Global evidence of persistent violations of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes: A systematic scoping review.

The influence of marketing on infant and young child feeding and health is well recognized, and an International Code was adopted by the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981 to reduce inappropriate marketing and protect breastfeeding. Yet the marketing and influencing continue. This scoping review systematically examined the published research evidence on the nature and extent of exposure to International Code violations from 1981 to August 2021. We used several search strategies involving multi-language databases, organization websites, citation tracking, and expert consultation, to find research items meeting our inclusion criteria. We evaluated 657 items and retained 153 studies from at least 95 countries in the review. The majority of the studies (n = 113) documenting exposure to inappropriate marketing were published since 2010. Studies reported a broad range of marketing violations targeting mothers and families, health workers, and the general public. Marketing via digital platforms and brand extension has become more frequent. The evidence shows the use of misleading and inaccurate labeling and health and nutrition claims in breach of the Code. Our review confirms that violations of the Code have not ceased and calls for renewed attention from the WHA and national governments to protect the health of children and their mothers.

Early additional food and fluids for healthy breastfed full-term infants.

BACKGROUND: Health organisations recommend exclusive breastfeeding for six months. However, the addition of other fluids or foods before six months is common in many countries. Recently, research has suggested that introducing solid food at around four months of age while the baby continues to breastfeed is more protective against developing food allergies compared to exclusive breastfeeding for six months. Other studies have shown that the risks associated with non-exclusive breastfeeding are dependent on the type of additional food or fluid given. Given this background we felt it was important to update the previous version of this review to incorporate the latest findings from studies examining exclusive compared to non-exclusive breastfeeding. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of additional food or fluid for full-term healthy breastfeeding infants and to examine the timing and type of additional food or fluid. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 March 2016) and reference lists of all relevant retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in infants under six months of age comparing exclusive breastfeeding versus breastfeeding with any additional food or fluids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Two review authors assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 trials (2542 randomised infants/mothers). Nine trials (2226 analysed) provided data on outcomes of interest to this review. The variation in outcome measures and time points made it difficult to pool results from trials. Data could only be combined in a meta-analysis for one primary (breastfeeding duration) and one secondary (weight change) outcome. None of the trials reported on physiological jaundice. Infant mortality was only reported in one trial.For the majority of older trials, the description of study methods was inadequate to assess the risk of bias. Most studies that we could assess showed a high risk of other biases and over half were at high risk of selection bias.Providing breastfeeding infants with artifical milk, compared to exclusive breastfeeding, did not affect rates of breastfeeding at hospital discharge (risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.08; one trial, 100 infants; low-quality evidence). At three months, breastfeeding infants who were provided with artificial milk had higher rates of any breastfeeding compared to exclusively breastfeeding infants (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.41; two trials, 137 infants; low-quality evidence). Infants who were given artifical milk in the first few days after birth before breastfeeding, had less "obvious or probable symptoms" of allergy compared to exclusively breastfeeding infants (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.91; one trial, 207 infants; very low-quality evidence). No difference was found in maternal confidence when comparing non-exclusive breastfeeding infants who were provided with artificial milk with exclusive breastfeeding infants (mean difference (MD) 0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.54; one study, 39 infants; low-quality evidence). Rates of breastfeeding were lower in the non-exclusive breastfeeding group compared to the exclusive breastfeeding group at four, eight, 12 (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.87; one trial, 170 infants; low-quality evidence), 16 and 20 weeks.The addition of glucose water resulted in fewer episodes of hypoglycaemia (below 2.2 mmol/L) compared to the exclusive breastfeeding group, reported at 12 hours (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.20; one trial, 170 infants; very low-quality evidence), but no significant difference at 24 hours (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 9.17; one trial, 170 infants; very low-quality evidence). Weight loss was lower for infants who received additional glucose water (one trial, 170 infants) at six, 12, 24 and 48 hours of life (MD -32.50 g, 95% CI -52.09 to -12.91; low-quality evidence) compared to the exclusively breastfeeding infants but no difference between groups was observed at 72 hours of life (MD 3.00 g, 95% CI -20.83 to 26.83; very low-quality evidence). In another trial with the water and glucose water arms combined (one trial, 47 infants), we found no significant difference in weight loss between the additional fluid group and the exclusively breastfeeding group on either day three or day five (MD -1.03%, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.18; very low-quality evidence) and (MD -0.20%, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.46; very low-quality evidence).Infant mortality was reported in one trial with no deaths occurring in either group (1162 infants). The early introduction of potentially allergenic foods, compared to exclusively breastfeeding, did not reduce the risk of "food allergy" to one or more of these foods between one to three years of age (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.25; 1162 children), visible eczema at 12 months stratified by visible eczema at enrolment (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.44; 284 children), or food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome reactions (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.18 to 22.04; 1303 children) (all moderate-quality evidence). Breastfeeding infants receiving additional foods from four months showed no difference in infant weight gain (g) from 16 to 26 weeks compared to exclusive breastfeeding to six months (MD -39.48, 95% CI -128.43 to 49.48; two trials, 260 children; low-quality evidence) or weight z-scores (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.13; one trial, 100 children; moderate-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of benefit to newborn infants on the duration of breastfeeding from the brief use of additional water or glucose water. The quality of the evidence on formula supplementation was insufficient to suggest a change in practice away from exclusive breastfeeding. For infants at four to six months, we found no evidence of benefit from additional foods nor any risks related to morbidity or weight change. The majority of studies showed high risk of other bias and most outcomes were based on low-quality evidence which meant that we were unable to fully assess the benefits or harms of supplementation or to determine the impact from timing and type of supplementation. We found no evidence to disagree with the current international recommendation that healthy infants exclusively breastfeed for the first six months.

Methods of milk expression for lactating women.

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is important, however not all infants can feed at the breast and methods of expressing milk need evaluation. OBJECTIVES: To assess acceptability, effectiveness, safety, effect on milk composition, contamination and costs of methods of milk expression. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (21 March 2016), handsearched relevant journals and conference proceedings, and contacted experts in the field to seek additional published or unpublished studies. We also examined reference lists of all relevant retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing methods at any time after birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: This updated review includes 41 trials involving 2293 participants, with 22 trials involving 1339 participants contributing data for analysis. Twenty-six of the trials referred to mothers of infants in neonatal units (n = 1547) and 14 to mothers of healthy infants at home (n = 730), with one trial containing mothers of both neonatal and healthy older infants (n = 16). Eleven trials compared one or more types of pump versus hand expression and 14 studies compared one type of pump versus another type of pump, with three of these studies comparing both hand expression and pump types. Twenty studies compared a specific protocol or adjunct behaviour including sequential versus simultaneous pumping protocols, pumping frequency, provision of an education and support intervention, relaxation, breast massage, combining hand expression with pumping and a breast cleansing protocol.Due to heterogeneity in participants, interventions, and outcomes measured or reported, we were unable to pool findings for most of the specified outcomes. It was not possible therefore to produce a 'Summary of findings' table in this update. Most of the included results were derived from single studies. Trials took place in 14 countries under a variety of circumstances and were published from 1982 to 2015. Sixteen of the 30 trials that evaluated pumps or products had support from the manufacturers. The risk of bias of the included studies was variable. Primary outcomesOnly one of the 17 studies examining maternal satisfaction/acceptability with the method or adjunct behaviour provided data suitable for analysis. In this study, self-efficacy was assessed by asking mothers if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: 'I don't want anyone to see me (hand expressing/pumping)'. The study found that mothers who were using the electric pump were more likely to agree with the statement compared to mothers hand expressing, (mean difference (MD) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.25; P = 0.01, participants = 68). Mothers who were hand expressing reported that the instructions for expression were clearer compared to the electric pump, (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.05; P = 0.02, participants = 68). Descriptive reporting of satisfaction in the other studies varied in the measures used, did not indicate a clear preference for one pump type, although there was satisfaction with some relaxation and support interventions.We found no clinically significant differences between methods related to contamination of the milk that compared any type of pump to hand expression (risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.61; P = 0.51, participants = 28), manual pump compared to hand expression, (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.58; P = 0.30, participants = 142) a large electric pump compared to hand expression (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.49; P = 0.61, participants = 123), or a large electric pump compared to a manual pump (MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.26; P = 0.59, participants = 141).The level of maternal breast or nipple pain or damage was similar in comparisons of a large electric pump to hand expression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.71; P = 0.96, participants = 68). A study comparing a manual and large electric pump, reported sore nipples in 7% for both groups and engorgement in 4% using a manual pump versus 6% using an electric pump; and in one study no nipple damage was reported in the hand-expression group, and one case of nipple damage in each of the manual pump and the large electric pump groups.One study examined adverse effects on infants, however as the infants did not all receive their mothers' expressed milk, we have not included the results. Secondary outcomesThe quantity of expressed milk obtained was increased, in some studies by a clinically significant amount, in interventions involving relaxation, music, warmth, massage, initiation of pumping, increased frequency of pumping and suitable breast shield size. Support programmes and simultaneous compared to sequential pumping did not show a difference in milk obtained. No pump consistently increased the milk volume obtained significantly.In relation to nutrient quality, hand expression or a large electric pump were found to provide higher protein than a manual pump, and hand expression provided higher sodium and lower potassium compared to a large electric pump or a manual pump. Fat content was higher with breast massage when pumping; no evidence of difference was found for energy content between methods.No consistent effect was found related to prolactin change or effect on oxytocin release with pump type or method. Economic aspects were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The most suitable method for milk expression may depend on the time since birth, purpose of expression and the individual mother and infant. Low-cost interventions including initiation of milk expression sooner after birth when not feeding at the breast, relaxation, massage, warming the breasts, hand expression and lower cost pumps may be as effective, or more effective, than large electric pumps for some outcomes. Variation in nutrient content across methods may be relevant to some infants. Small sample sizes, large standard deviations, and the diversity of the interventions argue caution in applying these results beyond the specific method tested in the specific settings. Independently funded research is needed for more trials on hand expression, relaxation and other techniques that do not have a commercial potential.

Methods of milk expression for lactating women.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a 2008 Cochrane review. Breastfeeding is important. However, not all infants can feed at the breast and methods of expressing milk need evaluation. OBJECTIVES: To assess acceptability, effectiveness, safety, effect on milk composition, contamination and cost implications of methods of milk expression. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (March 2014), CINAHL (1982 to March 2014), conference proceedings, secondary references and contacted researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing methods at any time after birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: This updated review includes 34 studies involving 1998 participants, with 17 trials involving 961 participants providing data for analysis. Eight studies compared one or more types of pump versus hand expression and 14 studies compared one type of pump versus another type of pump, with three of these studies comparing both hand expression and multiple pump types. Fifteen studies compared a specific protocol or adjunct behaviour including sequential versus simultaneous pumping protocols (five studies), pumping > 4 times per day versus < 3 times per day (one study), provision of a milk expression education and support intervention to mothers of preterm infants versus no provision (one study), provision of audio/visual relaxation to mothers of preterm infants versus no specific relaxation (two studies), commencing pumping within one hour of delivery versus between one to six hours (one study), breast massage before or during pumping versus no massage (two studies, of which one also tested a second behaviour), therapeutic touch versus none (one study), warming breasts before pumping versus not warming breasts (one study), combining hand expression with pumping versus pumping alone (one study) and a breast cleansing protocol versus no protocol (one study).There were insufficient comparable data on outcomes to undertake meta-analysis and data reported relates to evidence from single studies.Only one of the 17 studies examining maternal satisfaction/acceptability provided data in a way that could be analysed, reporting that mothers assigned to the pumping group had more agreement with the statement 'I don't want anyone to see me pumping' than mothers in the hand expression group and the statement 'I don't want anyone to see me hand expressing' (n = 68, mean difference (MD) -0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.25 to -0.15, P = 0.01), and that mothers found instructions for hand expression were clearer than for pumping (n = 68, MD 0.40, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.75, P = 0.02). No evidence of a difference was found between methods related to adverse effects of milk contamination (one study, n = 28, risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.27, P = 0.51), (one study, n = 142 milk samples, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.58, P = 0.30), (one study, n = 123 milk samples, MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.49, P = 0.61), (one study, n = 141 milk samples, MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.26, P = 0.59 ); or level of maternal breast or nipple pain or damage (one study, n = 68, MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.71, P = 0.96).For the secondary outcomes, greater volume was obtained when mothers with infants in a neonatal unit were provided with a relaxation tape or music-listening interventions to use while pumping, when the breasts was warmed before pumping or massaged while pumping.Initiation of milk pumping within 60 minutes of birth of a very low birthweight infant obtained higher mean milk quantity in the first week than the group who initiated pumping later. No evidence of difference in volume was found with simultaneous or sequential pumping or between pumps studied. Differences between methods was found for sodium, potassium, protein and fat constituents; no evidence of difference was found for energy content.No consistent effect was found related to prolactin change or effect on oxytocin release with pump type or method. Economic aspects were not reported.Most studies were classified as unclear or low risk of bias. Most studies did not provide any information regarding blinding of outcome assessment. Fifteen of the 25 studies that evaluated pumps or products had support from the manufacturers. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The most suitable method for milk expression may depend on the time since birth, purpose of expression and the individual mother and infant. Low-cost interventions including early initiation when not feeding at the breast, listening to relaxation music, massage and warming of the breasts, hand expression and lower cost pumps may be as effective, or more effective, than large electric pumps for some outcomes. Small sample sizes, large standard deviations, and the diversity of the interventions argue caution in applying these results beyond the specific method tested in the specific settings.

Early additional food and fluids for healthy breastfed full-term infants.

BACKGROUND: Widespread recommendations from health organisations encourage exclusive breastfeeding for six months. However, the addition of other fluids or foods before six months is common in many countries and communities. This practice suggests perceived benefits of early supplementation or lack of awareness of the possible risks. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of supplementation for full-term healthy breastfed infants and to examine the timing and type of supplementation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (21 March 2014) and reference lists of all relevant retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in infants under six months of age comparing exclusive breastfeeding versus breastfeeding with any additional food or fluids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected the trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight trials (984 randomised infants/mothers). Six trials (n = 613 analysed) provided data on outcomes of interest to this review. The variation in outcome measures and time points made it difficult to pool results from trials. Data could only be combined in a meta-analysis for one secondary outcome (weight change). The trials that provided outcome data compared exclusively breastfed infants with breastfed infants who were allowed additional nutrients in the form of artificial milk, glucose, water or solid foods.In relation to the majority of the older trials, the description of study methods was inadequate to assess the risk of bias. The two more recent trials, were found to be at low risk of bias for selection and detection bias. The overall quality of the evidence for the main comparison was low.In one trial (170 infants) comparing exclusively breastfeeding infants with infants who were allowed additional glucose water, there was a significant difference favouring exclusive breastfeeding up to and including week 20 (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.99), with more infants in the exclusive breastfed group still exclusively breastfeeding. Conversely in one small trial (39 infants) comparing exclusive breastfed infants with non-exclusive breastfed infants who were provided with artificial milk, fewer infants in the exclusive breastfed group were exclusively breastfeeding at one week (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.92) and at three months (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.76) and there was no significant difference in the proportion of infants continuing any breastfeeding at three months between groups (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03).For infant morbidity (six trials), one newborn trial (170 infants) found a statistically, but not clinically, significant difference in temperature at 72 hours (mean difference (MD) 0.10 degrees, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.19), and that serum glucose levels were higher in glucose supplemented infants in the first 24 hours, though not at 48 hours (MD -0.24 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.03). Weight loss was also higher (grams) in infants at six, 12, 24 and 48 hours of life in the exclusively breastfed infants compared to those who received additional glucose water (MD 7.00 g, 95% CI 0.76 to 13.24; MD 11.50 g, 95% CI 1.71 to 21.29; MD 13.40 g, 95% CI 0.43 to 26.37; MD 32.50 g, 95% CI 12.91 to 52.09), but no difference between groups was observed at 72 hours of life. In another trial (47 infants analysed), we found no significant difference in weight loss between the exclusively breastfeeding group and the group allowed either water or glucose water on either day three or day five (MD 1.03%, 95% CI -0.18 to 2.24) and (MD 0.20%, 95% CI -1.18 to 1.58).Three trials with four- to six-month-old infants provided no evidence to support any benefit from the addition of complementary foods at four months versus exclusive breastfeeding to six months nor any risks related either morbidity or weight change (or both).None of the trials reported on the remaining primary outcomes, infant mortality or physiological jaundice. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to fully assess the benefits or harms of supplementation or to determine the impact from timing and type of supplementation. We found no evidence of benefit to newborn infants and possible negative effects on the duration of breastfeeding from the brief use of additional water or glucose water, and the quality of the evidence from a small pilot study on formula supplementation was insufficient to suggest a change in practice away from exclusive breastfeeding. For infants at four to six months, we found no evidence of benefit from additional foods nor any risks related to morbidity or weight change. Future studies should examine the longer-term effects on infants and mothers, though randomising infants to receive supplements without medical need may be problematic.We found no evidence for disagreement with the recommendation of international health associations that exclusive breastfeeding should be recommended for healthy infants for the first six months.

Promoting Respectful Maternity Care by Reducing Unnecessary Episiotomies: Experiences from Centers of Excellence for Breastfeeding in Vietnam.

(1) Background: Routine episiotomy is not recommended by international guidelines; however, it occurs at a high rate in Vietnam. (2) Methods: A process to reduce unnecessary episiotomies was developed and implemented as part of the Centers of Excellence for Breastfeeding initiative, which aims to deliver high-quality breastfeeding and early essential newborn care services within a supportive policy environment. The aim of this project report is to outline the steps undertaken to reduce episiotomies, the experience in pilot hospitals, and the process towards changing policy. (3) Results: During the 14 months following the change in episiotomy policy, pilot hospital records showed no infant death or injury. Monthly monitoring data from four pilot hospitals showed that the prevalence of episiotomy was substantially lower than the average in national hospitals in Vietnam. Facilitators to reducing the episiotomy rate include the incentive of Centers of Excellence for Breastfeeding designation and supportive hospital leadership. Challenges include the ambiguity of Vietnam's national guideline on episiotomy and lack of routine monitoring on the episiotomy rate and indications. (4) Discussion: Our experience suggests that through training and routine monitoring hospitals can apply a policy of selective episiotomy and reduce the practice, particularly among multiparous women, and improve breastfeeding rates.(5) Conclusions: Sharing our experience of implementing this process and offering four areas for action will hopefully contribute to expanded use of mother-friendly, evidence-based care as policy and routine practice in Vietnam and similar settings.

Methods of milk expression for lactating women.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a 2008 Cochrane review. Breastfeeding is important. However, not all infants can feed at the breast and methods of expressing milk need evaluation. OBJECTIVES: To assess acceptability, effectiveness, safety, effect on composition, contamination and cost implications of methods of milk expression. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (20 January 2011), CINAHL (1982 to January 2011), conference proceedings, secondary references and contacted researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing methods at any time after birth, and crossover trials commencing at least 28 days after birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included 23 studies with 10 studies (632 mothers) providing data for analysis.Mothers provided with a relaxation tape produced more milk than mothers who were not (mean difference (MD) 34.70 ml/single expression, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.51 to 59.89, P = 0.007). A lower milk volume over six days was reported when comparing hand expression to the electric pump (standardised mean difference (SMD) -1.00 ml, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.36, P = 0.002); other studies of the same pump using different measures did not find a significant difference (12 to 36 hours postpartum SMD -0.38 cc, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.10, P = 0.12); day five postpartum SMD -0.62 ml/day, 95% CI -1.43 to 0.19, P = 0.13). No evidence of difference in volume was found with simultaneous or sequential pumping, or between manual and electric pumps studied. One study reported a higher sodium concentration in hand expressed milk compared to a manual pump (SMD 0.59 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96, P = 0.002) and to an electric pump (SMD 0.70 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.09, P = 0.0003), and lower potassium concentration compared to a manual pump (MD -0.37 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.73, P = 0.05) or to an electric pump (SMD -0.32 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.06, P = 0.10). No evidence of difference was found for energy content, milk contamination or adverse effects. Reports of maternal views were not comparable. Economic aspects were not reported.   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The most suitable method for milk expression may depend on the time since birth, purpose of expression and the individual mother and infant. Low cost interventions including early initiation when not feeding at the breast, relaxation, hand expression and lower cost pumps may be as effective, or more effective, than large electric pumps for some outcomes. Small sample sizes, large standard deviations, small number of studies reviewed, and the diversity of the interventions argue caution in applying these results beyond the specific method tested in the specific settings.

Early additional food and fluids for healthy breastfed full-term infants.

BACKGROUND: Widespread recommendations from health organisations encourage exclusive breastfeeding for six months. However the addition of other fluids or foods before six months is common practice in many countries and communities. This practice suggests perceived benefits of early supplementation or lack of awareness of the possible risks. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of supplementation for full-term healthy breastfed infants and to examine the timing and type of supplementation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 March 2011) and reference lists of all relevant retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in infants under six months of age comparing exclusive breastfeeding versus breastfeeding with any additional food or fluids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected the trials; three extracted data and assessed risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials (814 infants). Two trials in the early days after birth that reported data did not indicate that giving additional fluids was beneficial. For duration of breastfeeding, there was a significant difference favouring exclusive breastfeeding up to and including week 20 (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.99), indicating that supplements may contribute to reducing the duration.For infant morbidity (three trials), one newborn trial found a statistically, but not clinically, significant difference in temperature at 72 hours (MD 0.10 degrees, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.19), and that serum glucose levels were higher in glucose supplemented infants in the first 24 hours, though not at 48 hours (MD -0.24mmol/l, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.03). Two trials with four- to six-month-old infants did not indicate any benefit to supplemented infants to 26 weeks nor any risks related to morbidity or weight change.None of the trials reported on the remaining primary outcomes, infant mortality or physiological jaundice. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to fully assess the benefits or harms of supplementation or to determine the impact from timing and type of supplementation .We found no benefit to newborn infants and possible negative effects on the duration of breastfeeding from the brief use of additional water or glucose water. For infants at four to six months, we found no benefit from additional foods nor any risks related to morbidity or weight change. Future studies should examine the longer term effects on infants and mothers, though randomising infants to receive supplements without medical need may be considered unethical.We found no evidence for disagreement with the recommendation of international health associations that exclusive breastfeeding should be recommended for healthy infants for the first six months.

Measuring Mothers' Viewpoints of Breast Pump Usage.

Breastfeeding has short- and long-term positive influences on the health and wellbeing of the child. There are situations where breastfeeding does not occur and expressed or pumped mother's milk is used. Mothers and healthcare providers report problems or negative views on using pumps in studies across the globe. This systematic review and secondary analysis of 18 random control trials related to mothers' views of breast pumps examines the range of viewpoints gathered, the variety of measurement instruments used, how the outcomes are reported and the challenges that occur. It aims to inform critical reading of research as well as future research design. Devices which the mother views as comfortable and useful will facilitate more infants to receive human milk when direct breastfeeding does not occur, and they will have a positive influence on health and wellbeing.

Dietitians supporting breastfeeding: a survey of education, skills, knowledge and attitudes.

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding rates in Ireland are among the lowest in the world; thus, it is important to understand what knowledge and skills exist and what are the education needs of dietitians. There has been no Irish research on dietitians' perception of their role in promoting, protecting and supporting breastfeeding. AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the breastfeeding-related education that dietitians participated in, their breastfeeding-related skills, knowledge and attitudes towards breastfeeding. METHODS: An e-survey was conducted among members of the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute. RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent of the 181 respondents received education or training on breastfeeding since qualifying with a trend of more training time on general breastfeeding knowledge and less time on clinical issues. There were lower confidence in skills, and role expectations related to clinical practice and clinical skills were perceived as required by only a few dietitians in specific roles. Personal breastfeeding experience was associated with greater confidence in their breastfeeding-related skills and a greater likiehood of reporting positive attitudes. The main source of information about breastfeeding was own reading or experience. Most respondents (64%) felt that their practice would benefit from additional training. The most frequently reported barriers to providing breastfeeding-related care were "I lack the skill", "I lack the confidence", and "I lack the knowledge to provide assistance with breastfeeding". CONCLUSIONS: Further examination of the role of the dietitian and the establishment of expected competencies would provide a clear framework for future training and education of dietitians towards increasing breastfeeding prevalence in Ireland.

Evidence of Violations of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes since the Adoption by the World Health Assembly in 1981: A Systematic Scoping Review Protocol.

This is the protocol for a scoping review that aims to systematically explore and summarise the published evidence of violations of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (the Code) and subsequent World Health Assembly Resolutions globally. The planned scoping review will seek to identify what research has been conducted on the topic, examine the geographic spread and nature of violations, and summarise knowledge gaps. The Code was adopted in 1981 by the World Health Assembly to protect infant health, in particular from aggressive and inappropriate marketing of breastmilk substitutes including formula and related products. Non-compliance with the Code or violations are described in reports, however, no existing systematic review of the global research appears to have been conducted that encompasses the varied disciplines including health, economics, and gender. The review will inform international and national decision-makers on the nature of violations and potentially highlight the need for new modalities to regulate this marketing. The proposed scoping review will use the six-step process of Arksey and O'Malley which includes defining the research question; identifying the relevant literature; selecting studies; charting the data; collating, summarising and reporting the findings; and will include a consultative group.

Marketing Breastfeeding Substitutes: A Discussion Document.

Marketing influences knowledge, attitudes, and decisions related to infant and young child nutrition, safety, development, parental confidence, and other aspects of health and wellbeing of the child. These attitudes and behaviours of parents, health workers, policy makers, and other influencers have short- and long-term effects on the child. There is an International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes. Is it time to have a code of marketing of breastfeeding substitutes?

Do we agree? Using a Delphi technique to develop consensus on skills of hand expression.

The Delphi technique provides a structured process for collecting and examining group agreement on a topic. It facilitates anonymity and thus reduces the risk of stronger members dominating the group discussion, and it allows geographical spread of the participants as well as low cost and timely return. This article describes the use of Delphi to examine agreement and lack of agreement among an expert panel on what skills a mother needs to learn for hand expression. A Delphi technique can be used for a variety of topics and participants.

Methods of milk expression for lactating women.

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is important for health. However, not all infants can feed at the breast and effective methods of expressing milk have not been adequately evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To assess acceptability, effectiveness, safety, effect on milk composition, bacterial contamination of milk and cost implications of a range of methods of milk expression, including hand expression and manual, battery and electric pumps. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (December 2007), CINAHL (1982 to July 2007), handsearched relevant journals and conference proceedings, scanned secondary references and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared one method or technique of milk expression or pumping with other(s), at any time after birth, and cross-over trials that commenced at least 28 days after birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We sought additional information from the trial authors. MAIN RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria of which six (397 mothers) provided data that could be used in the analyses. Compared with hand expression, one study found a significantly greater total volume of milk expressed over six days both with the electrical pump (373.10 ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) 161.09 to 585.11), and with the foot-operated pump (212.10 ml, 95% CI 9.39 to 414.81); however, the difference found between the foot pump and the electric pump was not significant. Mothers provided with a relaxation tape produced a greater volume of milk at one expression than women not provided with the tape (34.70 ml, 95% CI 9.51 to 59.89). Simultaneous pumping took less time than sequential pumping in one study (3.50 hours/week, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.61). No evidence of difference was found in volume with simultaneous or sequential pumping, or for milk contamination, breastfeeding at discharge, fat content of milk, serum prolactin by method of pumping. Maternal satisfaction, adverse effects on mothers and economic effects of interventions were poorly reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Mothers appear to obtain greater total volumes of milk in six days after birth using the electric or foot powered pump tested compared to hand expression, and a greater volume at one expression during the second week when provided with a relaxation tape. Simultaneous pumping takes less time compared to sequential pumping. Further research with larger numbers and more comprehensive reporting is needed, and mothers' reasons for expressing linked to their evaluation of effectiveness rather than market-led research on equipment performance.