| Literature DB >> 33861515 |
Mackenzie Green1, Alissa M Pries2, Dian N Hadihardjono3, Doddy Izwardy4, Elizabeth Zehner2, Victoria Hall Moran5.
Abstract
Suboptimal breastfeeding is common in Indonesia, with only half of infants 0-5 months of age exclusively breastfed and feeding of breastmilk substitutes (BMS) highly prevalent among infants and toddlers. Various factors influence these feeding practices, including social norms, limited health system support and BMS manufacturer marketing practices. This cross-sectional survey aimed to identify the prevalence of breastfeeding and BMS feeding among children aged 0-35 months, explore socio-demographic characteristics and motivating factors associated with these feeding behaviours and identify the prevalence of mothers' exposure to BMS promotions. Indonesian mothers of children <3 years of age (n = 595) were interviewed in Bandung City health facilities using structured questionnaires. Although all children were ever breastfed, half of children across all age groups received BMS in the previous day. Maternal employment outside the home and insufficient breastmilk production were associated with BMS use. The most important motivational factors for feeding BMS were perceived benefits for growth, intelligence and immunity. Despite Indonesian legislation restricting some BMS marketing, 93% of mothers reported observing a BMS promotion outside the health system, with television, social media and newspapers as the most common sources. Half of mothers (43%) reported observing a BMS promotion within the health system, and half (46%) reported receiving recommendations from health workers to use BMS. Such high prevalence of BMS marketing may be influencing caregivers' feeding choices; stronger national legislation and implementation of laws are needed to ensure mothers' ability to make feeding choices free from manufacturer influence.Entities:
Keywords: International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes; breastfeeding; breastmilk substitutes; infancy and childhood; infant feeding decisions; infant formula; marketing; policy
Year: 2021 PMID: 33861515 PMCID: PMC8189241 DOI: 10.1111/mcn.13189
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Matern Child Nutr ISSN: 1740-8695 Impact factor: 3.092
FIGURE 1Percentage of children by breastfeeding‐BMS feeding status, across age groups (n=565). *p‐value < 0.01 difference between age‐group and next oldest age‐group. Significance testing was conducted using multinomial logistic regression adjusted for cluster at the facility level. BF‐BMS feeding status based on consumption in the previous day and does not account for consumption of other liquids or foods in the previous day. BF = breastfeeding; BF + BMS = breastfeeding and BMS feeding; BMS = BMS feeding; Neither = received neither breastfeeding nor BMS. Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
Maternal and child demographic characteristics by child breastfeeding‐BMS feeding status
| Characteristic | All children ( | BF ( | BF + BMS ( | BMS ( | Neither ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maternal age (years) | 29.8 ± 5.6 | 29.3 ± 5.7 | 29.9 ± 5.7 | 30.5 ± 5.5 | 30.0 ± 5.3 | .259 |
| Primiparous | 38.2 (227) | 39.0 (94) | 36.4 (44) | 43.5 (70) | 26.4 (19) | .067 |
| Maternal education | ||||||
| Elementary, junior high | 20.8 (124) | 23.7 (57) | 15.7 (19) | 17.4 (28) | 27.8 (20) | .090 |
| Senior high | 43.4 (258) | 44.0 (106) | 42.2 (51) | 39.8 (64) | 51.4 (37) | .487 |
| Diploma, university | 35.8 (213) | 32.4 (78) | 42.2 (51) | 42.9 (69) | 20.8 (15) | .012 |
| Maternal employment outside home in past month | 22.0 (131) | 14.5 (35) | 33.9 (41) | 27.3 (44) | 15.3 (11) | <.001 |
| Household wealth tercile | ||||||
| Lowest wealth | 32.9 (196) | 37.8 (91) | 27.3 (33) | 25.5 (41) | 43.1 (31) | .083 |
| Middle wealth | 31.1 (185) | 27.8 (67) | 33.1 (40) | 35.4 (57) | 29.2 (21) | .433 |
| Highest wealth | 36.0 (214) | 34.4 (83) | 39.7 (48) | 39.1 (63) | 27.8 (20) | .491 |
| Child age (months) | 17.3 ± 10.5 | 12.6 ± 8.4 | 12.8 ± 9.1 | 22.5 ± 9.5 | 29.4 ± 4.1 | <.001 |
| Child sex (male) | 54.3 (323) | 54.4 (131) | 49.6 (60) | 56.5 (91) | 56.9 (41) | .424 |
Note: Data presented as percentage (n) or mean ± standard deviation. Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding. BF‐BMS feeding status is based on consumption in the previous day and does not account for consumption of other liquids or foods in the previous day. BF = breastfeeding; BF + BMS = breastfeeding and BMS feeding; BMS = BMS feeding; Neither = received neither breastfeeding nor BMS. Significance testing was conducted using multinomial logistic regression adjusted for cluster at the facility level.
Mean score for factors motivating mothers to breastfeed by maternal characteristics and breastfeeding‐BMS feeding status
| Characteristics | Breastfeeding motivational factors | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthier/better immunity | Supports growth | Child smart/intelligent | Health providers recommend | Family and friends recommend | Saves money | |
| All mothers breastfeeding ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
| Maternal education | ||||||
| Elementary, junior high ( | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.0 ± 0.0 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
| Senior high ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.2 | 3.7 ± 0.6 | 3.2 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
| Diploma, university ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.4 ± 0.9 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
|
| .262 | .531 | .811 | .001 | .408 | .998 |
| Maternal employment | ||||||
| Yes ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.4 | 3.5 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.7 |
| No ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
|
| .946 | .512 | .732 | .050 | .056 | .636 |
| Household wealth tercile | ||||||
| Low wealth ( | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
| Middle wealth ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.7 |
| High wealth ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.9 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
|
| 0.412 | 0.538 | 0.398 | 0.947 | 0.749 | 0.786 |
| Child age group (months) | ||||||
| 0–5.9 ( | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.4 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
| 6.0–11.9 ( | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.0 ± 0.0 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.5 ± 0.8 |
| 12.0–23.9 ( | 4.0 ± 0.0 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.7 ± 0.6 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.7 ± 0.7 |
| 24.0–35.9 ( | 4.0 ± 0.0 | 3.9 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.2 | 3.7 ± 0.5 | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.7 |
|
| .106 | .036 | .265 | .046 | .137 | .508 |
| BF‐BMS feeding status | ||||||
| BF ( | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.3 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.9 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
| BF + BMS ( | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.7 ± 0.5 | 3.4 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
|
| .356 | .165 | .469 | .396 | .136 | .651 |
Note: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation. Scores for each factor listed vertically in the table. BF‐BMS feeding status is based on consumption in the previous day and does not account for consumption of other liquids or foods in the previous day. BF = breastfeeding; BF + BMS = breastfeeding and BMS feeding; BMS = BMS feeding; Neither = received neither breastfeeding nor BMS. Significance testing was conducted using linear regression adjusted for cluster at facility‐level.
Mean score for factors motivating mothers to provide BMS by maternal characteristics and breastfeeding‐BMS feeding status
| Characteristics | BMS feeding motivational factors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthier/better immunity | Supports growth | Child smart/intelligent | Health providers recommend | Family and friends recommend | Maternal work | Insufficient Breastmilk | |
| All mothers feeding BMS ( | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 1.0 | 3.3 ± 0.9 |
| Maternal education | |||||||
| Elementary, junior high ( | 3.3 ± 0.9 | 3.5 ± 0.7 | 3.6 ± 0.7 | 3.1 ± 1.0 | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.3 ± 1.2 | 3.4 ± 0.8 |
| Senior high ( | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.5 ± 1.0 | 3.3 ± 1.0 |
| Diploma, university ( | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.7 | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 2.5 ± 0.9 | 2.7 ± 1.0 | 3.3 ± 0.9 |
|
| .048 | .041 | .002 | .321 | .230 | .042 | .505 |
| Maternal employment | |||||||
| Yes ( | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.7 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 2.5 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.5 ± 0.8 |
| No ( | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.2 ± 0.8 | 3.0 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 2.3 ± 1.0 | 3.2 ± 1.0 |
|
| .063 | .164 | .187 | .403 | .228 | <.001 | .029 |
| Household wealth tercile | |||||||
| Low wealth ( | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 3.5 ± 0.7 | 3.5 ± 0.7 | 3.0 ± 1.0 | 2.6 ± 1.0 | 2.5 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 0.9 |
| Middle wealth ( | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 1.1 | 3.2 ± 0.9 |
| High wealth ( | 3.0 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.7 | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 2.5 ± 0.8 | 2.5 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 0.9 |
|
| .474 | .279 | .006 | .149 | .128 | .830 | .363 |
| Child age group (months) | |||||||
| 0–5.9 ( | 2.8 ± 0.8 | 3.2 ± 0.7 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 0.9 |
| 6.0–11.9 ( | 2.8 ± 0.8 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.8 ± 1.0 | 3.5 ± 0.7 |
| 12.0–23.9 ( | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 1.0 | 2.5 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 1.1 | 3.6 ± 0.7 |
| 24.0–35.9 ( | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.5 ± 0.6 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 2.4 ± 1.0 | 3.0 ± 1.1 |
|
| .008 | .027 | .403 | .635 | .857 | .340 | .003 |
| BF‐BMS feeding status | |||||||
| BMS ( | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.5 ± 0.7 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 2.4 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 0.9 |
| BF + BMS ( | 2.8 ± 0.8 | 3.2 ± 0.7 | 3.1 ± 0.8 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 2.8 ± 1.0 | 3.3 ± 0.9 |
|
| .001 | .001 | .407 | .028 | .369 | .021 | .272 |
Note: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation. Scores for each factor listed vertically in the table. BF‐BMS feeding status is based on consumption in the previous day and does not account for consumption of other liquids or foods in the previous day. BF = breastfeeding; BF + BMS = breastfeeding and BMS feeding; BMS = BMS feeding; Neither = received neither breastfeeding nor BMS. Significance testing was conducted using linear regression adjusted for cluster at facility‐level.
Percentage of mothers reporting their opinion of the best infant/child feeding practice by their breastfeeding‐BMS feeding status across age groups
| Opinion on best way to feed a baby | BF ( | BF + BMS ( | BMS ( | Neither ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ‘Breastfeeding’ | 80.9 (195) | 56.2 (68) | 52.8 (85) | 83.3 (60) | <.001 |
| ‘Mix of both breastfeeding and formula feeding’ | 4.6 (11) | 7.4 (9) | 8.1 (13) | 1.4 (1) | .379 |
| ‘Formula feeding’ | 0.4 (1) | 0.0 (0) | 3.1 (5) | 1.4 (1) | <.001 |
| ‘Breastfeeding and formula feeding are equally good ways to feed a baby’ | 14.1 (34) | 36.4 (44) | 36.0 (58) | 13.9 (10) | <.001 |
Note: Data presented as percentage (n). Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding. BF‐BMS feeding status is based on consumption in the previous day and does not account for consumption of other liquids or foods in the previous day. BF = breastfeeding; BF + BMS = breastfeeding and BMS feeding; BMS = BMS feeding; Neither = received neither breastfeeding nor BMS. Significance testing was conducted using multinomial logistic regression adjusted for cluster at facility‐level. Overall, p‐value is <.001.
|
|
|
My baby will have healthier/better immunity Breastfeeding supports my child's growth It will make my baby smart/intelligent It is what the health providers recommend that I should do It is what my relatives/friends believe I should do Breastfeeding is less expensive than feeding with breastmilk substitutes (saves money) |
|
|
|
My baby will have healthier/better immunity with breastmilk substitutes Breastmilk substitutes support my child's growth It will make my baby smart/intelligent It is what the health providers recommend that I should do It is what my relatives/friends believe I should do I need to work I did not have enough breastmilk/my breastmilk did not satisfy my baby |