: 2019
PMID： 30251612 DOI： 10.2174/1574887113666180924165844
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Recent Clin Trials ISSN： 1574-8871