Effect of an integrated community-based package for maternal and newborn care on feeding patterns during the first 12 weeks of life: a cluster-randomized trial in a South African township

Effectiveness of layperson-based interventions in promoting exclusive breastfeeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness of layperson-based interventions in sustaining exclusive breastfeeding and to identify the optimal characteristics of such layperson-led strategies for promoting exclusive breastfeeding.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a comprehensive search in seven electronic databases from their inception to January 2024. Two independent reviewers assessed the risk of bias using version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials.

RESULTS

Out of the 29,703 articles identified, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. A total of 38,412 participants were included in these studies. The majority of the included studies utilized home visits as the intervention method. However, there is limited data available for other interventions, such as group discussions, phone support, short message service, and combined approaches, making it difficult to determine their effectiveness. Laypersons, with or without breastfeeding experience, were found to be effective intervention providers.

DISCUSSION

Home visit interventions conducted by laypersons have proven effective in promoting exclusive breastfeeding. To maximize effectiveness, the content of home visits should be tailored based on the stages of pregnancy, and ideally, the duration of the visits should extend up to six months postpartum to sustain breastfeeding.

REGISTRATION

The protocol for this review is registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021235078). A major deviation from the protocol was the exclusion of network meta-analysis due to the small number of articles identified and the primary outcome being the exclusive breastfeeding rate.

Lessons for the UK on implementation and evaluation of breastfeeding support: evidence syntheses and stakeholder engagement

Background

Breastfeeding impacts positively on multiple health outcomes, but < 50% of UK women breastfeed at 8 weeks. Women with long-term conditions face additional challenges in breastfeeding.

Objectives

To synthesise global and UK evidence to co-create an implementation and evaluation toolkit for cost-effective breastfeeding support in the NHS.

Design

Evidence syntheses with stakeholder engagement.

Review methods

Systematic reviews examined effectiveness of breastfeeding support for (1) healthy women and (2) women with long-term conditions using Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group methods. Mixed-methods systematic reviews synthesised process evaluations of effective breastfeeding support interventions for healthy women and experiences of receiving/providing support for breastfeeding women with long-term conditions. Cross-study synthesis integrated qualitative and quantitative findings. Systematic reviews synthesised evidence on the incremental costs and cost-effectiveness of breastfeeding support following National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. All searches were conducted from May 2021 to October 2022. Stakeholder engagement and toolkit development comprised online discussions, a modified Delphi study, focus groups and four workshops. Participants were 23 stakeholders, 16 parents in the parents' panels, 15 women in the focus groups and 87 stakeholders who attended the workshops.

Results

We found considerably more interventions designed for healthy women (review 1) than aimed at women with long-term conditions (reviews 1 and 4); approximately half of the studies were targeted at groups at higher risk of poor breastfeeding outcomes, and the impact of support may be different in these populations. Despite this, studies from review 2 found that women perceived the provision of support as positive, important and needed. Studies from review 5 echoed a range of suggestions from participants regarding potential strategies to improve breastfeeding support, with the most widely reported being the need to acknowledge the role and influence of other sources of support (e.g. partners, family, friends, peers, external professionals, web-based resources) and involving these sources in the provision of breastfeeding support for women with long-term conditions. In reviews 3 and 6, there was uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of breastfeeding support interventions due to the limited number of studies and lack of good-quality evidence.

Limitations

There was a lack of evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of breastfeeding interventions in the UK. There was often insufficient information reported about intervention characteristics.

Conclusions

'Breastfeeding only' support probably reduces the number of women stopping any or exclusive breastfeeding. The evidence for 'breastfeeding plus' interventions is less consistent, but these may reduce the number of women stopping exclusive breastfeeding at 4-6 weeks and at 6 months. We found no evidence of differential intervention effects regarding mode of provision or provider. Cost-effectiveness is uncertain due to the lack of good-quality evidence. Key enablers of successful implementation were responsiveness and tailoring of interventions to both women's and supporters' needs. Breastfeeding support as delivered in the included studies probably has little to no effect on breastfeeding outcomes for women with long-term conditions. The mixed-methods synthesis and stakeholder work identified that existing interventions may not address the complex needs of these women. The main study output is a co-produced toolkit to guide implementation and evaluation of breastfeeding support services in the UK.

Future work

Evaluation of breastfeeding support for all women, particularly those at risk of poor breastfeeding outcomes (e.g. long-term conditions, deprivation). This could involve tailoring the toolkit to local contexts via implementation and effectiveness studies or using quality improvement studies.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42022337239, CRD42021229769 and CRD42022374509. The reviews of economic evidence were not registered; however, the review protocol can be accessed via the repository held by Queen's University Belfast Research Portal (https://pure.qub.ac.uk/).

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR130995) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 20. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The effect of home nurse visits on infant weight and breastfeeding: Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effects of home nurse visiting on infant weight and breastfeeding; the secondary aim is to determine the duration, frequency and content of home visits.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, CINAHL, Embase (Ovid), Web of Science, Google Scholar and DergiPark databases for publications between September 2000 and January 2019 was conducted using established methods in compliance with the PRISMA-P declaration guideline. Two authors independently evaluated the studies for inclusion and bias, extracted the data and checked their accuracy.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis includes a total of 34 studies, 28 on breastfeeding and nine on infant weight. The average effect size of the 28 studies investigating the effect on breastfeeding was found to be OR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.73-2.90; p < 0.001. The average effect size of the nine studies investigating the effect on infant weight was found to be ES: 0.197; 95% CI: 0.027-0.368; p < 0.05.

CONCLUSION

There is an association between nurse home visits and breastfeeding and infant weight. Home visits by nurses should continue to remain within the nursing role and be analysed appropriately for mother and baby health.

Scoping review of interventions to improve continuity of postdischarge care for newborns in LMICs

INTRODUCTION

Neonatal mortality remains significant in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) with in-hospital mortality rates similar to those following discharge from healthcare facilities. Care continuity interventions have been suggested as a way of reducing postdischarge mortality by better linking care between facilities and communities. This scoping review aims to map and describe interventions used in LMICs to improve care continuity for newborns after discharge and examine assumptions underpinning the design and delivery of continuity.

METHODS

We searched seven databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane library and (Ovid) Global health). Publications with primary data on interventions focused on continuity of care for newborns in LMICs were included. Extracted data included year of publication, study location, study design and type of intervention. Drawing on relevant theoretical frameworks and classifications, we assessed the extent to which interventions adopted participatory methods and how they attempted to establish continuity.

RESULTS

A total of 65 papers were included in this review; 28 core articles with rich descriptions were prioritised for more in-depth analysis. Most articles adopted quantitative designs. Interventions focused on improving continuity and flow of information via education sessions led by community health workers during home visits. Extending previous frameworks, our findings highlight the importance of interpersonal continuity in LMICs where communication and relationships between family members, healthcare workers and members of the wider community play a vital role in creating support systems for postdischarge care. Only a small proportion of studies focused on high-risk babies. Some studies used participatory methods, although often without meaningful engagement in problem definition and intervention implementation.

CONCLUSION

Efforts to reduce neonatal mortality and morbidity should draw across multiple continuity logics (informational, relational, interpersonal and managerial) to strengthen care after hospital discharge in LMIC settings and further focus on high-risk neonates, as they often have the worst outcomes.

Exploring primary healthcare practitioners' experiences regarding the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly around the world since the initial outbreak in Wuhan, China. With the emergence of the Omicron variant, South Africa is presently the epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa. Healthcare workers have been at the forefront of the pandemic in terms of screening, early detection and clinical management of suspected and confirmed COVID-19 cases. Since the beginning of the outbreak, little has been reported on how healthcare workers have experienced the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa, particularly within a low-income, rural primary care context.

METHODS

The purpose of the present qualitative study design was to explore primary healthcare practitioners' experiences regarding the COVID-19 pandemic at two selected primary healthcare facilities within a low-income rural context in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Data were collected from a purposive sample of 15 participants, which consisted of nurses, physiotherapists, pharmacists, community caregivers, social workers and clinical associates. The participants were both men and women who were all above the age of 20. Data were collected through individual, in-depth face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed manually by thematic analysis following Tech's steps of data analysis.

RESULTS

Participants reported personal, occupational and community-related experiences related to the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa. Personal experiences of COVID-19 yielded superordinate themes of psychological distress, self-stigma, disruption of the social norm, Epiphany and conflict of interest. Occupational experiences yielded superordinate themes of staff infections, COVID-19-related courtesy stigma, resource constraints and poor dissemination of information. Community-related experiences were related to struggles with societal issues, clinician-patient relations and COVID-19 mismanagement of patients.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that primary healthcare practitioners' experiences around COVID-19 are attributed to the catastrophic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic with the multitude of psychosocial consequences forming the essence of these experiences. Ensuring availability of reliable sources of information regarding the pandemic as well as psychosocial support could be valuable in helping healthcare workers cope with living and working during the pandemic.

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.

Community health workers and health equity in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review and recommendations for policy and practice

Background

The deployment of Community Health Workers (CHWs) is widely promoted as a strategy for reducing health inequities in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Yet there is limited evidence on whether and how CHW programmes achieve this. This systematic review aimed to synthesise research findings on the following questions: (1) How effective are CHW interventions at reaching the most disadvantaged groups in LMIC contexts? and (2) What evidence exists on whether and how these programmes reduce health inequities in the populations they serve?

Methods

We searched six academic databases for recent (2014–2020) studies reporting on CHW programme access, utilisation, quality, and effects on health outcomes/behaviours in relation to potential stratifiers of health opportunities and outcomes (e.g., gender, socioeconomic status, place of residence). Quantitative data were extracted, tabulated, and subjected to meta-analysis where appropriate. Qualitative findings were synthesised using thematic analysis.

Results

One hundred sixty-seven studies met the search criteria, reporting on CHW interventions in 33 LMIC. Quantitative synthesis showed that CHW programmes successfully reach many (although not all) marginalized groups, but that health inequalities often persist in the populations they serve. Qualitative findings suggest that disadvantaged groups experienced barriers to taking up CHW health advice and referrals and point to a range of strategies for improving the reach and impact of CHW programmes in these groups. Ensuring fair working conditions for CHWs and expanding opportunities for advocacy were also revealed as being important for bridging health equity gaps.

Conclusion

In order to optimise the equity impacts of CHW programmes, we need to move beyond seeing CHWs as a temporary sticking plaster, and instead build meaningful partnerships between CHWs, communities and policy-makers to confront and address the underlying structures of inequity.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number CRD42020177333.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-021-01615-y.

The distinctive roles of urban community health workers in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review of the literature

Addressing urban health challenges in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has been hampered by lack of evidence on effective mechanisms for delivering health services to the poor. The urban disadvantaged experience poor health outcomes (often worse than rural counterparts) and face service barriers. While community health workers (CHWs) have been extensively employed in rural communities to address inequities, little attention has been given to understanding the roles of CHWs in urban contexts. This study is the first to systematically examine urban CHW roles in LMICs. It aims to understand their roles vis-à-vis other health providers and raise considerations for informing future scope of practice and service delivery models. We developed a framework that presents seven key roles performed by urban CHWs and position these roles against a continuum of technical to political functions. Our scoping review included publications from four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Social Sciences Citation Index) and two CHW resource hubs. We included all peer-reviewed, CHW studies situated in urban/peri-urban, LMIC contexts. We identify roles (un)commonly performed by urban CHWs, present the range of evidence available on CHW effectiveness in performing each role and identify considerations for informing future roles. Of 856 articles, 160 met the inclusion criteria. Programmes spanned 34 LMICs. Studies most commonly reported evidence on CHWs roles related to health education, outreach and elements of direct service provision. We found little overlap in roles between CHWs and other providers, with some exceptions. Reported roles were biased towards home visiting and individual-capacity building, and not well-oriented to reach men/youth/working women, support community empowerment or link with social services. Urban-specific adaptations to roles, such as peer outreach to high-risk, stigmatized communities, were limited. Innovation in urban CHW roles and a better understanding of the unique opportunities presented by urban settings is needed to fully capitalize on their potential.

Breastfeeding inequities in South Africa: Can enforcement of the WHO Code help address them? - A systematic scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Suboptimal breastfeeding rates in South Africa have been attributed to the relatively easy access that women and families have had to infant formula, in part as a result of programs to prevent maternal-to-child transmission (MTCT) of HIV. This policy may have had an undesirable spill-over effect on HIV-negative women as well. Thus, the aims of this scoping review were to: (a) describe EBF practices in South Africa, (b) determine how EBF has been affected by the WHO HIV infant feeding policies followed since 2006, and (c) assess if the renewed interest in The Code has had any impact on breastfeeding practices in South Africa.

METHODS

We applied the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews and reported our work in compliance with the PRISMA Extension (PRISMA-ScR). Twelve databases and platforms were searched. We included all study designs (no language restrictions) from South Africa published between 2006 and 2020. Eligible participants were women in South Africa who delivered a healthy live newborn who was between birth and 24 months of age at the time of study, and with known infant feeding practices.

RESULTS

A total of 5431 citations were retrieved. Duplicates were removed in EndNote and by Covidence. Of the 1588 unique records processed in Covidence, 179 records met the criteria for full-text screening and 83 were included in the review. It was common for HIV-positive women who initiated breastfeeding to stop doing so prior to 6 months after birth (1-3 months). EBF rates rapidly declined after birth. School and work commitments were also reasons for discontinuation of EBF. HIV-positive women expressed fear of HIV MTCT transmission as a reason for not breastfeeding.

CONCLUSION

The Review found that while enforcing the most recent WHO HIV infant feeding guidelines and the WHO Code may be necessary to improve breastfeeding outcomes in South Africa, they may not be sufficient because there are additional barriers that impact breastfeeding outcomes. Mixed-methods research, including in-depth interviews with key informants representing different government sectors and civil society is needed to prioritize actions and strategies to improve breastfeeding outcomes in South Africa.

Breastfeeding Practices Among Women Living with HIV in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) is the safest infant feeding option in resource-limited settings, though women living with HIV have the lowest rates of EBF. Barriers to EBF in the absences of a formal intervention in women living with HIV in KwaZulu-Natal, where the prevalence of HIV among pregnant women is among the highest in the world, are understudied. Thus, this study sought to describe barriers to EBF and examine differences in social support, disclosure status, mood, and HIV-related stigma among women with different feeding methods.

METHODS

Women living with HIV enrolled in preventing mother-to-child transmission treatment (n = 156) were interviewed postpartum (M = 13.1 weeks) at a district hospital and self-reported infant feeding method, reasons not breastfeeding (if applicable), and HIV disclosure status. Mood, HIV-related stigma, functional social support, and HIV-related social support were also assessed.

RESULTS

No participants reported mixed feeding, 30% reported EBF, and 70% reported exclusive formula feeding. Commonly reported reasons for not breastfeeding included fear of HIV transmission to the infant and being away from the infant for extended periods of time. Social support (p = 0.02) and HIV-related social support (p < 0.01) were significantly higher in women who had attempted breastfeeding compared to women who never attempted breastfeeding.

DISCUSSION

Rates of EBF in this sample are lower than in other recent studies, suggesting this sample experiences multiple barriers to EBF. Healthcare providers should seek to correct misconceptions regarding HIV transmission and breastfeeding practices. Social and logistical support for EBF may be important considerations for future interventions.

Autonomous Continuation of Community Health Workers' Activities in Thegon Township, Bago Region, Myanmar

Background: Few studies have reported on the autonomous continuation of Community Health Worker (CHW) activities after external supervision and support have ended.

Objective: The study reports CHW activity continuation in Thegon Township, Bago Region, Myanmar, observed after the supervision by the external organization is completed.

Method: Following the completion of a child nutrition program in Thegon Township, CHWs were left unsupervised and uninformed of a follow-up at 10, 23, and 40 months from the end of the program survey due to unforeseen circumstances. In a follow-up survey in 2014, data on the activity implementation status from CHWs and activity attendance from caregivers of the target children were collected. Focus group discussions were held with caregivers concerning their information sources on child nutrition and health.

Results: On average, CHWs were found to have continued with 2.6 of the four core activities, often with modifications, irrespective of the time since completion of the non-profit-organization-led program. Meanwhile, caregiver attendance decreased over time. Caregivers recognized CHWs as information sources.

Discussion: Although unsupervised, CHWs ambitiously continued with their activities, but sorted through and modified them, which may have been unrelated to the local acceptance of the program, as caregiver attendance decreased even as CHWs continued the activities. The observation may highlight the importance of proactive engagement and thus, the autonomy of CHWs in their activity continuation.

Impact of Infant and Young Child Feeding (IYCF) Nutrition Interventions on Breastfeeding Practices, Growth and Mortality in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review

Undernutrition is associated with 45% of total infant deaths, totalling 2.7 million globally per year. The vast majority of the burden is felt in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This review aims to assess the effectiveness of infant and young child feeding (IYCF) interventions. We searched multiple databases including Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE. Title/abstract screening and full-text screening and data extraction filtered 77 studies for inclusion. Breastfeeding education interventions (n = 38) showed 20% increase in rates of early initiation of breastfeeding, 102% increase in exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) at 3 months and 53% increase in EBF at 6 months and 24% decreases in diarrheal diseases. Complementary feeding education intervention (n=12) showed a 0.41 standard deviation (SD) increase in WAZ, and 0.25 SD in HAZ in food secure setting. Complementary food provision with or without education (n=17) showed a 0.14 SD increase in HAZ and 36% decrease in stunting. Supplementary food interventions (n=12) showed a significant 0.15 SD increase in WHZ. Subgroup analyses showed healthcare professional led interventions were largely more effective, especially on breastfeeding outcomes. We believe this is a comprehensive review of the existing literature on IYCF studies in LMICs. Though breastfeeding education is well supported in its effectiveness on breastfeeding practices, limited evidence exists for growth outcomes. Supplementation interventions seem to have better effects at improving growth. However, more research is required to reach more substantial conclusions.

The Effects of Community Home Visit and Peer Group Nutrition Intervention Delivery Platforms on Nutrition Outcomes in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Weak delivery systems reduce the potential of evidence-supp orted interventions to improve nutrition. We synthesized the evidence for the effectiveness of nutrition-specific intervention delivery platforms for improving nutrition outcomes in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). A systematic literature search for studies published from 1997 to June 2018 resulted in the inclusion of 83 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomized, and controlled before-after studies across a variety of delivery platforms. In this paper, we report on meta-analysed outcomes for community health worker (CHW) home visits and mother/peer group delivery platforms. Compared to care as usual, CHW home visits increased early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF) (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.99; n = 10 RCTs) and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) (OR: 4.42; 95% CI: 2.28, 8.56; n = 9 RCTs) and mother/peer groups were effective for improving children's minimum dietary diversity (OR: 2.34; 95% CI: 1.17, 4.70; n = 4) and minimum meal frequency (OR: 2.31; 95% CI: 1.61, 3.31; n = 3). Pooled estimates from studies using both home visit and group platforms showed positive results for EIBF (OR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.12, 4.05; n = 9), EBF (OR: 2.43; 95% CI: 1.70, 3.46; n = 12), and < 5 wasting (OR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.89; n = 4). Our findings underscore the importance of interpersonal community platforms for improving infant and young child feeding practices and children's nutritional status in LMICs.

Community-based maternal and newborn educational care packages for improving neonatal health and survival in low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), health services are under-utilised, and several studies have reported improvements in neonatal outcomes following health education imparted to mothers in homes, at health units, or in hospitals. However, evaluating health educational strategy to deliver newborn care, such as one-to-one counselling or group counselling via peer or support groups, or delivered by health professionals, requires rigorous assessment of methodological design and quality, as well as assessment of cost-effectiveness, affordability, sustainability, and reproducibility in diverse health systems.

OBJECTIVES

To compare a community health educational strategy versus no strategy or the existing approach to health education on maternal and newborn care in LMICs, as imparted to mothers or their family members specifically in community settings during the antenatal and/or postnatal period, in terms of effectiveness for improving neonatal health and survival (i.e. neonatal mortality, neonatal morbidity, access to health care, and cost).

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 4), in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 2 May 2017), Embase (1980 to 2 May 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 2 May 2017). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Community-based randomised controlled, cluster-randomised, or quasi-randomised controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE method and prepared 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review 33 original trials (reported in 62 separate articles), which were conducted across Africa and Central and South America, with most reported from Asia, specifically India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Of the 33 community educational interventions provided, 16 included family members in educational counselling, most frequently the mother-in-law or the expectant father. Most studies (n = 14) required one-to-one counselling between a healthcare worker and a mother, and 12 interventions involved group counselling for mothers and occasionally family members; the remaining seven incorporated components of both counselling methods. Our analyses show that community health educational interventions had a significant impact on reducing overall neonatal mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.96; random-effects model; 26 studies; n = 553,111; I² = 88%; very low-quality evidence), early neonatal mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.84; random-effects model; 15 studies that included 3 subsets from 3 studies; n = 321,588; I² = 86%; very low-quality evidence), late neonatal mortality (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.74; random-effects model; 11 studies; n = 186,643; I² = 88%; very low-quality evidence), and perinatal mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.91; random-effects model; 15 studies; n = 262,613; I² = 81%; very low-quality evidence). Moreover, community health educational interventions increased utilisation of any antenatal care (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.22; random-effects model; 18 studies; n = 307,528; I² = 96%) and initiation of breastfeeding (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.77; random-effects model; 19 studies; n = 126,375; I² = 99%). In contrast, community health educational interventions were found to have a non-significant impact on use of modern contraceptives (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.41; random-effects model; 3 studies; n = 22,237; I² = 80%); presence of skilled birth attendance at birth (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.25; random-effects model; 10 studies; n = 117,870; I² = 97%); utilisation of clean delivery kits (RR 4.44, 95% CI 0.71 to 27.76; random-effects model; 2 studies; n = 17,087; I² = 98%); and care-seeking (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.27; random-effects model; 7 studies; n = 46,154; I² = 93%). Cost-effectiveness analysis conducted in seven studies demonstrated that the cost-effectiveness for intervention packages ranged between USD 910 and USD 11,975 for newborn lives saved and newborn deaths averted. For averted disability-adjusted life-year, costs ranged from USD 79 to USD 146, depending on the intervention strategy; for cost per year of lost lives averted, the most effective strategy was peer counsellors, and the cost was USD 33.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review offers encouraging evidence on the value of integrating packages of interventions with educational components delivered by a range of community workers in group settings in LMICs, with groups consisting of mothers, and additional education for family members, for improved neonatal survival, especially early and late neonatal survival.

Exclusive breastfeeding policy, practice and influences in South Africa, 1980 to 2018: A mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

In 2011, South Africa committed to promoting exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for six months for all mothers, regardless of HIV status, in line with World Health Organization recommendations. This was a marked shift from earlier policies, and with it, average EBF rates increased from less than 10% in 2011 to 32% by 2016.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this mixed-methods systematic review was to describe EBF practices in South Africa and their multi-level influences over four policy periods.

METHODS

We applied PRISMA guidelines according to a published protocol (Prospero: CRD42014010512). We searched seven databases [Africa-Wide, PubMed, Popline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Global Health, and The Cochrane Library] and conducted hand searches for eligible articles (all study designs, conducted in South Africa and published between 1980-2018). The quality of articles was assessed using published tools, as appropriate. Separate policy analysis was conducted to delineate four distinct policy periods. We compared EBF rates by these periods. Then, applying a three-level ecological framework, we analysed EBF influences concurrently by method. Finally, the findings were synthesized to compare breastfeeding influences by policy period, maintaining an ecological framework.

RESULTS

From an initial sample of 20,226 articles, 72 unique articles were reviewed, three of which contributed to both quantitative and qualitative analysis. Despite the large sample, several provinces were poorly represented (if at all) and many studies were assessed as low to moderate quality. Despite these limitations, our historical lens enabled us to explore why South African progress on increasing EBF practices has been slow. The review reflects a context that increasingly supports EBF, but falls short in accounting for family, community, and workplace influences. The findings also highlight the unintended damage caused by rapidly adopting and introducing global guidelines to an unsupported health workforce.

CONCLUSIONS

From a South African perspective, we identified geographic and methodological biases, as well as gaps in our understanding and potential explanations of inequities in EBF. Our recommendations relate to policy, programming, and research to inform changes that would be required to further improve EBF practice rates in South Africa. While our review is South Africa-specific, our findings have broader implications for investing in multi-level interventions and limiting how often infant feeding guidelines are changed.

Breastfeeding advice for reality: Women's perspectives on primary care support in South Africa

Breastfeeding education and support are critical health worker skills. Confusion surrounding infant feeding advice linked to the HIV epidemic has reduced the confidence of health workers to support breastfeeding. High antiretroviral therapy coverage of breastfeeding women living with HIV, and an Infant Feeding policy supportive of breastfeeding, now provides an opportunity to improve breastfeeding practices. Challenges remain in restoring health worker confidence to support breastfeeding. This qualitative study presents findings from focus group discussions with mothers of young infants, exploring their experiences of health worker breastfeeding counselling and support. Analysis followed the thematic framework approach. Six researchers reviewed the transcripts, coded them independently, then jointly reviewed the codes, and agreed on a working analytical framework. Although mothers received antenatal breastfeeding messages, these appeared to focus rigidly on the importance of exclusivity. Mothers described receiving some practical support with initiation of breastfeeding after delivery, but support and advice for post‐natal breastfeeding challenges were often incorrect or absent. The support also ignored the context in which women make infant feeding decisions, including returning to work and pressures from family members. Despite improved breastfeeding policies, restoring confidence in health workers to support breastfeeding remains a challenge. The post‐natal period, when mothers experience breastfeeding difficulties, is particularly critical, and our findings reinforce the importance of continuity of care between communities and health facilities. This research has implications for how health workers are trained to support breastfeeding. Greater attention is needed on developing skills and confidence in identifying, assessing, and supporting women experiencing breastfeeding challenges.

Issues about periconception use of dolutegravir are reminiscent of early concerns about efavirenz

South Africa intends to include dolutegravir in its first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimen because of cost savings, the drug's high barrier to resistance, and efficacy. However, recent data from Botswana suggest potential teratogenicity of dolutegravir. WHO recommends that non-pregnant women of childbearing age who are not using an effective form of contraception and women in early pregnancy should not initiate treatment with dolutegravir. Similar concerns about efavirenz once existed; the 2010 South African ART guidelines recommended that pregnant women and women at-risk of pregnancy should not be given efavirenz. Screening of fertility intentions and contraceptive use were poor, and protocols for regimen changes were unevenly implemented across South Africa. High incidence of unplanned pregnancies and late pregnancy diagnosis resulted in delays in efavirenz substitution. In the absence of reassuring safety data on dolutegravir, South Africa should learn from past mistakes and develop systems to ensure improved communication with patients and better integration of comprehensive reproductive health services.

Improved rates of exclusive breastfeeding at 14 weeks of age in KwaZulu Natal, South Africa: what are the challenges now?

Background

Increasing the rate of exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) to 50% in the first six months of life is one of six major global targets set by the United Nations Decade of Nutrition, and is essential to achieve the sustainable development goals to eradicate hunger and end malnutrition by 2030.

Methods

A survey using multistage random sampling design included 99 primary health care (PHC) clinics in all 11 districts in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). All mothers and caregivers of infants 14 weeks of age attending the clinics in the study period were requested to participate in a structured interview to explore feeding practices since birth. As non-maternal caregivers may not have detailed knowledge of feeding practices, they provided limited information about current feeding practices. Respondents who consistently reported giving no other food or fluids except breastmilk since birth were classified as practising exclusive breastfeeding (EBF), and those who were currently breastfeeding but had given other food or fluids since birth were categorised as practising mixed breastfeeding (MBF).

Results

A total of 4172 interviews were conducted with mothers and caregivers of 14 week old infants. Among mothers 49.8% were EBF, 23.1% were MBF and 27.0% were not breastfeeding. Among non-maternal caregivers 11.8% reported EBF, 23.4% MBF and 62.3% were not giving breastmilk. Higher education (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.8) and being in the highest socio-economic tertile (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.6–0.9) were risk factors for not practising EBF, while returning to work (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2–0.3) or school (OR 0.2 95% CI, 0.1–0.3) was associated with less EBF. HIV-positive mothers were more likely to have never started breastfeeding (OR 3.6, 95% CI 2.7–4.8). However, they were similar in having stopped breastfeeding by 14 weeks (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.9–1.4) compared to HIV-negative mothers, and, they had similar rates of EBF at 14 weeks of age (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.9–1.3).

Conclusions

Estimates of breastfeeding practices at 14 weeks in KZN are higher than previously shown. However, particular challenges that should be addressed if international targets for EBF are to be achieved include improving breastfeeding practices of HIV positive mothers and supporting all mothers, particularly working or schooling mothers to continue giving breastmilk while they are away from their children.

Follow-up consultations on growth and development: the meaning for quilombo mothers

Abstract Objective: To know the meanings of follow-up consultations on growth and development from the perspective of mothers living in quilombos. Method: A qualitative research was carried out with 26 mothers of under one-year-old children who attended the Family Health Unit of Ilha de Maré, Bahia, Brazil. The data of the interviews were systematized using analysis of thematic content based on symbolic interactionism. Results: Four categories were identified that reflect the symbolism of quilombola mothers about child consultations: growth assessment, examination of the general health conditions, guidance on health education, and the identification of health problems/risk factors and intervention. Conclusion: As quilombola mothers see children's consultations in a way similar to that recommended by the Ministry of Health and the scientific evidence shows their relevance to reduce morbidity and mortality rates, this research may guide educational measures aiming at the adherence of more children to the service.

Breastfeeding education and support for women with twins or higher order multiples

BACKGROUND

There are rising rates of multiple births worldwide with associated higher rates of complications and more hospital care, often due to prematurity. While there is strong evidence about the risks of not breastfeeding, rates of breastfeeding in women who have given birth to more than one infant are lower than with singleton births. Breastfeeding more than one infant can be more challenging because of difficulties associated with the birth or prematurity. The extra demands on the mother of frequent suckling, coordinating the needs of more than one infant or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit can lead to delayed initiation or early cessation. Additional options such as breast milk expression, the use of donor milk or different methods of supplementary feeding may be considered. Support and education about breastfeeding has been found to improve the duration of any breastfeeding for healthy term infants and their mothers, however evidence is lacking about interventions that are effective to support women with twins or higher order multiples.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effectiveness of breastfeeding education and support for women with twins or higher order multiples.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (30 June 2016), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (1 July 2016), the excluded studies list from the equivalent Cochrane review of singletons, and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing extra education or support for women with twins or higher order multiples were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We planned to assess the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach, but were unable to analyse any data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 10 trials (23 reports) of education and support for breastfeeding that included women with twins or higher order multiples. The quality of evidence was mixed, and the risk of bias was mostly high or unclear. It is difficult to blind women or staff to group allocation for this intervention, so in all studies there was high risk of performance and high or unclear risk of detection bias. Trials recruited 5787 women (this included 512 women interviewed as part of a cluster randomised trial); of these, data were available from two studies for 42 women with twins or higher order multiples. None of the interventions were specifically designed for women with more than one infant, and the outcomes for multiples were not reported separately for each infant. Due to the scarcity of evidence and the format in which data were reported, a narrative description of the data is presented, no analyses are presented in this review, and we were unable to GRADE the evidence.The two trials with data for women with multiple births compared home nurse visits versus usual care (15 women), and telephone peer counselling versus usual care (27 women). The number of women who initiated breastfeeding was reported (all 15 women in one study, 25 out of 27 women in one study). Stopping any breastfeeding before four to six weeks postpartum, stopping exclusive breastfeeding before four to six weeks postpartum, stopping any breastfeeding before six months postpartum andstopping exclusive breastfeeding before six months postpartum were not explicitly reported, and there were insufficient data to draw any meaningful conclusions from survival data. Stopping breast milk expression before four to six weeks postpartum, andstopping breast milk expression before six months postpartum were not reported. Measures ofmaternal satisfaction were reported in one study of 15 women, but there were insufficient data to draw any conclusions; no other secondary outcomes were reported for women with multiple births in either study. No adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence from randomised controlled trials about the effectiveness of breastfeeding education and support for women with twins or higher order multiples, or the most effective way to provide education and support . There was no evidence about the best way to deliver the intervention, the timing of care, or the best person to deliver the care. There is a need for well-designed, adequately powered studies of interventions designed for women with twins or higher order multiples to find out what types of education and support are effective in helping these mothers to breastfeed their babies.

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.

Interventions for promoting the initiation of breastfeeding

BACKGROUND

Despite the widely documented risks of not breastfeeding, initiation rates remain relatively low in many high-income countries, particularly among women in lower-income groups. In low- and middle-income countries, many women do not follow World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations to initiate breastfeeding within the first hour after birth. This is an update of a Cochrane Review, first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and describe health promotion activities intended to increase the initiation rate of breastfeeding.To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding promotion activities, in terms of changing the number of women who initiate breastfeeding.To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding promotion activities, in terms of changing the number of women who initiate breastfeeding early (within one hour after birth).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (29 February 2016) and scanned reference lists of all articles obtained.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with or without blinding, of any breastfeeding promotion intervention in any population group, except women and infants with a specific health problem.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial reports for inclusion, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion and a third review author was involved when necessary. We contacted investigators to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials involving 107,362 women in seven countries are included in this updated review. Five studies involving 3,124 women did not contribute outcome data and we excluded them from the analyses. The methodological quality of the included trials was mixed, with significant numbers of studies at high or unclear risk of bias due to: inadequate allocation concealment (N = 20); lack of blinding of outcome assessment (N = 20); incomplete outcome data (N = 19); selective reporting (N = 22) and bias from other potential sources (N = 17). Healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support versus standard care The studies pooled here compare professional health workers delivering breastfeeding education and support during the prenatal and postpartum periods with standard care. Interventions included promotion campaigns and counselling, and all took place in a formal setting. There was evidence from five trials involving 564 women for improved rates ofbreastfeeding initiation among women who received healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support (average risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.92; Tau² = 0.07, I² = 62%, low-quality evidence) compared to those women who received standard care. We downgraded evidence due to design limitations and heterogeneity. The outcome of early initiation of breastfeeding was not reported in the studies under this comparison. Non-healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support versus standard care There was evidence from eight trials of 5712 women for improved rates of breastfeeding initiation among women who received interventions from non-healthcare professional counsellors and support groups (average RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.40; Tau² = 0.02, I² = 86%, low-quality evidence) compared to women who received standard care. In three trials of 76,373 women, there was no clear difference between groups in terms of the number of women practicing early initiation of breastfeeding (average RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.95; Tau² = 0.18, I² = 78%, very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the evidence for a combination of design limitations, heterogeneity and imprecision (wide confidence intervals crossing the line of no effect). Other comparisonsOther comparisons in this review also looked at the rates of initiation of breastfeeding and there were no clear differences between groups for the following comparisons of combined healthcare professional-led education with peer support or community educator versus standard care (2 studies, 1371 women) or attention control (1 study, 237 women), breastfeeding education using multimedia (a self-help manual or a video) versus routine care (2 studies, 497 women); early mother-infant contact versus standard care (2 studies, 309 women); and community-based breastfeeding groups versus no breastfeeding groups (1 study, 18,603 women). None of these comparisons reported data on early initiation of breastfeeding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found low-quality evidence that healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and non-healthcare professional-led counselling and peer support interventions can result in some improvements in the number of women beginning to breastfeed. The majority of the trials were conducted in the USA, among women on low incomes and who varied in ethnicity and feeding intention, thus limiting the generalisability of these results to other settings.Future studies would ideally be conducted in a range of low- and high-income settings, with data on breastfeeding rates over various timeframes, and explore the effectiveness of interventions that are initiated prior to conception or during pregnancy. These might include well-described interventions, including health education, early and continuing mother-infant contact, and initiatives to help mothers overcome societal barriers to breastfeeding, all with clearly defined outcome measures.