Skip to main content
NCBI home page
BMC Public Health logoLink to BMC Public Health
. 2013 Sep 17;13(Suppl 3):S20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-S3-S20

Breastfeeding promotion interventions and breastfeeding practices: a systematic review

Sarah Haroon 1, Jai K Das 1, Rehana A Salam 1, Aamer Imdad 1, Zulfiqar A Bhutta 1,2,✉
PMCID: PMC3847366  PMID: 24564836

Abstract

Introduction

Exclusive Breastfeeding (EBF) rates remain low in both low-income and high-income countries despite World Health Organization recommendations for EBF till 6 months. Breastfeeding has been shown to have a protective effect against gastrointestinal infections, among other benefits. Large-scale interventions focusing on educating mothers about breastfeeding have the potential to increase breastfeeding prevalence, especially EBF, up to recommended standards and also to decrease infant morbidity.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted for RCTs and quasi-experimental studies comparing breastfeeding education or support to routine care. The effect of interventions was observed for exclusive, predominant, partial and no breastfeeding rates. The time intervals of interest were day 1, <1 month, and 1 to 5 months. Outcome-specific evidence was graded according to the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG) rules using the adapted Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria and recommendations were made from studies in developing countries for inclusion into the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) model.

Results

After reviewing 4600 abstracts, 372 studies were selected for full text screening and 110 of these studies were finally included. Statistically significant increases in EBF rates as a result of breastfeeding promotion interventions were observed: 43% at day 1, 30% at <1 month, and 90% at 1-5 months. Rates of ‘no breastfeeding’ reduced by 32% at 1 day, 30% at <1 month, and 18% at 1-5 months. The effect of interventions on the rates of predominant and partial breastfeeding were non-significant.

Conclusion

Breastfeeding education and/or support increased EBF rates and decreased no breastfeeding rates at birth, <1 month and 1-5 months. Combined individual and group counseling appeared to be superior to individual or group counseling alone. Interventions in developing countries had a greater impact than those in developed countries.

Introduction

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) to infants till 6 months of age to achieve optimum growth [1]. Despite this, EBF remains uncommon in most countries, even in countries with high rates of breastfeeding initiation [2,3]. In the developing world, one out of every three children is exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life, though considerable variation exists across regions [4]. Recent data shows that the prevalence of EBF in developing countries has increased from 33% in 1995 to just 39% in 2010 [5]. These figures were based on 66 countries covering 74% of the developing world population. The prevalence of EBF increased in almost all regions in the developing world, with a major improvement seen in West and Central Africa where the prevalence doubled from 12% to 28%, while more modest improvements were observed in South Asia where the increase was from 40% in 1995 to 45% in 2010. A recent WHO report shows that the median coverage of EBF has increased from 26% in 2000-2005 to 40% in 2006-2011 in the 48 Countdown countries [6].

EBF has protective effects against gastrointestinal infection [1] and the high incidence of morbidity and mortality from gastrointestinal infection in developing countries demands large-scale interventions to increase breastfeeding prevalence and exclusivity as evidence shows that “no breast feeding” is associated with a significant 165% increase in diarrhoea incidence in 0-5 month old infants and a 32% increase in 6-11 month old infants [7].

Lack of knowledge and confidence were found as the main reasons among mothers for less than optimum breastfeeding duration [8,9]. Perception of insufficient milk and work outside the home were cited as common reasons for premature weaning or not breast-feeding exclusively [10,11]. Pediatricians, nurses, midwives and lay counselors should therefore actively promote and educate, while taking into account mothers’ situational limitations.

Strategies that have been successful in increasing breastfeeding rates are the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) [12], and the use of peer counselors in settings where home deliveries are predominant [13,14]. Large-scale interventions including the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) program in developing countries, which have shown to improve feeding practices and reduced growth faltering [15,16]. Other strategies that have been employed to increase education include mother-to-mother support and contact with lay counselors or trained personnel via home visits [11,17] or telephone-based support [10,18]. These interventions may be carried out in a one-to-one counseling session or may occur in a group setting [19-22] or peer support groups [11]. Apart from interactive counseling strategies, large-scale awareness programs have also been launched via mass, electronic and print media.

Several reviews on the effect of educational interventions to increase breastfeeding have been conducted. A review by Chapman et al [23] found that peer counselors effectively improved breastfeeding initiation, duration and exclusivity. A recent Cochrane review by Lumbiganon et al [24] found that peer counseling, lactation consultation and formal BF education during pregnancy increased BF duration. The review conducted by Imdad et al [25] concludes that EBF rates rose significantly as a result of educational interventions, with a greater effect observed in developing countries. We in this review have updated the previous review by Imdad et al [25] to include the studies published after the last search date and have in addition expanded it to examine the effect of these interventions beyond EBF to include predominant, partial and no breastfeeding rates. We have reviewed and evaluated the quality of included studies according to the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group (CHERG) adaptation of Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Education (GRADE) criteria [26].

Methods

We searched published literature from PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and WHO regional databases to identify studies examining the effects of interventions to promote breastfeeding on breastfeeding rates; exclusive, predominant, partial or no breastfeeding. We used the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) Terms and keywords in various combinations. No language or date restrictions were employed in the electronic searches. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and performed data extraction. Any discrepancies between the reviewers in either the decision of inclusion or exclusion of studies or in data extraction were resolved by discussion aimed at reaching consensus. If two or more studies presented data for the same population during the same time period, the most applicable study based on methods and analysis was included in the meta-analyses.

Inclusion criteria

We selected studies that were either randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental trials. Studies with community- or facility-based interventions were included. The type of interventions included were those that offered education and/or support given to mothers through counselors (lay counselors and health professionals), and in either individual or group sessions, or a combination of both. All studies where intervention (education/support) was given either in prenatal, postnatal, or combined prenatal and postnatal periods, were included. Studies were included irrespective of the mode of delivery, whether vaginal or cesarean. For non-English articles, we primarily relied on the abstracts but did not translate the entire article into English. If the desired outcome was not present in the abstract, the study was excluded.

Exclusion criteria

We excluded studies that had before-after study designs, or were cohort and cross-sectional studies. All studies in which interventions were given specifically to preterm/very preterm babies, low birth weight/very low birth weight babies, babies with prenatal disease, born to drug-using mothers or babies in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) were excluded. Other interventions for promotion of breastfeeding like skin-to-skin contact or delayed pacifier use with the goal of decreasing ambivalence and resistance toward sustained breastfeeding were excluded.

Abstraction, analysis and summary measure

For the studies that met the final inclusion criteria, double data abstraction was done describing study identifiers and context, study design and limitations, intervention specifics and outcome effects into a standardized abstraction form as detailed in the CHERG Systematic Review Guidelines [26]. Each study was assessed and graded according to the CHERG adaptation of the GRADE technique [27].

Quantitative data synthesis

For any outcome with more than one study, we conducted a meta-analysis using Revman 5.2 [28] and reported the Mantel-Haenszel pooled relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed by a low P value (less than 0.1) or a large chi-squared statistic relative to its degree of freedom. The I2 values were also examined, and a value greater than 50% was interpreted as representing substantial and high heterogeneity, where causes were explored and the random effects model used.

Subgroup analyses were also done for studies; group vs. individual counseling, community based interventions vs. facility based interventions, and developing countries vs. developed countries. We summarized the evidence by outcome, including qualitative assessments of study quality and quantitative measures, according to the standard guidelines. A grade of “high”, “moderate”, “low” and “very low” was used for grading the overall evidence indicating the strength of an effect on specific health outcome according to the CHERG Rules for Evidence Review [26].

Outcomes and definitions

We have specified breastfeeding outcomes according to the categories of breastfeeding defined by the WHO [29,30]. The outcomes of interest included ‘EBF’, ‘Predominant breastfeeding’, ‘Partial breastfeeding’ and ‘No breastfeeding’ rates at day 1, <1 month and 1-5 months age.

‘EBF’ was defined as the child receiving only breast milk (including milk expressed or from a wet nurse) and no other type of milk or solids but could include vitamins, drops of other medicines and oral rehydration therapy (ORT). ‘Predominant breastfeeding’ was defined as the infant having breast milk as the predominant source of nourishment; however, the infant may also have received liquids (water and water-based drinks, fruit juice), ritual fluids and ORT, drops or syrups (vitamins, minerals and medicines). ‘Partial breastfeeding’ was defined as giving a baby some breastfeeds, and some artificial feeds, either milk or cereal, or other food. ‘No breastfeeding’ was defined as infants receiving no breast milk at all.

The time intervals of interest; day 1, <1 month and 1-5 months, were selected. “Day 1” was intended to refer to the early postpartum period and was extended to include time at hospital discharge provided it occurred at approximately the routine 48-hours postpartum. Where more than one data point was presented during this time period in a study, the earlier one was selected. The time interval “<1 month” included the time beginning from the end of the early postpartum period to 30 days. The time interval “1-5 months” included the beginning of the 2nd month to the end of 6 months. Breastfeeding rates after 6 months were recorded if they were reported in studies. For each of these time intervals, when multiple data for outcomes belonging to the same time interval were presented, the later data point was selected.

We performed subgroup analyses based on the types of counseling. “Individual counseling” was defined as interventions which solely had individual counseling and included one-on-one education or social support via home visits or telephone support. “Group counseling”, was defined as interventions with solely group counseling, including education or support sessions, discussions or classes in groups directed at mothers or other family members. “Individual and group counseling” included those studies that used interventions involving both individual and group counseling.

Subgroup analyses were also done based on the level of care. “Community-based interventions” included studies that had interventions conducted solely at the community level, in the form of care given at the home or in community and village centers, or disbursed throughout the community as an awareness program. “Facility-based interventions” was defined as interventions conducted solely at the facility level, including hospitals (such as the BFHI) and outpatient clinics or involving follow-up with facility-based professionals in the form of telephone calls. “Facility- and community-based interventions” included those studies that used interventions that were conducted at both the facility and community level.

Subgroup analyses were also conducted based on the country in which the intervention took place. The World Bank list of economies was used to classify developing (low-income and middle-income) and developed (high-income) countries [31].

Results

We conducted the search on October 5, 2012 and updated it on November 27, 2012. We screened 4600 titles and abstracts identified through literature searches and contacts with subject area experts. Of these, we reviewed 372 papers and included 110 in our final database (Figure 1). These studies included 63 RCTs and 47 quasi-experimental studies. Of these studies, 78 had individual counseling, 14 had group counseling, and 19 studies had both individual and group counseling. 21 of these studies were done in community, 46 in facility while 43 were both community- and facility-based. 34 studies were conducted in developing countries and 76 in developed countries.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Search strategy flow diagram

Various educational interventions were employed by the included studies; counseling during home visits was used in 39 studies, peer counseling in 18 studies and peer support groups in three studies. 30 studies used telephonic counseling and two studies used Internet or software-based educational programs. 16 studies used formal educational classes and 15 studies used in-hospital counseling. There were three studies that used counseling of fathers as the primary intervention.

Exclusive breastfeeding rates

In Table 1, we report the quality assessment of breastfeeding promotion intervention on EBF. A total of 66 studies were included for this outcome [11-14,17-22,32-87]. 27 of 66 studies were conducted in developing countries. Overall, educational interventions significantly increased EBF rates at day 1 by 43% (RR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.09-1.87), at <1 month by 30% (RR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.19-1.42) and at 1-5 months by 90% (RR: 1.90, 95% CI: 1.54-2.34) (Figure 2).

Table 1.

Summary of findings for the effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on exclusive breastfeeding rates.

Quality Assessment Summary of Findings
Directness No of events
No of Studies Design Limitations Consistency Generalizability to population of interest Generalizability to intervention of interest Intervention Control Relative Risk (95% CI) Comments
Rate of exclusive breastfeeding at day 1: low outcome-specific quality
15 6 RCTs [14,40,49,70,71,74], 9 QE [21,32,45,48,56,59,64,85,88] Studies used different follow up periods and recall criteria. Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. 6 of 15 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 10 out of 15 studies were conducted in developed countries Pooled results for different types of interventions. 4093 6316 1.43 [1.09, 1.87] Random effects meta-analysis due to heterogeneity.
The majority of studies used individual counseling as the intervention; most were facility and community-based.
Rate of exclusive breastfeeding at 0-1 month: Low outcome-specific quality
30 22 RCTs, 8 QE [13,17-19,21,22,33,38,39,41,42,45,52,53,55-57,60,61,65,66,68,71-74,76,81,84,85] Studies used different follow up periods. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. 15 of 30 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 19 of 30 studies were conducted in developed countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 1512 1276 1.30 [1.19, 1.42] Random effects meta-analysis due to heterogeneity.
The majority of studies used individual counseling as the intervention; most were facility and community-based.
Rate of exclusive breastfeeding at 1-6 months: low outcome-specific quality
53 34 RCTs, 19 QE [11-14,19,20,22,33-38,40-52,54,57-59,61-65,67,69,71-83,85-87] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. 21 of 53 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 29 of 53 studies were conducted in developed countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 5481 4897 1.90 [1.54, 2.34] Random effects meta-analysis due to heterogeneity.
The majority of studies used individual counseling as the intervention; most were facility and community-based
Open in a new tab

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of exclusive breastfeeding for 1 to 5 months

At day 1, subgroup analyses showed that individual counseling alone led to a 60% increase (RR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.04-2.48) while the effects of group counseling alone or combined individual and group counseling were non-significant. Subgroup analyses for the level of care showed that results were significant only for facility-based interventions. In developing countries, these interventions led to an increase of 157% (RR: 2.57, 95%CI: 1.39-4.77) whereas a non-significant effect was demonstrated in developed countries.

For the <1 month interval, subgroup analyses showed that the effects of individual counseling and combined individual and group counseling were significant, with increases of 31% and 27% respectively. Facility-based interventions were found to increase EBF rates significantly by 26% (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.11-1.43) and combined facility and community based interventions showed significant increase of 31% (RR: 1.31, 95%CI: 1.14-1.50). The effects were significant for both developing and developed countries at 35% (RR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.15-1.58) and 26% (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.13-1.41) respectively.

At 1-5 months, subgroup analyses showed that both individual and group counseling alone had significant impacts at 90% (RR: 1.90, 95% CI: 1.54-2.34) and 80% (RR: 1.80, 95% CI: 1.18-2.74), respectively. Combined individual and group counseling led to an increase of 101% (RR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.43-2.82), Subgroup analyses for level of care revealed that both community and facility-based care had significant results at 159% (RR: 2.59, 95% CI: 1.80-3.73) and 87% (RR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.26-2.78) respectively and the effect of combined facility- and community-based care was an increase of 47% (RR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.08-1.99). Interventions in developing countries led to a significant increase of 188% (RR: 2.88, 95% CI 2.11-3.93), while the impact was non-significant for developed countries.

Predominant breastfeeding rates

In Table 2, we report the quality assessment of breastfeeding promotion intervention on predominant breast feeding. 13 studies had reported this outcome [11,12,18,20,36,42,46,52,58,61,72,76,85] and eight of these were conducted in developing countries. Overall, educational interventions had a non-significant effect on predominant breastfeeding rates at <1 month (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43, 1.01) and at 1-5 months (RR: 1.08, 95%CI: 0.55, 2.13) (Figure 3), while there were no studies reporting predominant breastfeeding rates at day 1. Subgroup analysis also did not show significant findings for any of the subgroups.

Table 2.

Summary of findings for the effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on predominant and partial breastfeeding rates.

Quality Assessment Summary of Findings
Directness No of events
No of studies Design Limitations Consistency Generalizability to population of interest Generalizability to intervention of interest Intervention Control Relative Risk (95% CI) Comments
Rate of predominant breastfeeding at <1 month: Moderate outcome-specific quality
6 5 RCTs, 1 QE [18,52,61,72,76,85] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices None of the studies suggest benefit. Insignificant heterogeneity 3 studies were conducted in developing countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 33 59 0.66 [0.43, 1.01] Fixed effects meta-analysis; insignificant heterogeneity.
Most studies were facility-based and all used individual counseling.
Rate of predominant breastfeeding at 1- 5 months: low outcome specific-quality
13 10 RCTs, 3 QE [11,12,18,20,36,42,46,52,58,61,72,76,85] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices 2 studies suggest benefit.
Significant heterogeneity		 8 of 13 studies were conducted in developed countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 1433 707 1.08 [0.55, 2.13] Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity.
Most studies are facility-based and used individual counseling.
Rate of partial breastfeeding at day 1: low outcome-specific quality
6 2 RCT, 4 QE [45,49,59,64,71,89] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. 1 of 6 studies suggests benefit. Significant heterogeneity 1 of 6 studies was conducted in a developing country Pooled results for different types of interventions 101 99 1.21 [0.79, 1.87] Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity.
Most studies used individual counseling and most were facility-based.
Rate of partial breastfeeding at <1 month: moderate outcome-specific quality
11 8 RCTs, 3 QE [18,19,45,52,61,66,71,72,76,85,88] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. None of the studies suggest benefit. Insignificant heterogeneity 5 of 11 studies were conducted in developing countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 112 151 0.88 [0.72, 1.08] Fixed effects meta-analysis; insignificant heterogeneity
Most studies used individual counseling and most were facility-based.
Rate of partial breastfeeding at 1-5 months: moderate outcome-specific quality
20 11 RCTs, 9 QE [18-20,36,42,45,47,49,51,52,59,61,62,71,72,76,80,85,86,89] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). mothers in the intervention group may have over-reported feeding practices. None of the studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 9 of 20 studies were conducted in developing countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 524 578 0.87 [0.75, 1.02] Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity.
Most studies used individual counseling and most were facility-based.
Open in a new tab

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of predominant breastfeeding for 1-5 months

Partial breastfeeding rates

In Table 2, we report the quality assessment of breastfeeding promotion intervention on partial breast feeding. 24 studies [18-20,34,36,42,45,47,49,51,52,59,61,62,64,66,71,72,76,80,85,86,88,89] reported outcomes of partial breastfeeding, of which ten were conducted in developing countries. Overall, educational interventions had a non-significant effect on partial breastfeeding rates at day 1 (RR: 1.21 95% CI: 0.79, 1.87), at <1 month (RR: 0.88 95% CI: 0.72, 1.08) and at 1-5 months (RR: 0.87, 95%CI: 0.75, 1.02) intervals (Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of partial breastfeeding for 1 to 5 months

For the subgroup analysis based on the level of care, combined facility and community-based interventions had a significant reduction of 66% (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.13-0.93) at <1 month duration. Findings from all other subgroups were non-significant.

‘No breastfeeding’ rates

In Table 3, we report the quality assessment of breastfeeding promotion intervention on ‘no breast feeding’. Of the 97 papers [10-14,17-20,33,35-38,40-42,44,45,47,49,51-55,57-74,76-84,86,88-130] reporting this particular outcome, 23 were from developing countries. Overall, educational interventions significantly decreased rates of no breastfeeding by 32% at day 1 (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54-0.87), 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.62-0.80) at <1 month and 18% (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.77-0.89) at 1-5 months intervals (Figure 5).

Table 3.

Summary of findings for effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on ‘no breastfeeding’ rates.

Quality Assessment Summary of Findings
Directness No of events
No of Studies Design Limitations Consistency Generalizability to population of interest Generalizability to intervention of interest Intervention Control Relative Risk (95% CI) Comments
Rate of no breastfeeding at day 1: low outcome-specific quality
38 21 RCTs, 17 QE [11,13,14,17,33,36,37,44,49,59,63,64,68-71,74,78,79,89-91,96,100,103,107,108,110,111,113,117,120-122,124-127] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). Most studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 10 of 38 studies were conducted in developing countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 48026 39843 0.68 [0.54, 0.87] Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity
Most studies used individual counseling and most were facility and community-based.
Effect of benefit refers to decrease in numbers not breastfeeding.
Rate of no breastfeeding at <1 month: low outcome-specific quality
33 21 RCTs, 12 QE [10,18,19,38,45,52,53,61,63,66,68,71-74,76,88,90,91,93,95,98,99,101-103,106,113,117,118,120,124,128] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). 10 of 33 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 4 of 33 studies were conducted in developing countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 770 1018 0.70 [0.62, 0.80] Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity.
Most studies used individual counseling.
Rate of no breastfeeding at 1-5 months: low outcome-specific quality
73 41 RCTs, 32 QE [10,12,13,17-20,35,36,38,40-42,44,45,47,49,51,52,54,58,59,61-64,67-69,71-74,76,78-83,86,90-93,95-99,101,103-106,108-110,112-121,123,124,126,129,130] Variable follow up periods used in studies. Recall criteria variable across studies (past 24 hr, past week or previous month). 25 of 73 studies suggest benefit. Significant heterogeneity 16 of 73 studies were conducted in developing countries Pooled results for different types of interventions 15473 17578 0.82 [0.77, 0.89] Random effects meta-analysis due to significant heterogeneity
Most studies used individual counseling.
Open in a new tab

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Effect of breastfeeding education on the rate of no breastfeeding for 1 to 5 months

At day 1, subgroup analyses for type of counseling revealed that group counseling alone resulted in a 43% reduction (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.80) and individual counseling alone led to a 27% reduction (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.55-0.96). The effect of combined individual and group counseling was non-significant. Only facility-based interventions led to a significant reduction of 52% (RR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.34-0.69); the effects of community-based and combined facility- and community-based interventions were non-significant. Interventions in both developing and developed countries had significant results, with reduction of 42% (RR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.44-0.78) and 27% (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.57-0.95), respectively.

At <1 month, subgroup analyses for type of counseling showed that combined individual and group counseling resulted in a 34% decrease (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.51-0.87), individual counseling alone resulted in a 29% decrease (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.61-0.84) and group counseling alone led to a 29% decrease (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.51-0.99) . In the subgroup analyses for level of care, the effects of facility-based interventions and combined facility- and community-based interventions were 32% (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56-0.83) and 33% (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.54-0.83) respectively. The effects of community-based interventions were non-significant. Developing countries showed a reduction of 49% (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29-0.90) and in developed countries there was a reduction of 29% (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62-0.81).

For the 1-5 months interval, subgroup analyses showed statistically significant reduction in ‘no breastfeeding’ rates for combined individual and group counseling with a reduction of 32% (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.50-0.92), individual counseling alone with a reduction of 14% (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.79-0.94), and group counseling alone with a reduction of 24% (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63-0.91). Facility-based and combined facility- and community-based interventions led to significant reduction of 18% (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75-0.89) and 17% (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.75-0.93), respectively; however, results for community based interventions were non-significant. The effect of educational interventions in both developing and developed countries were significant at 44% (RR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.45-0.69) and 12% (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.82-0.95) respectively.

Beyond 6 months

Beyond 6 months, data was available from 11 studies [12,34,38,81,83,89,94,98,104,108,113] for exclusive, partial and no breastfeeding rates. At 6-12 months, a 19% increase in partial breastfeeding rates was demonstrated, which was significant (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.12-1.26). The effect of interventions was non-significant for both exclusive and no breastfeeding rates.

Recommendations for LiST model

Considering only the estimates from studies conducted in developing countries (Table 4), we propose that educational interventions increase EBF rates at day 1 by 157% (RR: 2.57 95% CI: 1.39, 4.77), at <1 month by 35% (RR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.58) and at 1-5 months by 188% (RR: 2.88, 95% CI: 2.11, 3.93). For predominant and partial breastfeeding rates, results were non-significant for all age durations. For ‘no breastfeeding’ we propose that educational interventions are associated with a reduction of 42% (RR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.78) at day 1, 49% (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29, 0.90) for <1 month and 44% (RR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.45, 0.69) for 1-5 month ages.

Table 4.

Estimates of effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on exclusive, predominant, partial and no breastfeeding rates in developing countries: Recommendations for LiST model.

Feeding practice and time interval Relative Risk (95% CI)
Exclusive breastfeeding rate at day 1 2.57 [1.39, 4.77]
Exclusive breastfeeding rate at <1 month 1.35 [1.15, 1.58]
Exclusive breastfeeding rate at 1-5 months 2.88 [2.11, 3.93]
Predominant breastfeeding rate at <1 month 0.67 [0.42, 1.06]
Predominant breastfeeding rate at 1-5 months 1.23 [0.49, 3.08]
Partial breastfeeding rate at day 1 0.84 [0.61, 1.15]
Partial breastfeeding rate at <1 month 0.94 [0.72, 1.24]
Partial breastfeeding rate at 1-5 months 0.83 [0.65, 1.06]
‘No breastfeeding’ rate at day 1 0.58 [0.44, 0.78]
‘No breastfeeding’ rate at <1 month 0.51 [0.29, 0.90]
‘No breastfeeding’ rate at 1-5 months 0.56 [0.45, 0.69]
Open in a new tab

Discussion

In this systematic review we summarized the effect of educational interventions to promote breastfeeding. We specifically examined the effect of these interventions on the various categories of breastfeeding, i.e. exclusive, predominant, partial breastfeeding and no breastfeeding, at day 1, <1 month, and 1-5 months. We also observed the prevalence of breastfeeding beyond 6 months if any study had reported outcomes in this age range.

EBF rates appeared to increase as a result of breastfeeding promotion interventions by 43% at day 1, by 30% till 1 month, and by 90% from 1-5 months (low outcome-specific quality of evidence). Significant reduction in rates of no breastfeeding were observed for the same time intervals, i.e. by 32% at day 1, by 30% till 1 month, and by 18% from 1-5 months (low outcome-specific quality of evidence). The overall effects of these interventions on predominant and partial breastfeeding rates were non-significant (moderate outcome-specific quality of evidence).

Combined individual and group counseling was found more effective than individual or group counseling alone. Overall, facility and combined facility- and community-based interventions led to greater improvements in breastfeeding rates, except for EBF at 1-5 months when the greatest increase resulted from community-based interventions. The effects of interventions in developing countries were greater than those observed in developed countries, i.e. increases in EBF rates of 35% compared to 26% at <1 month. At day 1 and at 1-5 months, the effects of interventions in developing countries on EBF rates were increases of 157% and 188%, respectively, whereas results for developed countries were non-significant. Reduction in ‘no breastfeeding’ rates of 42% were demonstrated in developing countries compared to 27% in developed countries at day 1, 49% compared to 29% at <1 month, and 44% compared to 12% at 1-5 months. Beyond 6 months, educational interventions had no significant effect except increasing rates of partial breastfeeding by 19% (moderate outcome-specific quality of evidence).

One of the limitations of this review is that the methodology of the RCTs included, indicated an unclear or high risk of bias as most RCTs demonstrated unclear blinding and/or allocation concealment. As quasi-experimental trials were also included, most of which did not employ blinding, this limited the quality of the evidence. Not only was there methodological heterogeneity across studies based on study design, clinical heterogeneity was also observed due to variations in types of intervention and the duration of the intervention, target population (differences in income and education), outcome definitions (‘fully’ breastfeeding interpreted as EBF but possibly including predominant BF) and different time intervals for follow-up. There were also differences in exposure to intervention, e.g. in the availability of a breastfeeding support telephone service, all the mothers in the intervention group did not choose to use the service. To investigate the subsequent statistical heterogeneity, we performed subgroup analyses to identify the cause. The random effects model was used to address this heterogeneity when it could not be explained. Criteria for recall of infant feeding practices for mothers were also variable, e.g. ranging from ‘continuous EBF from birth’ to ‘EBF in last 24 hours’.

Other reviews on the subject include a Cochrane review on antenatal education for increasing breastfeeding duration, which examined specific types of breastfeeding education and compared multiple methods with a single method of education. Peer counseling, lactation consultation and formal BF education during pregnancy were found to increase BF duration. Though we have included interventions given both during the antenatal and postpartum periods, our findings are similar with respect to the effectiveness of individual and group counseling, or individual counseling alone. Our findings are also similar to the previous review [25], which concluded that educational interventions increased EBF rates at 4-6 weeks and at 6 months, and the review by Chapman et al [23], which specifically examined studies with peer counseling programs and found that in the majority of studies peer counselors improved rates of breastfeeding initiation, duration and exclusivity.

We observed a statistically significant increase in EBF rates as well as a reduction in no breastfeeding rates at all measured time intervals till 6 months of age as a result of promotional interventions for breastfeeding. This corresponds with the messages in many interventions, which promote EBF till the age of 6 months in compliance with WHO recommendations [1]. A general effect of reduction of predominant and partial breastfeeding rates was demonstrated at day 1, <1 month and 1-5 months, however results were broadly non-significant. This finding may be explained by the rise of EBF as mothers realize the importance of not introducing formula or non-nutritional water-based foods early in the life of the infant. One exception to this pattern was the significant increase in partial breastfeeding rates of 325% (RR 4.25, CI 1.43-12.61) in the community-based interventions subgroup at day 1, comprising a single quasi-experimental study [59].

The impact was greater in developing countries when compared to developed countries. This could be because in less developed health systems, routine breastfeeding education in-hospital or follow-up home visits from public health nurses are less common than in the developed world leading to gaps in mothers’ knowledge of breastfeeding. These mothers may benefit more after any educational intervention. Breastfeeding is also socially accepted as the norm in many cultures in developing countries, which would make mothers more eager to breastfeed after counseling. Mothers in developed countries may have increases in breastfeeding rates of lower magnitude due to wider availability of formula, work constraints and social perceptions.

Both individual and group counseling markedly increased the rates of exclusive breastfeeding, with combined individual and group counseling having the greatest effect from 1-5 months of age with a 101% increase. Combined individual and group counseling also led to a greater decrease in no breastfeeding rates, of 34% till 1 month and 32% for 1-5 months, than individual or group counseling alone. Receiving the combination of one-on-one educational sessions with group sessions may be the ideal combination for women as a motivating strategy to continue breastfeeding.

Observing the success of educational strategies for promoting breastfeeding in developing countries, we should consider introducing these strategies on a large scale, utilizing both facility-based care and resources at the community level. These interventions should involve well-timed individual counseling along with group sessions for helping mothers achieve the goal of EBF till 6 months and continued BF till two years of life.

Conclusion

Breastfeeding education and/or support increased EBF rates and decreased no breastfeeding rates at birth, <1 month and 1-5 months. Combined individual and group counseling appeared to be superior to individual or group counseling alone. Interventions in developing countries had a greater impact than those in developed countries. These interventions have the potential to obtain optimum breast feeding practices and should be scaled up.

Competing interests

We do not have any financial or non-financial competing interests for this review. The publications costs for this paper are from a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the US Fund for UNICEF (grant 43386 to "Promote evidence-based decision making in designing maternal, neonatal, and child health interventions in low- and middle-income countries”).

Authors' contributions

Dr ZAB was responsible for designing the review and coordinating the review. SH, JKD, AI and RAS were responsible for: data collection, screening the search results, screening retrieved papers against inclusion criteria, appraising quality of papers, abstracting data from papers, entering data into RevMan, analysis and interpretation of data and writing the review. ZAB, RAS and JKD critically reviewed and modified the manuscript.

Supplementary Material

Additional File 1

Detailed quality of evidence tables for the subgroups.

Click here for file (548.2KB, pdf)
Additional File 2

Plots for meta analyses for day 1 and 0-1 month.

Click here for file (335.9KB, pdf)

Contributor Information

Sarah Haroon, Email: sarahharoonkhan@gmail.com.

Jai K Das, Email: jai.das@aku.edu.

Rehana A Salam, Email: rehana.salam@aku.edu.

Aamer Imdad, Email: aamer08@gmail.com.

Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Email: zulfiqar.bhutta@aku.edu.

Acknowledgment

This work was supported in part by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Declarations

The publication costs for this supplement were funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the US Fund for UNICEF (grant 43386 to "Promote evidence-based decision making in designing maternal, neonatal, and child health interventions in low- and middle-income countries”). The Supplement Editor is the principal investigator and lead in the development of the Lives Saved Tool (LiST), supported by grant 43386. He declares that he has no competing interests.

This article has been published as part of BMC Public Health Volume 13 Supplement 3, 2013: The Lives Saved Tool in 2013: new capabilities and applications. The full contents of the supplement are available online at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcpublichealth/supplements/13/S3.

References

  1. WHO. The optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding: report of an expert consultation. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2001. Available from: http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/WHO_NHD_01.09/en/index.html. [Google Scholar]
  2. Dimond HJ, Ashworth A. Infant feeding practices in Kenya, Mexico and Malaysia. The rarity of the exclusively breast-fed infant. Hum Nutr Appl Nutr. 1987;41(1):51–64. Epub 1987/02/01. PubMed PMID: 3558008. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Perez-Escamilla R. Breastfeeding in Africa and the Latin American and Caribbean region: the potential role of urbanization. J Trop Pediatr. 1994;40(3):137–43. doi: 10.1093/tropej/40.3.137. Epub 1994/06/01. PubMed PMID: 8078111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. UNICEF. A Report Card on Nutrition: Number 4. 2006.
  5. Cai X, Wardlaw T, Brown DW. Global trends in exclusive breastfeeding. Int Breastfeed J. 2012;7:12. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-7-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Countdown to 2015. Maternal, Newborn and Child Survival: The 2012 Report. WHO and UNICEF; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  7. Lamberti LM, Fischer Walker CL, Noiman A, Victora C, Black RE. Breastfeeding and the risk for diarrhea morbidity and mortality. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(Suppl 3):S15. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-S3-S15. Epub 2011/04/29. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-s3-s15. PubMed PMID: 21501432; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3231888. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Thulier D, Mercer J. Variables associated with breastfeeding duration. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2009;38:259–68. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2009.01021.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Chezem J, Friesen C, Boettcher J. Breastfeeding knowledge, breastfeeding confidence, and infant feeding plans: Effects on actual feeding practices. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2003;32:40–7. doi: 10.1177/0884217502239799. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bunik M, Shobe P, O'Connor M, Beaty B, Langendoerfer S, Crane L. et al. Are 2 Weeks of Daily Breastfeeding Support Insufficient to Overcome the Influences of Formula? Academic Pediatrics. 2010;10:21–8. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2009.09.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Dearden K, Altaye M, Maza I, Oliva M, Stone-Jimenez M, Burkhalter BR. et al. The impact of mother-to-mother support on optimal breast-feeding: a controlled community intervention trial in peri-urban Guatemala City, Guatemala. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2002;12(3):193–201. doi: 10.1590/S1020-49892002000900008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kramer MS, Chalmers B, Hodnett ED, Sevkovskaya Z, Dzikovich I, Shapiro S. et al. Promotion of breastfeeding intervention trial (PROBIT): a randomized trial in the Republic of Belarus. JAMA. 2001;285(4):413–20. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.4.413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Morrow AL, Guerrero ML, Shults J, Calva JJ, Lutter C, Bravo J. et al. Efficacy of home-based peer counselling to promote exclusive breastfeeding: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1999;353:1226–31. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)08037-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Haider R, Ashworth A, Kabir I, Huttly SR. Effect of community-based peer counsellors on exclusive breastfeeding practices in Dhaka, Bangladesh: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2000;356:1643–47. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03159-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. WHO; UNICEF. Integrated management of childhood illness: chartbook and training course. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1995. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Santos I, Victora C, Martines J, Gonçalves H, Gigante D, Valle N. et al. Nutrition counseling increases weight gain among Brazilian children. Journal of Nutrition. 2001;131(11):2866–73. doi: 10.1093/jn/131.11.2866. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Anderson A, Damio G, Young S, Chapman D, Perez-Escamilla R. A randomized trial assessing the efficacy of peer counseling on exclusive breastfeeding in a predominantly Latina low-income community. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159(9):836–41. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.159.9.836. Epub 2005/09/07. doi: 159/9/836 [pii] 10.1001/archpedi.159.9.836. PubMed PMID: 16143742. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Dennis CL, Hodnett E, Gallop R, Chalmers B. The effect of peer support on breast-feeding duration among primiparous women: a randomized controlled trial. CMAJ. 2002;166(1):21–8. Epub 2002/01/22. PubMed PMID: 11800243. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Alvarado R, Atalah E, Diaz S, Rivero S, Labbe M, Escudero Y. Evaluation of a breastfeeding-support programme with health promoters’ participation. Food Nutr Bull. 1996;17(1):49–53. [Google Scholar]
  20. Noel-Weiss J, Rupp A, Gragg B, Bassett V, Woodend K. Randomized Controlled Trial to Determine Effects of Prenatal Breastfeeding Workshop on Maternal Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy and Breastfeeding Duration. JOGNN. 2006;35:616–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2006.00077.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lin SS, Chien LY, Tai CJ, Lee CF. Effectiveness of a prenatal education programme on breastfeeding outcomes in Taiwan. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17(3):296–303. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01927.x. Epub 2007/10/13. doi: JCN1927 [pii] 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01927.x. PubMed PMID: 17931376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Aidam B, Perez-Escamilla R, Lartey A. Lactation Counseling Increases Exclusive Breast-Feeding Rates in Ghana. The Journal of Nutrition. 2005;135:1691–5. doi: 10.1093/jn/135.7.1691. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Chapman DJ, Morel K, Anderson AK, Damio G, Perez-Escamilla R. Breastfeeding peer counseling: from efficacy through scale-up. J Hum Lact. 2010;26(3):314–26. doi: 10.1177/0890334410369481. Epub 2010/08/19. PubMed PMID: 20715336; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3115698. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lumbiganon P, Martis R, Laopaiboon M, Festin M, Ho J, Hakimi M. Antenatal breastfeeding education for increasing breastfeeding duration. Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. 2012. [DOI] [PubMed]
  25. Imdad A, Yakoob MY, Bhutta ZA. Effect of breastfeeding promotion interventions on breastfeeding rates, with special focus on developing countries. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(Suppl 3):S24. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-S3-S24. Epub 2011/04/29. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-s3-s24. PubMed PMID: 21501442; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPmc3231898. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Walker N, Fischer-Walker C, Bryce J, Bahl R, Cousens S. Standards for CHERG reviews of intervention effects on child survival. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39(Suppl 1):i21–31. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq036. Epub 2010/04/02. doi: dyq036 [pii] 10.1093/ije/dyq036. PubMed PMID: 20348122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S. et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490. Epub 2004/06/19. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 328/7454/1490 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 15205295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. RevMan. The Cochrane Colloboration. Review Manager (RevMan) 5 for Windows. Oxford, England; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  29. WHO. Indicators for assessing breastfeeding practices. Vol. 91. WHO Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Document WHO/CDD/SER; 1991. p. 14. [Google Scholar]
  30. WHO. Indicators for Assessing Infant and Young Child Feeding Practices: Conclusions of a Consensus Meeting Held 6-8 November 2007 in Washington DC, USA. World Health Organization (WHO); 2008. [Google Scholar]
  31. World Bank list of economies. 2009. Available from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/CLASS.XLS.
  32. Abolyan LV. The breastfeeding support and promotion in Baby-Friendly Maternity Hospitals and Not-as-Yet Baby-Friendly Hospitals in Russia. Breastfeed Med. 2006;1(2):71–8. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2006.1.71. Epub 2007/07/31. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2006.1.71. PubMed PMID: 17661566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Aksu H, Küçük M, Düzgün G. The effect of postnatal breastfeeding education/support offered at home 3 days after delivery on breastfeeding duration and knowledge: a randomized trial. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24(2):354–61. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2010.497569. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Arifeen S, Hoque D, Akter T, Rahman M, Hoque M, Begum K. et al. Effect of the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness strategy on childhood mortality and nutrition in a rural area in Bangladesh: a cluster randomised trial. Lancet. 2009;374(9687):393–403. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60828-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Bashour H, Kharouf M, Abdulsalam A, El Asmar K, Tabbaa M, Cheikha S. Effect of postnatal home visits on maternal/infant outcomes in Syria: a randomized controlled trial. Public Health Nurs. 2008;25(2):115–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2008.00688.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Bhandari N, Bahl R, Mazumdar S, Martines J, Black R, Bhan M. Infant Feeding Study Group. Effect of community-based promotion of exclusive breastfeeding on diarrhoeal illness and growth: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;361(9367):1418–23. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13134-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Bhutta Z, Memon Z, Soofi S, Salat M, Cousens S, Martines J. Implementing community-based perinatal care: results from a pilot study in rural Pakistan. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86(6):452–9. doi: 10.2471/BLT.07.045849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Bonuck K, Freeman K, Trombley M. Randomized Controlled Trial of a Prenatal and Postnatal Lactation Consultant Intervention on Infant Health Care Use. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160:953–60. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.160.9.953. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. de Oliveira L, Giugliani E, domEspíritomSanto L, França M, Weigert E, Kohler C. et al. Effect of intervention to improve breastfeeding technique on the frequency of exclusive breastfeeding and lactation-related problems. J Hum Lact. 2006;22(3):315–21. doi: 10.1177/0890334406290221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Forster D, McLachlan H, Lumley J, Beanland C, Waldenstrom U, Amir L. Two mid-pregnancy interventions to increase the initiation and duration of breastfeeding: a randomized controlled trial. Birth. 2004;31(3):176–82. doi: 10.1111/j.0730-7659.2004.00302.x. Epub 2004/08/28. doi: 10.1111/j.0730-7659.2004.00302.x BIR302 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 15330879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Frank DA, Wirtz SJ, Sorenson JR, Heeren T. Commercial discharge packs and breast-feeding counseling: effects on infant-feeding practices in a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 1987;80(6):845–54. Epub 1987/12/01. PubMed PMID: 3684395. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Froozani MD, Permehzadeh K, Motlagh AR, Golestan B. Effect of breastfeeding education on the feeding pattern and health of infants in their first 4 months in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Bull World Health Organ. 1999;77(5):381–5. Epub 1999/06/11. PubMed PMID: 10361754. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Gijsbers B, Mesters I, Knottnerus J, Kester A, Van Schayck C. The Success of an Educational Program to Promote Exclusive Breastfeeding for 6 Months in Families with a History of Asthma: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Pediatric Asthma, Allergy and Immunology. 2006;19(4):214–22. doi: 10.1089/pai.2006.19.214. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Graffy J, Taylor J, Williams A, Eldridge S. Randomised controlled trial of support from volunteer counsellors for mothers considering breast feeding. BMJ. 2004;328(7430):26. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7430.26. Epub 2004/01/03. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7430.26 328/7430/26 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 14703543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Huang M, Kuo S, Avery M, Chen W, Lin K, Gau M. Evaluating effects of a prenatal web-based breastfeeding education programme in Taiwan. J Clin Nurs. 2007;16(8):1571–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01843.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Jakobsen MS, Sodemann M, Mølbak K, Alvarenga I, Aaby P. Promoting breastfeeding through health education at the time of immunizations: a randomized trial from Guinea Bissau. P Acta Paediatr. 1999;88(7):741–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1999.tb00035.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Khresheh R, Suhaimat A, Jalamdeh F, Barclay L. The effect of a postnatal education and support program on breastfeeding among primiparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2011;48(9):1058–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.02.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Kistin N, Abramson R, Dublin P. Effect of peer counselors on breastfeeding initiation, exclusivity, and duration among low-income urban women. J Hum Lact. 1994;10(1):11–5. doi: 10.1177/089033449401000121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Kools E, Thijs C, Kester A, van den Brandt P, de Vries H. A breast-feeding promotion and support program a randomized trial in the Netherlands. Preventive Medicine. 2005;40(1):60–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.05.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Kronborg H, Vaeth M, Olsen J, Iversen L, Harder I. Effect of early postnatal breastfeeding support: a cluster-randomized community based trial. Acta Paediatr. 2007;96(7):1064–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2007.00341.x. Epub 2007/05/26. doi: APA341 [pii] 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2007.00341.x. PubMed PMID: 17524018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Kruske S, Schmied V, Cook M. The 'Earlybird' gets the breastmilk: findings from an evaluation of combined professional and peer support groups to improve breastfeeding duration in the first eight weeks after birth. Matern Child Nutr. 2007;3(2):108–19. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2007.00078.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Kupratakul J, Taneepanichskul S, Voramongkol N, Phupong V. A randomized controlled trial of knowledge sharing practice with empowerment strategies in pregnant women to improve exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months postpartum. J Med Assoc Thai. 2010;93(9):1009–18. Epub 2010/09/29. PubMed PMID: 20873071. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Labarere J, Gelbert-Baudino N, Ayral AS, Duc C, Berchotteau M, Bouchon N. et al. Efficacy of breastfeeding support provided by trained clinicians during an early, routine, preventive visit: a prospective, randomized, open trial of 226 mother-infant pairs. Pediatrics. 2005;115(2):e139–46. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1362. Epub 2005/02/03. doi: 115/2/e139 [pii] 10.1542/peds.2004-1362. PubMed PMID: 15687421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Labarere J, Bellin V, Fourny M, Gagnaire J, Francois P, Pons J. Assessment of a structured in-hospital educational intervention addressing breastfeeding: a prospective randomised open trial. BJOG. 2003;110(9):847–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2003.02539.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Langer A. Intrapartum Social Support and Exclusive Breastfeeding in Mexico. Wellstart International, Expanded Promotion of Breastfeeding Program Exclusive Breastfeeding Promotion: A Summary of Findings from EPB's Applied Research Program (1992-1996) 1996.
  56. Lin CH, Kuo SC, Lin KC, Chang TY. Evaluating effects of a prenatal breastfeeding education programme on women with caesarean delivery in Taiwan. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17(21):2838–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02289.x. Epub 2008/07/16. doi: JCN2289 [pii] 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02289.x. PubMed PMID: 18624780. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Mattar CN, Chong YS, Chan YS, Chew A, Tan P, Chan YH. et al. Simple antenatal preparation to improve breastfeeding practice: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(1):73–80. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000249613.15466.26. Epub 2007/01/02. doi: 109/1/73 [pii] 10.1097/01.AOG.0000249613.15466.26. PubMed PMID: 17197590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. McDonald SJ, Henderson JJ, Faulkner S, Evans SF, Hagan R. Effect of an extended midwifery postnatal support programme on the duration of breast feeding: A randomised controlled trial. Midwifery. 2010;26:88–100. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2008.03.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. McInnes RJ, Love JG, Stone DH. Evaluation of a community-based intervention to increase breastfeeding prevalence. J Public Health Med. 2000;22(2):138–45. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/22.2.138. Epub 2000/07/27. PubMed PMID: 10912550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. McKeever P, Stevens B, Miller K, MacDonell J, Gibbins S, Querriere D. et al. Home versus Hospital Breastfeeding Support for Newborns: A Randomized Controlled Trial. BIRTH. 2002;29(4):258–65. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-536X.2002.00200.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. McQueen K, Dennis C, Stremker R, Norman C. A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of a Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Intervention With Primiparous Mothers. JOGNN. 2011;40:35–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2010.01210.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Morrell CJ, Spiby H, Stewart P, Walters S, Morgan A. Costs and effectiveness of community postnatal support workers: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2000;321(7261):593–8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7261.593. Epub 2000/09/08. PubMed PMID: 10977833. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Muirhead PE, Butcher G, Rankin J, Munley A. The effect of a programme of organised and supervised peer support on the initiation and duration of breastfeeding: a randomised trial. Br J Gen Pract. 2006;56(524):191–7. Epub 2006/03/16. PubMed PMID: 16536959. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Nommsen-Rivers LA, Mastergeorge AM, Hansen RL, Cullum AS, Dewey KG. Doula care, early breastfeeding outcomes, and breastfeeding status at 6 weeks postpartum among low-income primiparae. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2009;38(2):157–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2009.01005.x. Epub 2009/03/28. doi: JOGN1005 [pii] 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2009.01005.x. PubMed PMID: 19323712. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Petrova A, Ayers C, Stechna S, Gerling JA, Mehta R. Effectiveness of exclusive breastfeeding promotion in low-income mothers: a randomized controlled study. Breastfeed Med. 2009;4(2):63–9. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2008.0126. Epub 2009/02/26. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2008.0126. PubMed PMID: 19239405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Porteous R, Kaufman K, Rush J. The effect of individualized professional support on duration of breastfeeding: a randomized controlled trial. J Hum Lact. 2000;16(4):303–8. doi: 10.1177/089033440001600406. Epub 2001/01/13. PubMed PMID: 11155608. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Pugh LC, Milligan RA, Frick KD, Spatz D, Bronner Y. Breastfeeding duration, costs, and benefits of a support program for low-income breastfeeding women. Birth. 2002;29(2):95–100. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-536X.2002.00169.x. Epub 2002/05/10. doi: 169 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 12000411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Rasmussen K, Dieterich C, Zelek S, Altabet J, Kjolhede C. Interventions to Increase the Duration of Breastfeeding in Obese Mothers: The Bassett Improving Breastfeeding Study. Breastfeeding Medicine. 2011;6(2):69–75. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2010.0014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Ryan A, Zhou W. Lower breastfeeding rates persist among the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children participants, 1978-2003. Pediatrics. 2006;117(4):1136–46. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1555. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Sandy J, Anisfeld E, Ramirez E. Effects of a prenatal intervention on breastfeeding initiation rates in a Latina immigrant sample. J Hum Lact. 2009;25(4):404–11. doi: 10.1177/0890334409337308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Sciacca JP, Phipps BL, Dube DA, Ratliff MI. Influences on breast-feeding by lower-income women: an incentive-based, partner-supported educational program. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995;95(3):323–8. doi: 10.1016/S0002-8223(95)00083-6. Epub 1995/03/01. doi: S0002-8223(95)00083-6 [pii] 10.1016/S0002-8223(95)00083-6. PubMed PMID: 7860944. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Simonetti V, Palma E, Giglio A, Mohn A, Cicolini G. A structured telephonic counselling to promote the exclusive breastfeeding of healthy babies aged zero to six months: a pilot study. Int J Nurs Pract. 2012;18(3):289–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-172X.2012.02040.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Sjolin S, Hofvander Y, Hillervik C. A prospective study of individual courses of breast feeding. Acta Paediatr Scand. 1979;68(4):521–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1979.tb05050.x. Epub 1979/07/01. PubMed PMID: 463534. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Su LL, Chong YS, Chan YH, Chan YS, Fok D, Tun KT. et al. Antenatal education and postnatal support strategies for improving rates of exclusive breast feeding: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2007;335(7620):596. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39279.656343.55. Epub 2007/08/03. doi: bmj.39279.656343.55 [pii] 10.1136/bmj.39279.656343.55. PubMed PMID: 17670909. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Susin L, Giugliani E. Inclusion of fathers in an intervention to promote breastfeeding: impact on breastfeeding rates. J Hum Lact. 2008;24(4):386–92. doi: 10.1177/0890334408323545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Tahir NM, Al-Sadat N. Does telephone lactation counselling improve breastfeeding practices?: A randomised controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50:16–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.09.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Taveras E, Blackburn K, Gillman M, Haines J, McDonald J, Price S. et al. First steps for mommy and me: a pilot intervention to improve nutrition and physical activity behaviors of postpartum mothers and their infants. Matern Child Health J. 2011;15(8):1217–27. doi: 10.1007/s10995-010-0696-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Turan J, Say L. Community-based antenatal education in Istanbul, Turkey: effects on health behaviours. Health Policy Plan. 2003;18(4):391–8. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czg047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Valdes V, Perez A, Labbok M, Pugin E, Zambrano I, Catalan S. The Impact of a Hospital and Clinic-based Breastfeeding Promotion Programme in a Middle Class Urban Environment. Journal of Tropical Pediatrics. 1993;39:142–51. doi: 10.1093/tropej/39.3.142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Valdés V, Pugin E, Schooley J, Catalán S, Aravena R. Clinical support can make the difference in exclusive breastfeeding success among working women. J Trop Pediatr. 2000;46(3):149–54. doi: 10.1093/tropej/46.3.149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Vitolo M, Bortolini G, Feldens C, Drachle Mde L. [Impacts of the 10 Steps to Healthy Feeding in Infants: a randomized field trial] Cad Saude Publica. 2005;21(5):1448–57. doi: 10.1590/S0102-311X2005000500018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Wallace LM, Dunn OM, Alder EM, Inch S, Hills RK, Law SM. A randomised-controlled trial in England of a postnatal midwifery intervention on breast-feeding duration. Midwifery. 2006;22(3):262–73. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2005.06.004. Epub 2005/12/29. doi: S0266-6138(05)00064-1 [pii] 10.1016/j.midw.2005.06.004. PubMed PMID: 16380197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Wen L, Baur L, Simpson J, Rissel C, Flood V. Effectiveness of an early intervention on infant feeding practices and "tummy time": a randomized controlled trial. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(8):701–7. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Wiles LS. The effect of prenatal breastfeeding education on breastfeeding success and maternal perception of the infant. JOGN Nurs. 1984;13(4):253–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.1984.tb01136.x. Epub 1984/07/01. PubMed PMID: 6565110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Wong EH, Nelson E, Choi KC, Wong KP, Ip C, Ho LC. Evaluation of a peer counselling programme to sustain breastfeeding practice in Hong Kong. Int Breastfeed J. 2007;2:12. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-2-12. Epub 2007/09/22. doi: 1746-4358-2-12 [pii] 10.1186/1746-4358-2-12. PubMed PMID: 17883851. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Wrenn SE. Effects of a model-based intervention on breastfeeding attrition [dissertation] San Antonio: University of Texas; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  87. Tylleskär T, Jackson D, Meda N, Engebretsen IM, Chopra M, Diallo AH. et al. Exclusive breastfeeding promotion by peer counsellors in sub-Saharan Africa (PROMISE-EBF): a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9789):420–7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60738-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Ryser F. Breastfeeding attitudes, intention, and initiation in low-income women: the effect of the best start program. Journal of Human Lactation. 2004;20(3):300–5. doi: 10.1177/0890334404266985. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Pisacane A, Continisio GI, Aldinucci M, D'Amora S, Continisio P. A controlled trial of the father's role in breastfeeding promotion. Pediatrics. 2005;116(4):e494–e498. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-0479. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Brent NB, Redd B, Dworetz A, D'Amico F, Greenberg JJ. Breast-feeding in a low-income population. Program to increase incidence and duration. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995;149(7):798–803. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1995.02170200088014. Epub 1995/07/01. PubMed PMID: 7795772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Chapman DJ, Damio G, Young S, Perez-Escamilla R. Effectiveness of breastfeeding peer counseling in a low-income, predominantly Latina population: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004;158(9):897–902. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.158.9.897. Epub 2004/09/08. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.158.9.897 158/9/897 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 15351756. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Garcia-Montrone V, Rose J. [An education experience for promoting breast-feeding and infant stimulation by low-income women: a preliminary study] Cad Saude Publica. 1996;12(1):61–8. doi: 10.1590/S0102-311X1996000100017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Gill SL, Reifsnider E, Lucke JF. Effects of support on the initiation and duration of breastfeeding. West J Nurs Res. 2007;29(6):708–23. doi: 10.1177/0193945906297376. Epub 2007/06/15. doi: 0193945906297376 [pii] 10.1177/0193945906297376. PubMed PMID: 17557933. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Greiner T, Mitra SN. Evaluation of the effect of a breastfeeding message integrated into a larger communication project. J Trop Pediatr. 1999;45:351–7. doi: 10.1093/tropej/45.6.351. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Gross S, Caulfield L, Bentley M, Bronner Y, Kessler L, Jensen J. et al. Counseling and motivational videotapes increase duration of breast-feeding in African-American WIC participants who initiate breast-feeding. J Am Diet Assoc. 1998;98:143–8. doi: 10.1016/S0002-8223(98)00037-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Ingram J, Rosser J, Jackson D. Breastfeeding peer supporters and a community support group: evaluating their effectiveness. Matern Child Nutr. 2005;1:111–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2005.00005.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Johnston B, Huebner C, Anderson M, Tyll L, Thompson R. Healthy steps in an integrated delivery system: child and parent outcomes at 30 months. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(8):793–800. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.160.8.793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Jones DA, West RR. Lactation nurse increases duration of breast feeding. Arch Dis Child. 1985;60(8):772–4. doi: 10.1136/adc.60.8.772. Epub 1985/08/01. PubMed PMID: 4037866. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Kang J, Choi S, Ryu E. Effects of a breastfeeding empowerment programme on Korean breastfeeding mothers: a quasi-experimental study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2008;45(1):14–23. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.03.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  100. Kumar V, Mohanty S, Kumar A, Misra RP, Santosham M, Awasthi S. et al. Effect of community-based behaviour change management on neonatal mortality in Shivgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;372(9644):1151–62. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61483-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Lieu T, Braveman P, Escobar G, Fischer A, Jensvold N, Capra A. A Randomized Comparison of Home and Clinic Follow-Up Visits After Early Postpartum Hospital Discharge. Pediatrics. 2000;105(5):1058–65. doi: 10.1542/peds.105.5.1058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Lieu T, Wikler C, Capra A, Martin K, Escobar G, Braveman P. Clinical Outcomes and Maternal Perceptions of an Updated Model of Perinatal Care. Pediatrics. 1998;102(6):1437–44. doi: 10.1542/peds.102.6.1437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Long D, Funk-Archeluta M, Geiger C, Mozar A, Heins J. Peer Counselor Program Increases Breastfeeding Rates in Utah Native American WIC Population. Journal of Human Lactation. 1995;11(4):279–84. doi: 10.1177/089033449501100414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  104. Lovera D, Sanderson M, Bogle M, Vela Acosta M. Evaluation of a breastfeeding peer support program for fathers of Hispanic participants in a Texas special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010;110(11):1696–702. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2010.08.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Lynch SA, Koch AM, Hislop TG, Coldman AJ. Evaluating the effect of a breastfeeding consultant on the duration of breastfeeding. Can J Public Health. 1986;77(3):190–5. Epub 1986/05/01. PubMed PMID: 3742402. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Mongeon M, Allard R. [Controlled study of a regular telephone support program given by volunteers on the establishment of breastfeeding] Can J Public Health. 1995;86(2):124–7. Epub 1995/03/01. PubMed PMID: 7757891. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Mottl-Santiago J, Walker C, Ewan J, Vragovic O, Winder S, Stubblefield P. A Hospital-Based Doula Program and Childbirth Outcomes in an Urban, Multicultural Setting. Matern Child Health J. 2008;12:372–7. doi: 10.1007/s10995-007-0245-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Olson BH, Haider SJ, Vangjel L, Bolton TA, Gold JG. A quasi-experimental evaluation of a breastfeeding support program for low income women in Michigan. Matern Child Health J. 2010;14(1):86–93. doi: 10.1007/s10995-008-0430-5. Epub 2008/12/17. doi: 10.1007/s10995-008-0430-5. PubMed PMID: 19082697. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Hill P. Effects of Education on Breastfeeding Success. Maternal-Child Nursing Journal. 1987;16(2):145–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  110. Rishel P. Comparison of Breastfeeding Rates among Women Delivering Infants in Military Treatment Facilities with and without Lactation Consultants. Military Medicine. 2005;170(5):435–8. doi: 10.7205/milmed.170.5.435. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  111. Martens PJ. Does breastfeeding education affect nursing staff beliefs, exclusive breastfeeding rates, and Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative compliance? The experience of a small, rural Canadian hospital. J Hum Lact. 2000;16(4):309–18. doi: 10.1177/089033440001600407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  112. Pugh LC, Serwint JR, Frick KD, Nanda JP, Sharps PW, Spatz DL. et al. A randomized controlled community-based trial to improve breastfeeding rates among urban low-income mothers. Acad Pediatr. 2010;10:14–20. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2009.07.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  113. Quinlivan JA, Box H, Evans SF. Postnatal home visits in teenage mothers: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;361(9361):893–900. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12770-5. Epub 2003/03/22. doi: S0140-6736(03)12770-5 [pii] 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12770-5. PubMed PMID: 12648967. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Redman S, Watkins J, Evans L, LLoyd D. Evaluation of an Australian intervention to encourage breast feeding in primiparous women. Health Prom Int. 1995;10(2):101–13. doi: 10.1093/heapro/10.2.101. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  115. Reifsnider E, Eckhart D. Prenatal breastfeeding education: its effect on breastfeeding among WIC participants. Journal of Human Lactation. 1997;13(2):121–5. doi: 10.1177/089033449701300212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Rosen IM, Krueger MV, Carney LM, Graham JA. Prenatal breastfeeding education and breastfeeding outcomes. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2008;33(5):315–319. doi: 10.1097/01.NMC.0000334900.22215.ec. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Rossiter JC. The effect of a culture-specific education program to promote breastfeeding among Vietnamese women in Sydney. International journal of nursing studies. 1994;31(4):369–79. doi: 10.1016/0020-7489(94)90077-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Schafer E, Vogel MK, Viegas S, Hausafus C. Volunteer peer counselors increase breastfeeding duration among rural low-income women. Birth. 1998;25(2):101–6. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-536x.1998.00101.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  119. Schlickau J, Wilson M. Development and testing of a prenatal breastfeeding education intervention for Hispanic women. The Journal of perinatal education. 2005;14(4):24. doi: 10.1624/105812405X72302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Serwint J, Wilson M, Vogelhut J, Repke J, Seidel H. A randomized controlled trial of prenatal pediatric visits for urban, low-income families. Pediatrics. 1996;98(6 Pt 1):1069–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Shaw E, Kaczorowski J. The effect of a peer counseling program on breastfeeding initiation and longevity in a low-income rural population. Journal of Human Lactation. 1999;15(1):19–25. doi: 10.1177/089033449901500108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Taddei J, Westphal MF, Venancio S, Bogus C, Souza S. Breastfeeding training for health professionals and resultant changes in breastfeeding duration. Sao Paulo Med J. 2000;118(6):185–91. doi: 10.1590/S1516-31802000000600007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  123. Wilhelm SL, Rodehorst TK, Stepans MBF, Hertzog M, Berens C. Influence of intention and self-efficacy levels on duration of breastfeeding for midwest rural mothers. Applied Nursing Research. 2008;21(3):123–30. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2006.10.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  124. Wolfberg AJ, Michels KB, Shields W, O'Campo P, Bronner Y, Bienstock J. Dads as breastfeeding advocates: results from a randomized controlled trial of an educational intervention. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2004;191(3):708–12. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.05.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  125. MacArthur C, Jolly K, Ingram L, Freemantle N, Dennis CL, Hamburger R. et al. Antenatal peer support workers and initiation of breast feeding: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009;338:b131. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  126. Pobocik RS, Benavente JC, Schwab AC, Boudreau N, Morris CH, Sue Houston M. Effect of a breastfeeding education and support program on breastfeeding initiation and duration in a culturally diverse group of adolescents. Journal of Nutrition Education. 2000;32(3):139–45. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3182(00)70541-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  127. Wambach KA, Aaronson L, Breedlove G, Domian EW, Rojjanasrirat W, Yeh HW. A randomized controlled trial of breastfeeding support and education for adolescent mothers. West J Nurs Res. 2011;33(4):486–505. doi: 10.1177/0193945910380408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  128. Labarere J, Gelbert-Baudino N, Laborde L, Arragain D, Schelstraete C, Francois P. CD-ROM-based program for breastfeeding mothers. Maternal and Child Nutrition. 2011;7:263–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2009.00235.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Grossman LK, Harter C, Sachs L, Kay A. The effect of postpartum lactation counseling on the duration of breast-feeding in low-income women. Am J Dis Child. 1990;144(4):471–4. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1990.02150280093019. Epub 1990/04/01. PubMed PMID: 2321612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Henderson A, Stamp G, Pincombe J. Postpartum positioning and attachment education for increasing breastfeeding: a randomized trial. Birth. 2001;28(4):236–42. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-536X.2001.00236.x. Epub 2002/03/21. doi: 236 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 11903211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Additional File 1

Detailed quality of evidence tables for the subgroups.

Click here for file (548.2KB, pdf)
Additional File 2

Plots for meta analyses for day 1 and 0-1 month.

Click here for file (335.9KB, pdf)

Articles from BMC Public Health are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES