An evaluation of the effects of a breastfeeding support program on health outcomes

Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies

BACKGROUND

There is extensive evidence of important health risks for infants and mothers related to not breastfeeding. In 2003, the World Health Organization recommended that infants be breastfed exclusively until six months of age, with breastfeeding continuing as an important part of the infant's diet until at least two years of age. However, current breastfeeding rates in many countries do not reflect this recommendation.

OBJECTIVES

1. To describe types of breastfeeding support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies. 2. To examine the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding support interventions in terms of whether they offered only breastfeeding support or breastfeeding support in combination with a wider maternal and child health intervention ('breastfeeding plus' support).  3. To examine the effectiveness of the following intervention characteristics on breastfeeding support:      a. type of support (e.g. face-to-face, telephone, digital technologies, group or individual support, proactive or reactive);      b. intensity of support (i.e. number of postnatal contacts);      c. person delivering the intervention (e.g. healthcare professional, lay person);     d. to examine whether the impact of support varied between high- and low-and middle-income countries.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (which includes results of searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP)) (11 May 2021) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing extra support for healthy breastfeeding mothers of healthy term babies with usual maternity care. Support could be provided face-to-face, over the phone or via digital technologies. All studies had to meet the trustworthiness criteria.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth methods. Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and study trustworthiness.  The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review includes 116 trials of which 103 contribute data to the analyses. In total more than 98,816 mother-infant pairs were included.  Moderate-certainty evidence indicated that 'breastfeeding only' support probably reduced the number of women stopping breastfeeding for all primary outcomes: stopping any breastfeeding at six months (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.89 to 0.97); stopping exclusive breastfeeding at six months (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.93); stopping any breastfeeding at 4-6 weeks (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.97); and stopping exclusive breastfeeding at 4-6 (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.76 to 0.90). Similar findings were reported for the secondary breastfeeding outcomes except for any breastfeeding at two months and 12 months when the evidence was uncertain if 'breastfeeding only' support helped reduce the number of women stopping breastfeeding.  The evidence for 'breastfeeding plus' was less consistent. For primary outcomes there was some evidence that 'breastfeeding plus' support probably reduced the number of women stopping any breastfeeding (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.97, moderate-certainty evidence) or exclusive breastfeeding at six months (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.90).  'Breastfeeding plus' interventions may have a beneficial effect on reducing the number of women stopping exclusive breastfeeding at 4-6 weeks, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.95). The evidence suggests that 'breastfeeding plus' support probably results in little to no difference in the number of women stopping any breastfeeding at 4-6 weeks (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08, moderate-certainty evidence). For the secondary outcomes, it was uncertain if 'breastfeeding plus' support helped reduce the number of women stopping any or exclusive breastfeeding at any time points.  There were no consistent findings emerging from the narrative synthesis of the non-breastfeeding outcomes (maternal satisfaction with care, maternal satisfaction with feeding method, infant morbidity, and maternal mental health), except for a possible reduction of diarrhoea in intervention infants.  We considered the overall risk of bias of trials included in the review was mixed. Blinding of participants and personnel is not feasible in such interventions and as studies utilised self-report breastfeeding data, there is also a risk of bias in outcome assessment.   We conducted meta-regression to explore substantial heterogeneity for the primary outcomes using the following categories: person providing care; mode of delivery; intensity of support; and income status of country.  It is possible that moderate levels (defined as 4-8 visits) of 'breastfeeding only' support may be associated with a more beneficial effect on exclusive breastfeeding at 4-6 weeks and six months. 'Breastfeeding only' support may also be more effective in reducing women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) stopping exclusive breastfeeding at six months compared to women in high-income countries (HICs). However, no other differential effects were found and thus heterogeneity remains largely unexplained. The meta-regression suggested that there were no differential effects regarding person providing support or mode of delivery, however, power was limited.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When 'breastfeeding only' support is offered to women, the duration and in particular, the exclusivity of breastfeeding is likely to be increased. Support may also be more effective in reducing the number of women stopping breastfeeding at three to four months compared to later time points.  For 'breastfeeding plus' interventions the evidence is less certain. Support may be offered either by professional or lay/peer supporters, or a combination of both. Support can also be offered face-to-face, via telephone or digital technologies, or a combination and may be more effective when delivered on a schedule of four to eight visits. Further work is needed to identify components of the effective interventions and to deliver interventions on a larger scale.

A realist review of one-to-one breastfeeding peer support experiments conducted in developed country settings

The World Health Organisation guidance recommends breastfeeding peer support (BFPS) as part of a strategy to improve breastfeeding rates. In the UK, BFPS is supported by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance and a variety of models are in use. The experimental evidence for BFPS in developed countries is mixed and traditional methods of systematic review are ill-equipped to explore heterogeneity, complexity, and context influences on effectiveness. This review aimed to enhance learning from the experimental evidence base for one-to-one BFPS intervention. Principles of realist review were applied to intervention case studies associated with published experimental studies. The review aimed (a) to explore heterogeneity in theoretical underpinnings and intervention design for one-to-one BFPS intervention; (b) inform design decisions by identifying transferable lessons developed from cross-case comparison of context-mechanism-outcome relationships; and (c) inform evaluation design by identifying context-mechanism-outcome relationships associated with experimental conditions. Findings highlighted poor attention to intervention theory and considerable heterogeneity in BFPS intervention design. Transferable mid-range theories to inform design emerged, which could be grouped into seven categories: (a) congruence with local infant feeding norms, (b) integration with the existing system of health care, (c) overcoming practical and emotional barriers to access, (d) ensuring friendly, competent, and proactive peers, (e) facilitating authentic peer-mother interactions, (f) motivating peers to ensure positive within-intervention amplification, and (g) ensuring positive legacy and maintenance of gains. There is a need to integrate realist principles into evaluation design to improve our understanding of what forms of BFPS work, for whom and under what circumstances.

Lactation Support Services and Breastfeeding Initiation: Evidence from the Affordable Care Act

OBJECTIVE

Despite substantial evidence of the benefits of breastfeeding for both mothers and children, rates of sustained breastfeeding in the United States are quite low. This study examined whether mandated coverage of lactation support services under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) affects breastfeeding behavior.

DATA SOURCE

We studied the census of U.S. births included in the National Vital Statistics System from 2009 to 2014.

STUDY DESIGN

We used regression-adjusted difference-in-differences (DD) to examine changes in breastfeeding rates for privately insured mothers relative to those covered by Medicaid. We adjusted for several health and sociodemographic measures. We also examined the extent to which the effect varied across vulnerable populations-by race/ethnicity, maternal education, WIC status, and mode of delivery.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Results suggest that the ACA mandate increased the probability of breastfeeding initiation by 2.5 percentage points, which translates into about 47,000 more infants for whom breastfeeding was initiated in 2014. We find larger effects for black, less educated, and unmarried mothers.

CONCLUSIONS

The Affordable Care Act-mandated coverage of lactation services increased breastfeeding initiation among privately insured mothers relative to mothers covered by Medicaid. The magnitude of the effect size varied with some evidence of certain groups being more likely to increase breastfeeding rates.

Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies

BACKGROUND

There is extensive evidence of important health risks for infants and mothers related to not breastfeeding. In 2003, the World Health Organization recommended that infants be breastfed exclusively until six months of age, with breastfeeding continuing as an important part of the infant's diet until at least two years of age. However, current breastfeeding rates in many countries do not reflect this recommendation.

OBJECTIVES

To describe forms of breastfeeding support which have been evaluated in controlled studies, the timing of the interventions and the settings in which they have been used.To examine the effectiveness of different modes of offering similar supportive interventions (for example, whether the support offered was proactive or reactive, face-to-face or over the telephone), and whether interventions containing both antenatal and postnatal elements were more effective than those taking place in the postnatal period alone.To examine the effectiveness of different care providers and (where information was available) training.To explore the interaction between background breastfeeding rates and effectiveness of support.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (29 February 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing extra support for healthy breastfeeding mothers of healthy term babies with usual maternity care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review includes 100 trials involving more than 83,246 mother-infant pairs of which 73 studies contribute data (58 individually-randomised trials and 15 cluster-randomised trials). We considered that the overall risk of bias of trials included in the review was mixed. Of the 31 new studies included in this update, 21 provided data for one or more of the primary outcomes. The total number of mother-infant pairs in the 73 studies that contributed data to this review is 74,656 (this total was 56,451 in the previous version of this review). The 73 studies were conducted in 29 countries. Results of the analyses continue to confirm that all forms of extra support analyzed together showed a decrease in cessation of 'any breastfeeding', which includes partial and exclusive breastfeeding (average risk ratio (RR) for stopping any breastfeeding before six months 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 0.95; moderate-quality evidence, 51 studies) and for stopping breastfeeding before four to six weeks (average RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; moderate-quality evidence, 33 studies). All forms of extra support together also showed a decrease in cessation of exclusive breastfeeding at six months (average RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.92; moderate-quality evidence, 46 studies) and at four to six weeks (average RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.89; moderate quality, 32 studies). We downgraded evidence to moderate-quality due to very high heterogeneity.We investigated substantial heterogeneity for all four outcomes with subgroup analyses for the following covariates: who delivered care, type of support, timing of support, background breastfeeding rate and number of postnatal contacts. Covariates were not able to explain heterogeneity in general. Though the interaction tests were significant for some analyses, we advise caution in the interpretation of results for subgroups due to the heterogeneity. Extra support by both lay and professionals had a positive impact on breastfeeding outcomes. Several factors may have also improved results for women practising exclusive breastfeeding, such as interventions delivered with a face-to-face component, high background initiation rates of breastfeeding, lay support, and a specific schedule of four to eight contacts. However, because within-group heterogeneity remained high for all of these analyses, we advise caution when making specific conclusions based on subgroup results. We noted no evidence for subgroup differences for the any breastfeeding outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When breastfeeding support is offered to women, the duration and exclusivity of breastfeeding is increased. Characteristics of effective support include: that it is offered as standard by trained personnel during antenatal or postnatal care, that it includes ongoing scheduled visits so that women can predict when support will be available, and that it is tailored to the setting and the needs of the population group. Support is likely to be more effective in settings with high initiation rates. Support may be offered either by professional or lay/peer supporters, or a combination of both. Strategies that rely mainly on face-to-face support are more likely to succeed with women practising exclusive breastfeeding.

"Be positive as well as realistic": a qualitative description analysis of information gaps experienced by breastfeeding mothers

Background

Early breastfeeding cessation is common in many regions of the world despite high breastfeeding initiation rates and strong evidence of the health benefits to both mother and infant. This research investigated mothers’ perceived breastfeeding information needs in order to increase our understanding of this phenomenon.

Methods

Surveys were distributed by public health nurses in a health region in Western Canada to mothers who had initiated breastfeeding and whose infants were six to eleven months old to learn more about their infant feeding experiences during the birth to six month period. Two open-ended survey questions asked: (1) What support or advice did you receive that helped you with feeding your baby?” and (2) “What support or information on feeding your baby would you have found helpful but did not receive?” A total of 191 eligible mothers submitted a survey (response rate 35%) between January and October 2012. Qualitative description was used in analyzing the responses of the women who provided comments for the open-ended questions.

Results

While many mothers felt their information needs were met, others outlined important content areas where more information and guidance was desired. These areas included milk supply management, frequency/duration of feeds, proper latch and feeding positions, nipple care, expression/pumping, other nutrition sources, and realistic information regarding common breastfeeding concerns.

Conclusions

The results suggest that several of the information gaps highlighted by respondents in this study closely align with commonly cited reasons for breastfeeding cessation including perceived insufficient milk supply, latching difficulties and nipple discomfort. The findings emphasize the need for lactation support with systematic measures to ensure breastfeeding mothers are universally provided with information on these key content areas. Lactation supports should reinforce critical information and seek feedback to ascertain that mothers have clearly understood the information provided. Ensuring mothers receive and understand key breastfeeding information is a modifiable factor in efforts to increase breastfeeding duration rates.