| Literature DB >> 32100818 |
Yongshuo Yin1, Zhiyong Yu1, Min Zhao2, Yuemei Wang3, Xiao Guan4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the potential risk factors for acute mastitis during lactation comprehensively. Subsequently, to evaluate logistic regression model in predicting the risk of lactational mastitis in Chinese women by applying receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Entities:
Keywords: Breastfeeding; Logistic Regression; Mastitis; ROC curve; Risk factors
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32100818 PMCID: PMC7087359 DOI: 10.1042/BSR20190919
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosci Rep ISSN: 0144-8463 Impact factor: 3.840
Figure 1Implementation flow chart in the research
The procedures of research were divided into design phase, implementation phase and data analysis phase. Each variable in the questionnaire was assigned, and the original data were encoded and entered into the Excel table, which were imported into the SPSS software package for statistical analyses. Strict quality control was essential to avoid measurement bias from investigators and respondents.
Figure 2The flow chart of 1679 respondents distribution
In the case, 768 patients agreed to participate and only 691 patients completed the questionnaires, the other 77 cases were unfinished due to poor communication and cooperation during the investigation and no response/lost follow-up. Finally, 652 cases were qualified, the remaining 39 cases were excluded owing to incomplete information collection/multiple selection or mission of the options in the questionnaire. In the control, 846 healthy women with breastfeeding experience were recruited into our study as controls and 581 females completed the investigation in the end. There were finally 1233 patients recruited as cases or controls, and 466 respondents left during study period due to a variety of reasons. *Cases: women with infectious mastitis in lactation. **Controls: women with breastfeeding experience
Sociodemographic characteristics of 1233 women who participated in the case–control study
| Variables | Case, | Control, | Crude OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age range at last delivery | 0.318 | ||||
| <25 | 37 (5.7) | 23 (4.0) | 0.791 | 0.396–1.580 | |
| 25–29 | 411 (63.0) | 361 (62.1) | 1.118 | 0.694–1.802 | |
| 30–35 | 162 (24.8) | 164 (28.2) | 1.288 | 0.778–2.135 | |
| >35 | 42 (6.4) | 33 (5.7) | Reference | ||
| Residence | 0.087 | ||||
| Urban | 487 (74.7) | 458 (78.8) | 0.713 | 0.440–1.476 | |
| Rural | 165 (25.3) | 123 (21.2) | Reference | ||
| Occupation | 0.163 | ||||
| Professional women | 416 (63.8) | 388 (66.8) | 0.862 | 0.559–1.143 | |
| Housewife | 236 (36.2) | 193 (33.2) | Reference | ||
| Education | 0.010 | ||||
| Bachelor or below | 588 (90.2) | 505 (86.9) | 1.248 | 1.055–1.475 | |
| Master or above | 64 (9.8) | 76 (13.1) | Reference | ||
| Total | 652 | 581 |
Significant at α ≤ 0.05
Univariate analyses of 1233 women who participated in the case–control study
| Variables | Cases, | Controls, | Crude OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delivery and postpartum characteristics | |||||
| Delivery number | 0.018 | ||||
| Primiparous | 405 (62.1) | 322 (55.4) | 2.669 | 1.322–4.078 | |
| Multiparous | 247 (37.9) | 259 (44.6) | Reference | ||
| Delivery mode | 0.011 | ||||
| Vaginal | 395 (60.6) | 393 (67.6) | 0.758 | 0.599–0.959 | |
| Caesarean section | 257 (39.4) | 188 (21.2) | Reference | ||
| Mastitis in previous breastfeeding | <0.001 | ||||
| Yes | 132 (53.4) | 56 (21.6) | 1.582 | 1.258–1.988 | |
| No | 115 (46.6) | 203 (78.4) | Reference | ||
| First contact with child | 0.001 | ||||
| ≤ 1 h | 577 (88.5) | 547 (94.1) | 0.478 | 0.314–0.729 | |
| > 1 h | 75 (11.5) | 34 (5.9) | Reference | ||
| Separation of mother-infant | 0.013 | ||||
| > 24 h | 61 (9.4) | 32 (5.5) | 3.226 | 1.887–5.525 | |
| ≤ 24 h | 591 (90.6) | 549 (94.5) | Reference | ||
| Smoking / Drinking | 0.869 | ||||
| Yes | 21 (3.2) | 17 (2.9) | 0.906 | 0.473–1.734 | |
| No | 631 (96.8) | 564 (97.1) | Reference | ||
| Breastfeeding behaviors and characteristics | |||||
| Feeding type | 0.002 | ||||
| Exclusive | 463 (71.0) | 461 (79.4) | |||
| Mixed | 181 (27.8) | 118 (20.3) | |||
| Formula | 8 (1.2) | 2 (0.3) | Reference | ||
| Nipple’s heteroplasia | <0.001 | ||||
| Nipple retraction | 67 (10.3) | 6 (1.0) | 12.530 | 5.378–29.192 | |
| Nipple applanation | 122 (18.7) | 52 (9.0) | 4.617 | 1.883–11.324 | |
| Large nipple | 16 (2.5) | 6 (1.0) | 4.063 | 1.156–14.277 | |
| No | 447 (68.6) | 517 (89.0) | Reference | ||
| Cracked nipple | <0.001 | ||||
| Yes | 389 (59.7) | 103 (17.7) | 6.864 | 5.270–8.940 | |
| No | 263 (40.3) | 478 (82.3) | Reference | ||
| Breast trauma by external force | <0.001 | ||||
| Yes | 129 (19.8) | 65 (11.2) | 7.152 | 5.296–9.656 | |
| No | 523 (80.2) | 516 (88.8) | Reference | ||
| Breastfeeding behaviors and characteristics | |||||
| Sleeping posture | 0.002 | ||||
| Prone position | 28 (4.3) | 12 (2.1) | 3.630 | 1.748–7.602 | |
| Lateral position | 304 (46.6) | 233 (40.1) | 2.650 | 1.546–3.867 | |
| Supine position | 320 (49.1) | 336 (57.8) | Reference | ||
| Clean nipple before breastfeeding | 0.002 | ||||
| Yes | 457 (70.1) | 452 (77.8) | 0.449 | 0.324–0.624 | |
| No | 195 (29.9) | 129 (22.2) | Reference | ||
| Breast pump | 0.007 | ||||
| Yes | 442 (67.8) | 351 (60.4) | 5.940 | 4.638–7.608 | |
| No | 210 (32.2) | 230 (39.6) | Reference | ||
| Non-medical staff massage | 0.008 | ||||
| Yes | 305 (46.8) | 228 (39.2) | 7.115 | 5.506–9.194 | |
| No | 347 (53.2) | 353 (60.8) | Reference | ||
| Maternal BMI | 0.272 | ||||
| < 18.5 | 35 (5.4) | 19 (3.3) | 1.779 | 0.961–3.292 | |
| 18.5–22.9 | 117 (17.9) | 113 (19.4) | 1.569 | 0.866–2.842 | |
| 23.0–25.0 | 202 (31.0) | 172 (29.6) | 1.712 | 0.957–3.064 | |
| > 25.0 | 298 (45.7) | 277 (47.7) | Reference | ||
| Throat infection | 0.014 | ||||
| Yes | 116 (17.8) | 74 (12.7) | 1.483 | 1.081–2.034 | |
| No | 536 (82.2) | 507 (87.3) | Reference | ||
| Anemia | 0.032 | ||||
| Yes | 73 (11.2) | 44 (7.6) | 1.541 | 1.041–2.281 | |
| No | 578 (88.8) | 537 (92.4) | Reference | ||
| Unauthorized oral antibiotics | 0.039 | ||||
| Yes | 122 (18.7) | 83 (14.3) | 1.951 | 1.456–2.615 | |
| No | 530 (81.3) | 498 (85.7) | Reference | ||
| Psychological mood | 0.001 | ||||
| Negative | 498 (76.4) | 393 (67.6) | 3.771 | 2.806–5.068 | |
| Positive | 154 (23.6) | 188 (32.4) | Reference | ||
| Infants practices and characteristics | |||||
| Sucking manners | <0.001 | ||||
| Nipple sucking | 146 (22.4) | 72 (12.4) | 3.734 | 2.777–5.022 | |
| Nipple shields | 32 (4.9) | 9 (1.5) | 1.381 | 0.602–3.169 | |
| Areola sucking | 474 (72.7) | 500 (86.1) | Reference | ||
| Sleep with sucking | 0.001 | ||||
| Yes | 349 (53.5) | 255 (43.9) | 4.159 | 3.239–5.342 | |
| No | 303 (46.5) | 326 (56.1) | Reference | ||
| Connection difficulty | <0.001 | ||||
| Yes | 114 (17.5) | 58 (10.0) | 4.598 | 3.056–6.920 | |
| No | 538 (82.5) | 523 (90.0) | Reference | ||
| Oral dysplasia | 0.008 | ||||
| Yes | 58 (8.9) | 29 (5.0) | 1.571 | 1.013–2.437 | |
| No | 594 (91.1) | 552 (95.0) | Reference |
Significant at α ≤ 0.05
Data from primiparous women were excluded for this analysis.
Factors significantly associated with mastitis risk in a previous univariate analysis that were included in the multivariate logistic regression
| Variables | Adjusted OR | 95%CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Education | |||
| Bachelor or below | 1.237 | 0.795–2.109 | 0.315 |
| Master or above | Reference | ||
| Delivery number | |||
| Primiparous | 2.233 | 1.602–3.113 | <0.001 |
| Multiparous | Reference | ||
| Delivery mode | |||
| Vaginal | 0.702 | 0.527–0.934 | 0.015 |
| Caesarean section | Reference | ||
| Sleeping posture | |||
| Prone position | 2.105 | 0.942–4.703 | 0.007 |
| Lateral position | 1.502 | 1.133–1.991 | |
| Supine position | Reference | ||
| Mastitis in previous breastfeeding | |||
| Yes | 4.945 | 3.123–7.829 | <0.001 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Nipple's heteroplasia | |||
| Nipple retraction | 9.114 | 3.629–22.884 | |
| Nipple applanation | 1.632 | 1.070–2.490 | <0.001 |
| Large nipple | 1.853 | 0.588–5.845 | |
| No | Reference | ||
| Cracked nipple | |||
| Yes | 5.807 | 4.334–7.782 | <0.001 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Clean nipple before breastfeeding | |||
| Yes | 0.681 | 0.499–0.929 | 0.015 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Breast pump | |||
| Yes | 1.348 | 1.015–1.790 | 0.039 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Non-medical staff massage | |||
| Yes | 1.286 | 0.975–1.695 | 0.074 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Breast trauma by external force | |||
| Yes | 1.845 | 1.256–2.711 | 0.002 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Sucking manners | |||
| Nipple sucking | 1.664 | 1.141–2.427 | 0.007 |
| Nipple shields | 2.486 | 0.977–6.327 | |
| Areola sucking | Reference | ||
| Sleep with sucking | |||
| Yes | 1.460 | 1.110–1.921 | 0.007 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Connection difficulty | |||
| Yes | 1.015 | 0.662–1.555 | 0.946 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Oral dysplasia | |||
| Yes | 2.026 | 1.160–3.539 | 0.013 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Anemia | |||
| Yes | 1.378 | 0.846–2.245 | 0.198 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Throat infection | |||
| Yes | 1.552 | 0.961–2.507 | 0.072 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Unauthorized oral antibiotics | |||
| Yes | 1.057 | 0.666–1.676 | 0.814 |
| No | Reference | ||
| Psychological mood | |||
| Negative | 1.328 | 0.981–1.797 | 0.066 |
| Positive | Reference | ||
| First contact with child | |||
| ≤ 1h | 0.565 | 0.340–0.938 | 0.027 |
| > 1h | Reference | ||
| Separation of mother-infant | |||
| > 24h | 1.613 | 0.933–2.790 | 0.087 |
| ≤ 24h | Reference |
Significant at α ≤ 0.05
Figure 3Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for logistic regression model
The model 1 was established according to the related factors including mastitis in previous breastfeeding, abnormal nipple’s development, cracked nipple, breast trauma, poor connection of mother-infant, unauthorized oral antibiotics, tongue-tie, maternal BMI, psychologic status, and education, of which AUC was 0.7687, and 95%CI was 0.7424–0.7950. The model 2 was set up based on the following factors such as deliver mode, deliver number, sleeping posture, breast pumps, clean nipple before breastfeeding, first contact with child within 1 h, sucking manners, sleep with sucking, non-medical staff massage and tongue-tie, and combined with the indicators from model 1 to perform ROC curve analysis, of which AUC was 0.8122, and 95%CI was 0.7885–0.8360. Models 1 and 2 are statistically significant for the ability to screen and discriminate mastitis (χ2 = 33.2405, P < 0.0001).