Pumps: A Possible Tool to Promote More Equitable Lactation Outcomes

Pregnant individuals and infants in the US are experiencing rising morbidity and mortality rates. Breastfeeding is a cost-effective intervention associated with a lower risk of health conditions driving dyadic morbidity and mortality, including cardiometabolic disease and sudden infant death. Pregnant individuals and infants from racial/ethnic subgroups facing the highest risk of mortality also have the lowest breastfeeding rates, likely reflective of generational socioeconomic marginalization and its impact on health outcomes. Promoting breastfeeding among groups with the lowest rates could improve the health of dyads with the greatest health risk and facilitate more equitable, person-centered lactation outcomes. Multiple barriers to lactation initiation and duration exist for families who have been socioeconomically marginalized by health and public systems. These include the lack of paid parental leave, increased access to subsidized human milk substitutes, and reduced access to professional and lay breastfeeding expertise. Breast pumps have the potential to mitigate these barriers, making breastfeeding more accessible to all interested dyads. In 2012, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) greatly expanded access to pumps through the preventative services mandate, with a single pump now available to most US families. Despite their near ubiquitous use among lactating individuals, little research has been conducted on how and when to use pumps appropriately to optimize breastfeeding outcomes. There is a timely and critical need for policy, scholarship, and education around pump use given their widespread provision and potential to promote equity for those families facing the greatest barriers to achieving their personal breastfeeding goals.

Comparison of the costs of compliance with nutrition education messages to improve the diets of Bangladeshi breastfeeding mothers and weaning-age children

Local market prices in rural Bangladesh were used to compute the costs of filling the nutrient gaps between actual intakes and safe nutrient requirements, and the costs of compliance with nutrition messages, for 78 lactating mothers and 61 weaning-age breastfed children. (The gap is the difference between the requirement and the amount of nutrient consumed.) To fill the mother's energy gap of approximately 1050 kcal (4393 kJ) would cost an additional 21% of the daily wage, or almost double the value of food she was presently eating. Given social reality, these costs would probably be much greater, as the mother would also need to increase the allocation of food to other household members. The weaning-age children's energy gap could theoretically be closed for less than one-third of the cost of improving the mothers' diets, or about 8% of the daily wage. The increase in food intake equivalent to 2% of the daily wage actually achieved through nutrition education resulted in a significant improvement in child weight gain, though not ideal. These findings suggest that, in the absence of programs which reduce economic barriers, it is economically feasible for families to close the nutrient gaps for weaning-age breastfed children in Bangladesh, but not for lactating women. Thus, education to improve women's diets should be incorporated into programs that make these improvements affordable, whereas education to improve weaning-age children's diets can be implemented with or without other program supports.