Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2017 Dec 27;47(4):571–582. doi: 10.1016/j.jogn.2017.11.005

Table 2.

Associations between milk type and length of stay among 183 late preterm infants

Milk Type Number of Infants by Milk Type n (%) Mean LOSa Days (95% CI) Unadjusted IRR (95% CI)b p Adjusted IRR (95% CI)b,c p
Breastfeeding Only 27 (14.8%) 2.58 (2.33-2.83) REFERENCE REFERENCE
Breastfeeding Supplemented with EHM or PDHM 20 (10.9%) 2.95 (2.56-3.35) 1.46 (1.23-1.73) <0.001 1.14 (0.96-1.37) 0.14
Breastfeeding with Any Formula Supplementationd 93 (50.8%) 2.86 (2.71-3.00) 1.23 (1.12-1.36) <0.001 1.11 (1.00-1.23) 0.06
Formula Only 43 (23.5%) 3.19 (2.92-3.45) 1.34 (1.18-1.52) <0.001 1.23 (1.09-1.40) 0.001

Note. EHM = expressed human milk; PDHM = pasteurized donor human milk.

a

Predicted mean length of stay (LOS) calculated using Generalized Poisson regression models adjusted for maternal age, race, medical insurance, parity, cesarean section, gestational age, maternal hypertension, physician orders for supplementation and hyperbilirubinemia.

b

IRR = Incidence Rate Ratio calculated using modified Poisson regression, CI = 95 % Confidence Interval

c

Modified Poisson regression model controlling for maternal age, race, medical insurance, parity, cesarean section, gestational age, maternal hypertension, physician orders for supplementation and hyperbilirubinemia.

d

Breastfeeding with any formula supplementation includes formula supplementation only and formula supplementation plus EHM or PDHM.