Dataset Information

Clinical Interventions to Promote Breastfeeding by Latinas: A Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT:Breastfeeding duration and exclusivity among Latinas fall below recommended levels, indicating a need for targeted interventions. The effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions for Latinas remains unclear. OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the documented effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions on any and exclusive breastfeeding among Latinas. DATA SOURCES:English-language publications in Medline, CINAHL, and Embase were searched through May 28, 2015. STUDY SELECTION:Fourteen prospective, controlled studies describing 17 interventions met inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION:Extracted study characteristics include study design, population characteristics, intervention components, timing and intensity of delivery, provider type, control procedures, and outcome measures. RESULTS:Random-effects meta-analyses estimated risk differences (RDs) between breastfeeding mothers in intervention and control arms of each study and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) within which 95% of intervals cover the true value estimated by a future study. Interventions increased any breastfeeding at 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 months (RD 0.04 [95% PI -0.15 to 0.23] and 0.08 [-0.08 to 0.25], respectively) and exclusive breastfeeding at 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 months (0.04 [-0.09 to 0.18] and 0.01 [-0.01 to 0.02]). Funnel plot asymmetry suggested publication bias for initiation and 1- to 3-month any breastfeeding. Estimates were slightly larger among interventions with prenatal and postpartum components, 3 to 6 patient contacts, and delivery by an International Board Certified Lactation Consultant or lay provider. LIMITATIONS:The published evidence for Latinas is limited, and studies have varying methodologic rigor. CONCLUSIONS:Breastfeeding interventions targeting Latinas increased any and exclusive breastfeeding compared with usual care.

SUBMITTER: Wouk K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4702022 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical Interventions to Promote Breastfeeding by Latinas: A Meta-analysis.

Wouk Kathryn K Lara-Cinisomo Sandraluz S Stuebe Alison M AM Poole Charles C Petrick Jessica L JL McKenney Kathryn M KM

Pediatrics 20151214 1

<h4>Context</h4>Breastfeeding duration and exclusivity among Latinas fall below recommended levels, indicating a need for targeted interventions. The effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions for Latinas remains unclear.<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically review the documented effectiveness of clinical breastfeeding interventions on any and exclusive breastfeeding among Latinas.<h4>Data sources</h4>English-language publications in Medline, CINAHL, and Embase were searched through May ...[more]

PMID: 26668300

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Exclusive breastfeeding rates in many high-income countries are considerably lower than the World Health Organization recommendations. Younger mothers are less likely than older mothers to exclusively breastfeed or to exclusively breastfeed for a long duration. This systematic review explores interventions to increase the rate of exclusive breastfeeding among young mothers in high-income countries. METHODS:A systematic search of the following databases was completed in August 2020: CINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, ProQuest, PsychInfo, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus and Embase. A manual search of the reference lists of all the included studies and published systematic reviews was also performed. The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies. A random effects model meta-analyses was applied. Heterogeneity of outcomes between the studies was assessed using both the ?2 test and the I2 statistic. RESULTS:Of 955 records identified in the search, 392 duplicates were removed, and nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies were randomised controlled trial (RCTs) and two were quasi-experimental in design. Eight were conducted in the United States. The interventions included peer counselling, telephone support, massage, gift packs, financial incentive and antenatal education. Most studies included a combination of strategies, peer counselling being the most common. A meta-analysis of four of nine included studies did not detect a difference in rate of exclusive breastfeeding to 3 months postpartum (RR 1.44; 95% CI 0.82, 2.55; p?=?0.204). This review is limited by the relatively few studies which met the inclusion criteria and the small sample sizes of most included studies. High rates of attrition and formula supplementation among the participants made it difficult to detect a statistically significant effect. Consistency in follow up times would enable more studies to be included in a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS:Peer counselling was the most promising strategy associated with higher rates of exclusive breastfeeding. However, further studies are needed to understand the breastfeeding experiences of young mothers. Young mothers should be targeted specifically in intervention studies.

Project description:Background:Many infants worldwide are not breastfeeding according to WHO recommendations and this impacts on the health of women and children. Increasing breastfeeding is identified as a priority area supported by current policy targets. However, interventions are complex and multi-component and it is unclear which elements of interventions are most effective to increase breastfeeding in which settings. Breastfeeding counselling is often part of complex interventions but evidence is lacking on the specific effect of counselling interventions on breastfeeding practices. The aim of this systematic review is to examine evidence on effectiveness of breastfeeding counselling to inform global guidelines. Methods:A systematic search was conducted of six electronic databases in January 2018. Randomised controlled trials comparing breastfeeding counselling with no breastfeeding counselling or different formulations of counselling were included if they measured breastfeeding practices between birth and 24?months after birth. Results:From the 5180 records identified in searches and a further 11 records found by hand searching, 63 studies were included. Of these, 48 were individually-randomised trials and 15 were cluster-randomised trials. A total of 69 relevant comparisons were reported involving 33,073 women. There was a significant effect of counselling interventions on any breastfeeding at 4 to 6 weeks (Relative risk [RR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.77, 0.94) and 6 months (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87, 0.94). Greater effects were found on exclusive breastfeeding at 4 to 6 weeks (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72, 0.87) and 6 months (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78, 0.91). Counselling delivered at least four times postnatally is more effective than counselling delivered antenatally only and/or fewer than four times. Evidence was mostly of low quality due to high or unclear risk of bias of the included trials and high heterogeneity. Conclusions:Breastfeeding counselling is an effective public health intervention to increase rates of any and exclusive breastfeeding. Breastfeeding counselling should be provided face-to-face, and in addition, may be provided by telephone, both antenatally and postnatally, to all pregnant women and mothers with young children. To inform scale-up globally there is a need to further understand the elements of breastfeeding interventions such as counselling and their effectiveness in different contexts and circumstances. Study registration:This systematic review was registered in Prospero (CRD42018086494).

Project description:IntroductionExclusive Breastfeeding (EBF) rates remain low in both low-income and high-income countries despite World Health Organization recommendations for EBF till 6 months. Breastfeeding has been shown to have a protective effect against gastrointestinal infections, among other benefits. Large-scale interventions focusing on educating mothers about breastfeeding have the potential to increase breastfeeding prevalence, especially EBF, up to recommended standards and also to decrease infant morbidity.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted for RCTs and quasi-experimental studies comparing breastfeeding education or support to routine care. The effect of interventions was observed for exclusive, predominant, partial and no breastfeeding rates. The time intervals of interest were day 1, <1 month, and 1 to 5 months. Outcome-specific evidence was graded according to the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG) rules using the adapted Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria and recommendations were made from studies in developing countries for inclusion into the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) model.ResultsAfter reviewing 4600 abstracts, 372 studies were selected for full text screening and 110 of these studies were finally included. Statistically significant increases in EBF rates as a result of breastfeeding promotion interventions were observed: 43% at day 1, 30% at <1 month, and 90% at 1-5 months. Rates of 'no breastfeeding' reduced by 32% at 1 day, 30% at <1 month, and 18% at 1-5 months. The effect of interventions on the rates of predominant and partial breastfeeding were non-significant.ConclusionBreastfeeding education and/or support increased EBF rates and decreased no breastfeeding rates at birth, <1 month and 1-5 months. Combined individual and group counseling appeared to be superior to individual or group counseling alone. Interventions in developing countries had a greater impact than those in developed countries.

Dataset Information

Clinical Interventions to Promote Breastfeeding by Latinas: A Meta-analysis.

Publications

Clinical Interventions to Promote Breastfeeding by Latinas: A Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets