Exploring factors influencing the uptake of kangaroo mother care: key informant interviews with parents.

BACKGROUND: The updated World Health Organization (WHO) guideline recommends immediate kangaroo mother care (KMC) for all infants, particularly those born preterm. However, its uptake and sustainability have been unsatisfactory. Therefore, we aimed to gain deeper insight into factors influencing the uptake of KMC practice in our setting, and thereby identify possible solutions for the development of relevant interventions to improve its adoption and make KMC a routine practice for all infants. METHODS: Using the Triandis model of social behaviour as our framework, we conducted key informant interviews with parents and healthcare providers. Trained interviewers conducted interviews with nine parents, recruited via purposive sampling. These parents were parents of preterm infants who had been introduced to KMC. Data was transcribed and analysed based on Triandis' Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour. This paper only reports the results of the parent interviews. RESULTS: Major findings were how positive feelings like warmth and contentment, the sense of parenthood with KMC, the benefits of KMC for their infant and parents being enablers for KMC uptake. Conversely, the lack of KMC awareness, the initial negative feelings such as fear, uncertainty and embarrassment, the prioritization of time for milk expression, overcrowding in the ward, lack of space and privacy, limited visiting hours, lack of support and poor communication resulting in misapprehension about KMC were major barriers. CONCLUSION: A deeper understanding of the factors influencing the uptake of KMC using the Triandis behavioural model provided a way forward to help improve its uptake and sustainability in our settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the National Medical Research Registry (NMRR-17-2984-39191).

Oral galactagogues (natural therapies or drugs) for increasing breast milk production in mothers of non-hospitalised term infants.

BACKGROUND: Many women express concern about their ability to produce enough milk, and insufficient milk is frequently cited as the reason for supplementation and early termination of breastfeeding. When addressing this concern, it is important first to consider the influence of maternal and neonatal health, infant suck, proper latch, and feeding frequency on milk production, and that steps be taken to correct or compensate for any contributing issues. Oral galactagogues are substances that stimulate milk production. They may be pharmacological or non-pharmacological (natural). Natural galactagogues are usually botanical or other food agents. The choice between pharmacological or natural galactagogues is often influenced by familiarity and local customs. Evidence for the possible benefits and harms of galactagogues is important for making an informed decision on their use. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of oral galactagogues for increasing milk production in non-hospitalised breastfeeding mother-term infant pairs. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Health Research and Development Network - Phillippines (HERDIN), Natural Products Alert (Napralert), the personal reference collection of author LM, and reference lists of retrieved studies (4 November 2019). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs (including published abstracts) comparing oral galactagogues with placebo, no treatment, or another oral galactagogue in mothers breastfeeding healthy term infants. We also included cluster-randomised trials but excluded cross-over trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth methods for data collection and analysis. Two to four review authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias, extracted data for analysis and checked accuracy. Where necessary, we contacted the study authors for clarification. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one RCTs involving 3005 mothers and 3006 infants from at least 17 countries met the inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted either in hospitals immediately postpartum or in the community. There was considerable variation in mothers, particularly in parity and whether or not they had lactation insufficiency. Infants' ages at commencement of the studies ranged from newborn to 6 months. The overall certainty of evidence was low to very low because of high risk of biases (mainly due to lack of blinding), substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity, and imprecision of measurements. Pharmacological galactagogues Nine studies compared a pharmacological galactagogue (domperidone, metoclopramide, sulpiride, thyrotropin-releasing hormone) with placebo or no treatment. The primary outcome of proportion of mothers who continued breastfeeding at 3, 4 and 6 months was not reported. Only one study (metoclopramide) reported on the outcome of infant weight, finding little or no difference (mean difference (MD) 23.0 grams, 95% confidence interval (CI) -47.71 to 93.71; 1 study, 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three studies (metoclopramide, domperidone, sulpiride) reported on milk volume, finding pharmacological galactagogues may increase milk volume (MD 63.82 mL, 95% CI 25.91 to 101.72; I² = 34%; 3 studies, 151 participants; low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicates there may be increased milk volume with each drug, but with varying CIs. There was limited reporting of adverse effects, none of which could be meta-analysed. Where reported, they were limited to minor complaints, such as tiredness, nausea, headache and dry mouth (very low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects were reported for infants. Natural galactagogues Twenty-seven studies compared natural oral galactagogues (banana flower, fennel, fenugreek, ginger, ixbut, levant cotton, moringa, palm dates, pork knuckle, shatavari, silymarin, torbangun leaves or other natural mixtures) with placebo or no treatment. One study (Mother's Milk Tea) reported breastfeeding rates at six months with a concluding statement of "no significant difference" (no data and no measure of significance provided, 60 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Three studies (fennel, fenugreek, moringa, mixed botanical tea) reported infant weight but could not be meta-analysed due to substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 60%, 275 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis shows we are very uncertain whether fennel or fenugreek improves infant weight, whereas moringa and mixed botanical tea may increase infant weight compared to placebo. Thirteen studies (Bu Xue Sheng Ru, Chanbao, Cui Ru, banana flower, fenugreek, ginger, moringa, fenugreek, ginger and turmeric mix, ixbut, mixed botanical tea, Sheng Ru He Ji, silymarin, Xian Tong Ru, palm dates; 962 participants) reported on milk volume, but meta-analysis was not possible due to substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 99%). The subgroup analysis for each intervention suggested either benefit or little or no difference (very low-certainty evidence). There was limited reporting of adverse effects, none of which could be meta-analysed. Where reported, they were limited to minor complaints such as mothers with urine that smelled like maple syrup and urticaria in infants (very low-certainty evidence). Galactagogue versus galactagogue Eight studies (Chanbao; Bue Xue Sheng Ru, domperidone, moringa, fenugreek, palm dates, torbangun, moloco, Mu Er Wu You, Kun Yuan Tong Ru) compared one oral galactagogue with another. We were unable to perform meta-analysis because there was only one small study for each match-up, so we do not know if one galactagogue is better than another for any outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to extremely limited, very low certainty evidence, we do not know whether galactagogues have any effect on proportion of mothers who continued breastfeeding at 3, 4 and 6 months. There is low-certainty evidence that pharmacological galactagogues may increase milk volume. There is some evidence from subgroup analyses that natural galactagogues may benefit infant weight and milk volume in mothers with healthy, term infants, but due to substantial heterogeneity of the studies, imprecision of measurements and incomplete reporting, we are very uncertain about the magnitude of the effect. We are also uncertain if one galactagogue performs better than another. With limited data on adverse effects, we are uncertain if there are any concerning adverse effects with any particular galactagogue; those reported were minor complaints. High-quality RCTs on the efficacy and safety of galactagogues are urgently needed. A set of core outcomes to standardise infant weight and milk volume measurement is also needed, as well as a strong basis for the dose and dosage form used.

Co-bedding in neonatal nursery for promoting growth and neurodevelopment in stable preterm twins.

BACKGROUND: The increased birth rate of twins during recent decades and the improved prognosis of preterm infants have resulted in the need to explore measures that could optimize their growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. It has been postulated that co-bedding simulates twins' intrauterine experiences in which co-regulatory behaviors between them are observed. These behaviors are proposed to benefit twins by reducing their stress, which may promote growth and development. However, in practice, uncertainty surrounds the benefit-risk profile of co-bedding. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of co-bedding compared with separate (individual) care for stable preterm twins in the neonatal nursery in promoting growth and neurodevelopment and reducing short- and long-term morbidities, and to determine whether co-bedding is associated with significant adverse effects.As secondary objectives, we sought to evaluate effects of co-bedding via the following subgroup analyses: twin pairs with different weight ranges (very low birth weight [VLBW] < 1500 grams vs non-VLBW), twins with versus without significant growth discordance at birth, preterm versus borderline preterm twins, twins co-bedded in incubator versus cot at study entry, and twins randomized by twin pair versus neonatal unit. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG). We used keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH) to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (hosted by EBSCOHOST), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and references cited in our short-listed articles, up to February 29, 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials with randomization by twin pair and/or by neonatal unit. We excluded cross-over studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using standard methods of the CNRG. Two review authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of retrieved records. We contacted the authors of included studies to request important information missing from their published papers. We expressed our results using risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) when appropriate, along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). We adjusted the unit of analysis from individual infants to twin pairs by averaging measurements for each twin pair (continuous outcomes) or by counting outcomes as positive if developed by either twin (dichotomous outcomes). MAIN RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria; however, only five studies provided data for analysis. Four of the six included studies were small and had significant limitations in design. As each study reported outcomes differently, data for most outcomes were effectively contributed by a single study. Study authors reported no differences between co-bedded twins and twins receiving separate care in terms of rate of weight gain (MD 0.20 grams/kg/d, 95% CI -1.60 to 2.00; one study; 18 pairs of twins; evidence of low quality); apnea, bradycardia, and desaturation (A/B/D) episodes (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.18 to 4.05; one study; 62 pairs of twins; evidence of low quality); episodes in co-regulated states (MD 0.96, 95% CI -3.44 to 5.36; one study; three pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); suspected or proven infection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.31; three studies; 65 pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); length of hospital stay (MD -4.90 days, 95% CI -35.23 to 25.43; one study; three pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); and parental satisfaction measured on a scale of 0 to 55 (MD -0.38, 95% CI -4.49 to 3.73; one study; nine pairs of twins; evidence of moderate quality). Although co-bedded twins appeared to have lower pain scores 30 seconds after heel lance on a scale of 0 to 21 (MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.68 to -0.23; two studies; 117 pairs of twins; I(2) = 75%; evidence of low quality), they had higher pain scores 90 seconds after the procedure (MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.86; one study; 62 pairs of twins). Substantial heterogeneity in the outcome of infant pain response after heel prick at 30 seconds post procedure and conflicting results at 30 and 90 seconds post procedure precluded clear conclusions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the benefits and harms of co-bedding for stable preterm twins was insufficient to permit recommendations for practice. Future studies must be adequately powered to detect clinically important differences in growth and neurodevelopment. Researchers should assess harms such as infection, along with medication errors and caregiver satisfaction.

Co-bedding in neonatal nursery for promoting growth and neurodevelopment in stable preterm twins.

BACKGROUND: With the increased birth rate of twins during the recent decades and improved prognosis of preterm infants, there is a need to explore measures that could optimise their growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. It has been postulated that co-bedding simulates the twins' intrauterine experiences in which co-regulatory behaviours between the twins are observed. These behaviours are proposed to benefit the twins by reducing their stress, which may promote growth and development. However, uncertainties exist on the benefit-risk profile of co-bedding in practice. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the effects of co-bedding on growth, and other clinically relevant physiological and neurodevelopmental outcomes for stable preterm twins. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG). We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (hosted by EBCHOST), CINAHL and references cited in our shortlisted articles using keywords and MesH headings, up to July 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with randomisation either at the level of each twin pair and/or at the level of neonatal unit. We excluded cross-over studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using the standard methods of the CNRG. Two review authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We contacted the authors of the included studies if important information was missing from their published papers. We expressed our results using risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) where appropriate with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We adjusted the unit of analysis from individual infants to twin pairs by averaging the measurement for each twin pair (continuous outcome) or by counting the outcome as positive if any of the twins developed the outcome (dichotomous outcome). MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria; however, data were only available for analysis in four studies. Four of the five included studies were small and had significant limitations in design. As each study reported the outcomes differently, data for most of the outcomes were effectively contributed by a single study. There were no differences between co-bedded twins and twins that received separate care in the rate of weight gain (MD 0.20 grams/kg/day, 95% CI: -1.60 to 2.00), apnoea, bradycardia and desaturation (A/B/D) episodes (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.18 to 4.05; 1 study), length of hospital stay (MD -4.90 days, 95% CI: -35.23 to 25.43) and infection rates (typical RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.30 to 2.31; 3 studies). There were also no differences in parental perceptions of care. Co-bedded twins appeared to spend more time crying, but they also seemed to spend more time in quiet sleep. There was low or very low quality of evidence across all the outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence on the benefits and harms of co-bedding stable preterm twins to make any recommendation in practice. There is a need for future studies that are adequately powered to detect clinically important differences in growth and neurodevelopment. Such studies should also assess harms including infections and medication errors, and caregiver satisfaction.

Mothers' hygiene experiences in confinement centres: A cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Ethnic Malaysian Chinese used to observe the 1-month postpartum confinement period at home and many families would engage a traditional postpartum carer to help care for the mother and newborn. A recent trend has been the development of confinement centres (CCs) which are private non-healthcare establishments run by staff not trained in health care. Concerns about hygiene in CCs arose after infections were reported. We describe the practice of hand hygiene observed in CCs, the availability of resources for hygiene, and the prevalence of health-related problems in CCs. METHODS: This is a cohort study of ethnic Chinese mothers intending to breastfeed their healthy infants. They were recruited post-delivery along with a comparison group who planned to spend their confinement period at home. After their 1-month confinement period, they were contacted for a structured telephone interview about their experience. To avoid any alteration in behaviour, mothers were not told at recruitment that they had to observe hygiene practices. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the effect of place of confinement on rates of infant health problems. RESULTS: Of 187 mothers, 88(47%) went to 27 different CCs while 99(53%) stayed at home. Response rates for the 1-month interviews were 88%(CC) versus 97%(home). Mothers in CC group stayed in one to four-bedded rooms and 92% of them had their baby sleeping separately in a common nursery described to have up to 17 babies at a time; 74% of them spent less than six hours a day with their babies; 43% noticed that CC staff had inadequate hand hygiene practices; 66% reported no hand basins in their rooms; 30% reported no soap at hand basins; 28% reported inexperienced or inadequate staff and 4% reported baby item sharing. Among the mothers staying at home, 35% employed a traditional postpartum carer for her baby; 32% did not room-in with their babies, but only 11% spent less than 6 hours a day with their babies. Of mothers who employed traditional postpartum carers, 32% did not know if their carer washed hands after changing diapers and 18% reported that their carer did not. Health problems that were probably related to infection (HPRI) like fever and cough were similar between the groups: 14%(CC) versus 14%(home) (p = 0.86). Multiple logistic regression did not show that CCs were a factor for HPRI: aOR 1.28 (95% CI 0.36 to 4.49). Three mothers reported events that could indicate transmission of infection in CCs. CONCLUSION: We found unsatisfactory hygiene practices in CCs as reported by mothers who spent their confinement period there. Although we were not able to establish any direct evidence of infection transmission but based on reports given by the mothers in this study, it is likely to be happening. Therefore, future studies, including intervention studies, are urgently needed to establish an appropriate hygiene standard in CCs as well as the best method to implement this standard. Training CC staff with hygiene knowledge so that they can be empowered to contribute to the development of these standards would be important.

Use of Galactagogues in a Multi-Ethnic Community in Southeast Asia: A Descriptive Study.

Purpose: Galactagogues are substances that increase breast-milk production. They can be medication, herbs or food. Use of galactagogues may be different among the major ethnic groups in Malaysia. The primary objective of this cross-sectional study is to determine the prevalence of galactagogues use among breastfeeding mothers in a multi-ethnic community. Patients and Methods: Self-administered questionnaires were distributed between November 2016 and January 2017 to mothers attending the health clinics and private hospital paediatric clinics in Penang, Malaysia, whose infants were below 6 months of age. The questionnaire enquired about use of galactagogues, types of galactagogue used, perceived effectiveness and sources of information. It also asked mothers about what they would do to increase milk supply. Results: We analyzed 322 out of 530 questionnaires distributed where 76% of mothers reported use of galactagogues; most of which were food-based: dates (66%), oats (58%) and soya bean (56%). Each major ethnic group had a different preference for galactagogues: Malays (dates), Chinese (soya bean) and Indians (oats). Only one mother used pharmacological galactagogues alone. Galactagogues were perceived to be effective by 65% of mothers who used them. Multivariate analysis showed that use of galactagogues was not related to ethnicity, education, work, perception of milk supply or use of formula milk. The most common source of information on galactagogues came from family and friends. Conclusion: Use of galactagogues is common in our population, especially food-based ones, and the choice of galactagogues differs by ethnicity. Future studies on efficacy and safety galactagogues should be focused these commonly used ones. There is also a need for qualitative studies to improve our understanding of why they are widely used in this region.

A Participatory, Needs-Based Approach to Breastfeeding Training for Confinement Centres.

With a focus on traditional practices rather than evidence-based practices, breastfeeding support is sub-optimal in confinement centres (CCs). We used a participatory, needs-based approach to develop a training module for CC staff adopting Kern's six-step approach as our conceptual framework. Of 46 identified CCs, 25 accepted our invitation to a dialogue aimed at establishing relationships and understanding their needs. An interactive training workshop was developed from the dialogue's findings. The workshop, attended by 32 CCs (101 participants), was conducted four times over a four-month period. Questions raised by the participants reflected deficits in understanding breastfeeding concepts and erroneous cultural beliefs. Correct answers rose from 20% pre-test to 51% post-test. Post-workshop feedback showed that participants appreciated the safe environment to ask questions, raise concerns and correct misconceptions. An interview conducted 14 months later showed that while some CCs improved breastfeeding support, others made no change due to conflict between breastfeeding and traditional postnatal practices, which was aggravated by a lack of support due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A participatory approach established a trustful learning environment, helping CCs appreciate the value of learning and adopting new concepts. However, cultural perceptions take time to change, hence continuous training and support are vital for sustained changes.

Comparing breastfeeding experiences between mothers spending the traditional Chinese confinement period in a confinement centre and those staying at home: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Ethnic Chinese mothers in Malaysia adhere to 30 days of traditional postpartum practices (the "confinement period") aimed at recuperation after delivery. Recently there has been an emergence of confinement centres (CCs) where mothers stay and receive traditional confinement care. Ethnic Chinese mothers have low breastfeeding rates. There are concerns that practices in CCs could contribute to this but no data exists. We described mothers' breastfeeding experiences at CCs and identified areas for potential improvement in breastfeeding support. METHODS: Ethnic Chinese mothers intending to breastfeed their healthy infants were recruited post-delivery between August and October 2017 then, at 1 and 6 months, they were telephone interviewed about their experience. For every participant going to a CC after the birth, another mother going home ("home") for her confinement was recruited. Chi-square test was used to compare groups and multiple logistic regression was used to assess the effect of confinement place on exclusive breastfeeding. RESULTS: Of 187 mothers, 88 (47%) went to CCs. Significantly more were primipara and fewer had previous breastfeeding experience. Response rates for the 1- and 6- month interviews were 88% (CC) versus 97% (home); and 77% (CC) versus 87% (home) respectively. Exclusive breastfeeding rates were similar between the groups: 62% (CC) versus 56% (home) at 1 month (p = 0.4); and 37% (CC) versus 42% (home) at 6 months (p = 0.5). Multiple logistic regression did not show that CCs were a factor affecting exclusive breastfeeding rates at 1 month, (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9, 3.3), or 6 months (aOR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4, 1.7). However, significantly more CC participants only fed expressed breast milk. Despite 66% of CC participants reporting that their centre supported breastfeeding, only 6 (8%) CC participants compared to 66 (69%) of home participants roomed-in with their baby (p < 0.001). The proportion encountering breastfeeding difficulties were similar between groups. CC participants sought help for breastfeeding problems mainly from CC staff and support groups while home participants obtained help from friends and healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Breastfeeding rates appeared to be similar at CCs and at home during the confinement period, but there were gaps in how CCs supported breastfeeding. Targeted training to CC staff to support breastfeeding may result in better outcomes for mothers staying in CCs.

Postpartum women's perception of antenatal breastfeeding education: a descriptive survey.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal breastfeeding education (ANBE) is provided to all pregnant women attending Ministry of Health (MOH) clinics and some private health facilities in Malaysia, in line with the WHO/UNICEF Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI). However, the 6 month exclusive breastfeeding prevalence remains relatively low in Malaysia, suggesting that there may be a gap between what is currently taught and what is received by the women. OBJECTIVES: To determine how women perceived their ANBE experience in the first 8 weeks postpartum including what was useful and what they would like to have been included, sources of ANBE and infant feeding practices at the time of survey. METHODS: Women during their first 8 weeks postpartum who attended MOH clinics in Penang State, Malaysia were surveyed using a self-administered questionnaire in April and May 2015. Categorical responses were presented as numbers and proportions while free text responses were compiled verbatim and categorised into themes. The perceptions of primiparous and multiparous women were compared. Multivariate logistic regression adjusted to known confounders was used to determine if ANBE was associated with exclusive breastfeeding at the time of survey. RESULTS: A total of 421 women completed the 15-item questionnaire (84% response rate) of which 282 were complete and available for analysis. Of these, 95% had received ANBE, majority (88%) from MOH clinics. Almost all women found it useful. However, there were areas both in the delivery (e.g. too short) and the content (e.g. nothing new) that were described as not useful; and areas they would like more coverage (e.g. milk expression, storage and overcoming low milk supply). The exclusive breastfeeding prevalence at the time of survey was 61%. ANBE was significantly associated with exclusive breastfeeding even after adjusting for confounders (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8.1, 95% confidence interval 1.7, 38.3). CONCLUSIONS: ANBE is widely implemented and perceived as useful and may be associated with exclusive breastfeeding. Our findings give insight into content that women would like more of and how delivery of ANBE could be improved, including individualized sessions and communicating at a suitable level and language. Future studies could focus on the quality of ANBE delivery.