Combined Influence of Gestational Diabetes and Gestational Weight Gain on Exclusive Breastfeeding

Decision-making process of breastfeeding behavior in mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus based on health belief model

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) threatens GDM mothers and their offspring's health and breastfeeding is one of the most effective ways to decrease the risk. However, the prevalence of breastfeeding among GDM mothers is far from optimal and how GDM mothers develop their feeding behavior is still unclear. Thus, this study aimed to explore the formation of GDM mothers' breastfeeding behaviors based on the health belief model (HBM).

METHODS

A questionnaire survey was conducted on 324 GDM mothers who have given birth within 6 months from January 1 to February 6, 2022. According to HBM, GDM mothers' knowledge, the perceived threat from GDM, the perceived value of breastfeeding, self-efficacy, social support and GDM mothers' breastfeeding behavior were measured. Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) was defined as an infant who received only breast milk in the past 24 h before the survey. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to explore how GDM mothers form their breastfeeding behaviors based on HBM.

RESULTS

The prevalence of EBF among GDM mothers was 33.95%. GDM mothers had limited knowledge of GDM (average 63.14% correct answer to 7 questions), especially poor on the long-term effect of GDM (39.81%) and protective effect of breastfeeding (34.57%-45.99%). Although GDM mothers showed high perceived benefits (Mean: 3.35, SD: 0.46), high self-efficacy (Mean: 3.43, SD: 0.97) and high level of social support for breastfeeding (Mean: 3.74, SD: 0.74), the various barriers (Mean: 2.20, SD: 0.47) hindered their success in EBF. The SEM results showed that a higher level of social support and more self-efficacy of breastfeeding resulted in a higher likelihood of EBF, while the higher level of knowledge of GDM, perceived higher barriers and benefits of breastfeeding and higher susceptibility to GDM consequences led to less EBF.

CONCLUSION

To promote EBF, physicians' education, emphasizing the protective effect of breastfeeding and how to correct breastfeeding, is highly recommended. In addition, social support for GDM mothers is also important to reduce their barriers to breastfeeding and help enhance self-efficacy in breastfeeding.

Self-Efficacy and Outcomes in Women with Diabetes: A Prospective Comparative Study

Background: Breastfeeding is especially beneficial to women with diabetes and their infants, yet diabetic mothers frequently experience less favorable breastfeeding outcomes. Objectives: To identify facilitators and barriers to breastfeeding for women with diabetes by comparing cognitive and social factors, health and hospital-related factors, and breastfeeding outcomes between women with and without diabetes. Design/Methods: Women with any type of diabetes (n = 28) and without diabetes (n = 29) were recruited during pregnancy. Data were collected from the electronic medical record and maternal surveys at 24-37 weeks' gestation, birth hospitalization, and 4 weeks' postbirth. We compared differences in mother's regard for breastfeeding, breastfeeding intention, and birth hospital experience by diabetes status, and estimated odds ratios for exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) and unmet intention to breastfeed. Results: Women with and without diabetes had similar breastfeeding intentions, attitudes, and self-efficacy. Women with diabetes were less likely to EBF, and more likely to have unmet intentions to EBF at hospital discharge, compared to women without diabetes. At 4 weeks' postpartum, there was no difference in breastfeeding by diabetes status, although EBF at hospital discharge was strongly associated with EBF at 4 weeks. Infant neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission and hypoglycemia were significantly associated with diabetes status, reduced EBF rates, and unmet breastfeeding intentions. Conclusions: Despite having a strong intent to breastfeed, women with diabetes experienced less favorable early breastfeeding outcomes and were less likely to meet their own breastfeeding goals. These differences may be driven by neonatal complications, such as infant hypoglycemia and NICU admissions, rather than maternal cognitive and social factors.

Development and Interrater Reliability of the Lactation Assessment Care Tool

BACKGROUND

There have been no comprehensive predictive measurement instruments published that account for the dynamic interaction between maternal, infant, and functional factors related to breastfeeding difficulty. The Lactation Care Assessment Tool (LACT) was developed by the authors as a predictive measure of lactation acuity to identify families at risk for breastfeeding difficulty and facilitate access to the most effective level of care.

RESEARCH AIM

To describe the development, content validation, and interrater reliability of the LACT.

METHODS

This study was a cross-sectional, online survey. Upon reading a standardized case scenario reflective of common experiences among families with goals to breastfeed, participants (N = 82) anonymously completed the LACT, which consisted of 16 measures based upon research relevant to maternal, infant, and functional factors affecting breastfeeding success. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize and describe the characteristics of the study sample. Interrater reliability was evaluated using Krippendorff's alpha.

RESULTS

An acceptable degree of interrater reliability (α = 0.70) among participants was detected for the 16 measures included in the instrument.

CONCLUSION

This instrument supports Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative Step 10 to facilitate more precise and timely continuity of care after discharge from the hospital by identifying families in need of referral to a level of care consistent with their lactation acuity. Future research is necessary to determine appropriate levels of care and support based on the instrument scores in diverse breastfeeding dyads during early lactation and through the duration of breastfeeding.

Breastfeeding following bariatric surgery among obese women with and without diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Information on exclusive breastfeeding (BF) and BF initiation following bariatric surgery (BS) among obese women with diabetes mellitus (DM) and without DM (non-DM) is limited.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study. Obesity was defined by BMI (kg/m2) as grade 1 (30-34.9), grade 2 (35-39.9) or grade 3 (≥40). The 65 women in the DM group (40 women with gestational, 19 with Type 2 and 6 with Type 1) was similar to 84 with non-DM in BS type: Roux-en-Y (51 vs 55%), sleeve gastrectomy (32 vs 35%), laparoscopic gastric banding (17 vs 7%) and gastro-duodenal anastomosis (0 vs 4%).

RESULTS

Women with DM were older (35 vs 33y), of advanced age (54 vs 27%), with higher prevalence of grade 3 obesity (66 vs 46%), chronic hypertension (31 vs 10%), delivery of late-preterm infants (23 vs 10%) and neonatal hypoglycemia (25 vs 12%). Although infant feeding intention was similar: BF (66 vs 79%), partial BF (9 vs 7%) or formula (25 vs 14%), at discharge women with DM had lower exclusive BF (29 vs 41%) and BF initiation rates (68 vs 76%) than those with non-DM. Women with grade 3 obesity (52% were DM) differed from those with grades 1-2 (34% were DM) in exclusive BF (27 vs 52%), and BF initiation rates (66 vs 86%).

CONCLUSION

After BS, women with DM, especially those with grade 3 obesity, had higher rates of chronic hypertension and preeclampsia and lower rates of exclusive BF and BF initiation than those who had DM but had less severe obesity.

Impact of excessive gestational weight gain on exclusive breastfeeding among women with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes and obesity

BACKGROUND

Pregestational diabetes, obesity and gestational weight gain (GWG) are associated with adverse perinatal outcomes, however, the influence of excessive GWG on lactation at discharge is less known. Our aim is to evaluate the impact of excessive GWG using the LifeCycle project guidelines on exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) and any BF rates at discharge among 171 women with Type 1 and 294 Type 2 diabetes and obesity who intended to BF.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Retrospective cohort study. Obesity was defined by BMI (kg/m2) as grade 1 (30-34.9), grade 2 (35-39.9) or grade 3 (≥40). GWG was categorized as adequate, inadequate or excessive according to the 2019 LifeCycle Project guidelines. Women with Type 1 were younger (30 vs 33y), primiparous (51 vs 32%), delivered earlier (37 vs 38w) than women with Type 2 andwere different in grade 1 (40 vs 26%), grade 3 obesity (19 vs 49%) and median GWG (15 vs 11kg). Of all 465 women with Type 1 and Type 2 combined, 365 (78%) who had excessive GWG and 100 (22%) who had non-excessive GWG showed similar EBF (27 vs 25%) and any BF (72 vs 72%) rates. Regression analysis showed that after adjusting for potential confounders excessive GWG was not a predictor of EBF or any BF at discharge.

CONCLUSION

Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, obesity and excessive GWG are associated with low EBF, however, excessive GWG is not an independent predictor of low EBF or any BF at discharge.

Barriers and benefits to breastfeeding with gestational diabetes

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a disease of glucose intolerance during pregnancy and is associated with infant macrosomia, infant hypoglycemia, and increased risk of type 2 diabetes development for both mother and infant. Although breastfeeding potentially mitigates metabolic sequelae for both mother and her offspring, women with GDM are more likely to introduce formula and, therefore, are less likely to exclusively breastfeed, and some studies show less initiation and shorter breastfeeding duration as well. Therefore, women with GDM and their infants warrant investigation of methods by which to increase breastfeeding exclusivity and duration. Exploration of the barriers to breastfeeding for women with GDM demonstrate not only biologic complications such as maternal obesity, increased prevalence of cesarean section, and infant hypoglycemia, but also maternal report of less provider support of breastfeeding and reduced breastfeeding self-efficacy. Consequently, interventions designed to optimize breastfeeding outcomes in this high-risk population should not only focus on the biology but also on provider behavior and maternal social factors.