Effect of using HIV and infant feeding counselling cards on the quality of counselling provided to HIV positive mothers: a cluster randomized controlled trial

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.

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.

Use of a Nutrition Behavior Change Counseling Tool: Lessons from a Rapid Qualitative Assessment in Eastern Zambia

The U.S. Agency for International Development Feed the Future Mawa Project – led by Catholic Relief Services – aims to improve food and economic security for farming households in Zambia’s Eastern Province. Mawa employs social and behavior change (SBC) strategies with households and communities to improve nutrition and reduce stunting among children under two (CU2). To support these strategies, sub-partner University Research Co., LLC employed a participatory process to develop a series of 35 action cards, each illustrating one project-promoted behavior, that are used at household and community group levels. Caregivers of CU2 are given a full set of action cards to promote household dialogue and support for the promoted behaviors. As a final step in the action card tool development process, a qualitative rapid assessment was conducted 1 month after implementation to investigate preliminary ways action cards were being used, and if the methods of using the cards had the potential to impact behavior change. The research team conducted nine key informant interviews and four focus group discussions with Mawa staff and administered 41 qualitative interview questionnaires with project participants in the Chipata and Lundazi districts. Although not based on a representative sampling frame, the assessment produced valuable results for program improvement purposes. It also provided a feedback mechanism for community-based staff and project participants, a crucial step in the participatory tool development process. The assessment found that Mawa staff at every level use action cards combined with at least one other social behavior change tool for each nutrition intervention. Our results suggest that Mawa staff and project participants share a common understanding of the cards’ purpose. Each group noted that the cards provide a visual cue for action and reinforce previous Mawa nutrition messages. Intended uses confirmed by the assessment include encouraging household cooperation, negotiating behavior change, telling stories, and integrating messages with other project sectors. Based on the findings, recommendations for future project activities include aligning efforts against a theory of change to optimize use of all SBC tools; leveraging action card use to strengthen cross-sectoral integration within Mawa; and specific ongoing monitoring of action card use to improve activity implementation.

Incorporating elements of social franchising in government health services improves the quality of infant and young child feeding counselling services at commune health centres in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

Although social franchising has been shown to enhance the quality of reproductive health services in developing countries, its effect on nutrition services remains unexamined. This study assessed the effects of incorporating elements of social franchising on shaping the quality of infant and young child feeding (IYCF) counselling facilities and services in Vietnam.

METHODS

Process-related data collected 12 months after the launch of the first franchises were used to compare randomly assigned Alive & Thrive-supported health facilities (AT-F, n = 20) with standard facilities (SF, n = 12) across three dimensions of service quality: 'structure', 'process' and 'outcome' that capture the quality of facilities, service delivery, and client perceptions and use, respectively. Data collection included facility assessments (n = 32), staff surveys (n = 96), counselling observations (n = 137), client exit interviews (n = 137) and in-depth interviews with mothers (n = 48).

RESULTS

Structure: AT-F were more likely to have an unshared, well-equipped room for nutrition counselling than SF (65.0% vs 10.0%).

PROCESS

Compared with SF providers, AT-F staff had better IYCF knowledge (mean score 9.9 vs 8.8, range 0-11 for breastfeeding; mean score 3.6 vs 3.2, range 0-4 for complementary feeding). AT-F providers also demonstrated significantly better interpersonal communication skills (score 9.6 vs 5.1, range 0-13) and offered more comprehensive counselling sessions.

OUTCOME

Overall utilization of franchises was low (10%). A higher proportion of pregnant women utilized franchise services (48.9%), compared with mothers with children 6-23.9 months (1.4%). There was no quantitative difference in client satisfaction with counselling services between AT-F and SF, but franchise users praised the AT-F for problem solving related to child feeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating elements of social franchising significantly enhances the quality of IYCF counselling services within government primary healthcare facilities, particularly their structural and process attributes. Provided that service utilization is improved through demand generation, this model has the potential to impact IYCF practices and child nutrition.