Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMJ Glob Health ; 9(6)2024 Jun 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38857945

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Prelacteal feeding (PLF) is anything other than breastmilk given to newborns in the first few days of birth and/or before breastfeeding is established. PLF comes in many forms and is known as a challenge to optimal breastfeeding. Interestingly, both breastfeeding and PLF are common in Indonesia. This study investigated the association between PLF (any PLF, formula, honey, water and other milk) and breastfeeding duration. METHODS: This study used Indonesia Demographic and Health Surveys data from 2002, 2007 and 2017. Sample sizes were 5558 (2007), 6268 (2007) and 6227 (2017) mothers whose last child was aged 0-23 months. We used Cox regression survival analysis to assess the association between PLF and breastfeeding duration, estimating hazard ratios (HR) for stopping earlier. RESULTS: Overall PLF was prevalent (59%, 67% and 45% in 2002, 2007 and 2017, respectively), with formula being the most common (38%, 50% and 25%). No association between any PLF and breastfeeding duration in 2002 (HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.16)), but in 2007 and 2017, mothers who gave any PLF were more likely to stop breastfeeding earlier than those who did not (HR 1.33 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.61) and 1.47 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.69), respectively), especially in the first 6 months (HR 2.13 (95% CI 1.55 to 2.92) and 2.07 (95% CI 1.74 to 2.47), respectively). This association was more consistent for milk-based PLF. For example, HR in 2017 was 2.13 (95% CI 1.78 to 2.53) for prelacteal formula and 1.73 (95% CI 1.39 to 2.15) for other milk. The associations were inconsistent for the other PLF types. Prelacteal water showed no association while prelacteal honey showed some association with a longer breastfeeding duration in 2002 and 2007. CONCLUSION: The impact of PLF on breastfeeding duration varied by type. While this study supports current recommendations to avoid PLF unless medically indicated, the potential consequences of different PLF types on breastfeeding outcomes should be clearly communicated to healthcare providers and mothers. Further research should explore the reasons for the high PLF prevalence in this setting.


Subject(s)
Breast Feeding , Humans , Breast Feeding/statistics & numerical data , Indonesia , Female , Cross-Sectional Studies , Infant , Adult , Infant, Newborn , Young Adult , Health Surveys , Male , Time Factors , Adolescent , Infant Formula/statistics & numerical data
2.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0243097, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33270720

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prelacteal feeding (PLF) is a recognised challenge to optimal breastfeeding but remains common in Indonesia. Meanwhile, PLF-related epidemiological research is limited, particularly in this setting. This study examines the prevalence and determinants of overall PLF as well as common PLF types (formula, other milk, and honey) in Indonesia. METHODS: Data from 6127 mothers whose last child was ≤23-month-old were drawn from the 2017 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey. Multivariable modified Poisson regression was used to measure the prevalence ratio (PR) for selected PLF risk factors. PLF was defined as anything to drink other than breast milk within three days after birth, before breastmilk flows. Additional analyses were performed on mothers who gave formula, other milk, and honey. RESULTS: About 45% babies in Indonesia received PLF with formula being the most frequent (25%), followed by other milk (14%), plain water (5%), and honey (3%). Factors associated with higher prevalence of any PLF were higher wealth quintiles in rural area (PR 1.07; 95% CI 1.03-1.11 per increase in quintile), baby perceived to be small at birth (PR 1.23; 95% CI 1.12-1.35), caesarean deliveries at either public (PR 1.27; 95% CI 1.13-1.44) or private facilities (PR 1.15; 95% CI 1.01-1.31), and not having immediate skin-to-skin contact after birth (PR 1.32; 95% CI 1.23-1.42). PLF was less prevalent among mothers who gave birth to second/subsequent child (PR 0.82; 95% CI 0.76-0.88) and who had an antenatal card (PR 0.89; 95% CI 0.80-0.99). These patterns did not apply uniformly across all PLF types. For example, honey was more common among home births than deliveries at health facilities, but formula and other milk were more common among caesarean deliveries. CONCLUSIONS: Mapping risk factors for PLF, especially by types, could help to design more targeted interventions to reduce PLF and improve breastfeeding practices in Indonesia.


Subject(s)
Bottle Feeding , Breast Feeding , Adolescent , Adult , Bottle Feeding/statistics & numerical data , Breast Feeding/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Surveys , Humans , Indonesia , Infant , Infant Formula , Infant, Newborn , Mothers/statistics & numerical data , Prevalence , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...