Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Sep 17;15(9):e0239278. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239278

Mothers’ and Grandmothers’ misconceptions and socio-cultural factors as barriers to exclusive breastfeeding: A qualitative study involving Health Workers in two rural districts of Ghana

Christiana Nsiah-Asamoah 1,*, David Teye Doku 2, Samuel Agblorti 2
Editor: Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh3
PMCID: PMC7498105  PMID: 32941500

Abstract

Background

Education on exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) practices is usually given in the form of health talks by health workers (HWs). The need for HWs to be well-informed about cultural practices and misconceptions that act as barriers to EBF has been documented in literature. This information can guide HWs in developing interventions such as health talks which are culturally sensitive. However, this has not been explored from the perspectives of HWs in Ghana. In this paper, we report mothers’ and grandmothers’ misconceptions and cultural practices that are barriers to EBF in two rural districts in Ghana from the perspectives of Community Health Workers and Community Health Volunteers.

Methods

We used qualitative data collected in the Kwahu Afram Plains South and North Districts of Ghana through nine focus group discussions (FGDs) among HWs and followed the data saturation principle. All FGDs were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and translated from local dialects to English. The emerging themes were used in writing a narrative account, guided by the principles of the thematic analysis.

Results

Our main findings included mothers’ and grandmothers’ perceptions that HWs themselves do not practice EBF. Mothers had the perception that grandmothers did not practice EBF but their children grew well, and gestures of babies suggested their readiness to start eating. Misconceptions revealed included beliefs that breastmilk is watery in nature and does not satisfy infants. Another misconception was that babies gain weight faster when not exclusively breastfed but fed on infant formulas. A custom of giving corn flour mixed with water or light porridge during the first few days after birth to welcome newborns was also reported.

Conclusions

The reports of the HWs revealed that several socio-cultural factors and misconceptions of mothers and grandmothers negatively influence EBF practices of mothers. Findings from this study highlight the need for HWs to provide culturally appropriate counselling services on breastfeeding not only to mothers but also to grandmothers and fathers in order to promote EBF and reap its benefits.

Introduction

According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), with respect to breastfeeding, every second counts in an infant’s life. Hence, the time at which it is initiated and its exclusivity for the first six months of life can make a whole lot of difference between life and death [1]. Early initiation of breastfeeding, that is, putting newborns to the breast within the first hour of their lives safeguards their survival and considerably reduces the risk of death during the critical neonatal period of life [2]. In addition, early initiation of breastfeeding has been described as an effective intervention that helps to establish exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) [3]. Exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life is a recommended intervention, in view of its established benefits of reducing the risks of morbidity and mortality in infants [3]. There is also evidence that EBF protects against pneumonia and diarrhoea–the two leading killers of children under five [1].

While breastfeeding is common in most parts of the world, EBF is not the norm. The situation is not different in Ghana where, according to the latest Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) report of 2014, almost all children in Ghana (98 percent) are breastfed at some point in their life [4]. However, only 52 percent of children less than 6 months of age are exclusively breastfed; and the median duration of EBF is approximately four months instead of the recommended six months. A cursory study of previous GDHS reports reveals that, with regard to EBF, the prevalence increased considerably from 53% in 2003 to 63% in 2008, but declined to 52% in 2014 [46]. Therefore, according to the 2014 GDHS, the percentage of children aged between 0 and 5 months who were exclusively breastfed has decreased by approximately 17% between 2008 and 2014. It is important to acknowledge that the findings in the 2014 GDHS, which was the only available information representative of Ghana at the time of the study (in 2018), may not be an updated information. However, these figures suggest that the practice of EBF might be gradually declining among mothers and requires much effort to assess the factors leading to this occurrence. In addition, the prevalence of EBF reported in these demographic and health surveys obviously falls far below the widely accepted “universal coverage target of 90% coverage [7].

The barriers which have been identified as preventing EBF are generally maternal, child and socially or environmentally-related. Maternal-related barriers to EBF include low educational level of mothers, working mothers, difficulties in obtaining maternity leave, increase in mother’s workload, less number of antenatal visits and lack of knowledge about EBF [8]. Child-related factors such as being a male and having been delivered by cesarean section have been reported to reduce the likelihood of being exclusively breastfed [9]. Social and environmental barriers to EBF which include lack of spousal support with chores, controversial health messages on EBF delivered at health facilities and unsupported environments for EBF in public places have been identified as discouraging EBF [10, 11].

It has been indicated that most infants are not exclusively breastfed but are given other foods or liquids throughout the first six months, due to cultural practices and beliefs and some misconceptions held by mothers [12]. These cultural practices, myths, misconceptions and beliefs influence the ability of most mothers to initiate breastfeeding within one hour after birth, practice EBF and prolong the duration of breastfeeding, particularly in low-income countries [13]. In Ghana, Tampah-Naah and Kumi-Kyereme [14] assert that the limited practice of EBF in all regions of the country can be attributed to cultural beliefs. However, there is little information regarding these cultural practices and misconceptions which are barriers to the practice of exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months in a developing country like Ghana. Most studies undertaken in the past to investigate cultural practices influencing optimal EBF practices were conducted among mothers [1216] and grandmothers [16, 17]. For example, in the study of Thet et al. [16] which was undertaken in the Ayeyarwaddy Region of Myanmar (formerly Burma), the barriers to EBF were assessed qualitatively from the views of mothers, grandmothers, and husbands. Clearly, there has been less focus on context, norms and cultural practices influencing EBF from the viewpoints of health workers (HWs). However, recommendations from studies suggest the need for health professionals in various settings to understand and be well-informed about these cultural practices and misconceptions that act as barriers to appropriate breastfeeding practices [18, 19].

In Ghana, there is a dearth of information on barriers to EBF practices of mothers from the perspectives of Community Health Workers (CHWs) and Community Health Volunteers (CHVs) who play a major role in providing care to breastfeeding women, neonates and young infants when they undertake both home visits and community outreach programmes. We seek to fill this gap by assessing the perceptions of these group of HWs regarding socio-cultural influences and mothers’ misconceptions about EBF. Although, other key health professionals like midwives and nurses play significant roles in promoting child health and nutrition, the study focused on only CHWs and CHVs because of some reasons. The study concentrated on only CHWs and CHVs because they play an important role in the delivery of health care services particularly in rural settings where there are shortages of trained health care workers. Both CHWs and CHVs have been described as agents of behaviour change promotion as they interact with community members in their allocated catchment areas [20]. They are regarded as being in a better position to deliver crucial health messages, empower community members to enable them make informed decisions and therefore increase local access to health preventive measures [21].

Therefore, a better understanding of cultural practices and misconceptions that negatively imparts EBF practices of mothers can particularly guide CHWs and CHVs in developing interventions such as health talks which are culturally sensitive to help disabuse the minds of caregivers on issues regarding EBF. In addition, the findings can play a role in the development and implementation of some intervention activities by the HWs on the basis of the Motivational theory of role modeling [22] which highlights the power of role models (in this study, HWs) to serve as sources of inspiration and agents of behavioural change to their clients (in this study, lactating mothers). Therefore, this study assessed the cultural practices and misconceptions of mothers that influence EBF practices from reports of CHWs and CHVs (collectively referred to as HWs for the purpose of this study) working in two rural districts in Ghana.

Subjects and methods

Ethics

Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Dodowa Health Research Centre (DHRC) Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Ghana Health Service (Reference/Identification: DHRCIRB/04/02/17)and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Cape Coast (U.C.C) (Reference/Identification: UCCIRB/CHLS/2017/02). Participants who gave their consent to participate in the FGDs willingly signed a consent form.

Study area

The study was conducted in two rural districts—Kwahu Afram Plains North (KAPND) and Kwahu Afram Plains South (KAPSD) in the Eastern Region of Ghana. Kwahu Afram Plains North District (KAPND) is located in the northern-most part of the Eastern Region and the capital of the district is Donkorkrom. With the exception of Donkorkrom, which is urban, the rest of the settlements in the district are peri-urban, rural and small communities. The district has 86% rural and 14% urban population distribution. Approximately, three quarters of the communities are located on Islands within water bodies (Volta lake, River Afram and Obosom River). Mostly, the economy of KAPND is an agrarian one. Within the employed labour force, the major occupation in the district is agriculture which is largely subsistence in nature (employing 74.5% of the total labour force). Regarding health services infrastructure, the district has one hospital at Donkorkrom and thirteen Community-based Health Planning Services (CHPS). According to the Kwahu Afram Plains North District Planning Coordinating Unit (DPCU) 2018 report, most of the inhabitants in other settlement communities take between 25 and 35 minutes of walking to access the main district hospital at Donkorkrom. About 59.9% of the population patronize health facilities outside the settlement they live [23].

Kwahu Afram Plains South District (KAPSD) is located at the north-western part of the Eastern Region and Tease is the administrative capital town of the district. About 85.3% of the population aged 15 years and older are economically active. Of the employed population, majority (80.0%) are engaged as skilled agricultural, forestry and fishery workers.

With respect to health services infrastructure, the KAPSD has six (6) health centers, 15 Community-based Health Planning Service (CHPS) zones and one (1) private clinic. The only referral health center in the district is the Presbyterian Health Center at Tease. Similar to KAPND most of the inhabitants have to walk between 25 and 35 minutes to access the main health center at Tease [24]. Ofosu’s [25] study in the Eastern Region revealed that several localities in the Afram Plains districts are beyond the 5 kilometres recommended distance by the Ghana Health Service which is considered as good for people to access health care from a health facility.

Study design and population

The study was descriptive and cross-sectional in which qualitative data was collected through nine (9) Focus Group Discussions (FGD) in two selected districts in the Eastern Region of Ghana: Kwahu Afram Plains North (KAPND) and Kwahu Afram Plains South (KAPSD). These two districts were purposively selected from the 26 districts in the Eastern Region on the basis of being ranked respectively as the first and second districts with the highest prevalence of underweight among children under five (5) years in the Region in both 2015 and 2016.

The CHWs who participated in the FGDs were selected from 21 randomly sampled Child Welfare Clinics (CWCs) which are found in health facilities within the districts. The CHVs were purposively selected with the assistance of the District Nutrition Officers who knew CHVs who had worked for more than 5 years and who were actively involved in promoting child nutrition health services within the districts. In this study, the HW should have been working for at least five years in the district before he or she participates in the FGDs because of the assumption that these number of years might have given them ample experiences to be able to provide information on socio-cultural issues influencing EBF within the selected districts. A total of 78 health workers (HWs) were recruited face- to- face with assistance from the district nutrition officers and nurse-in-charges in the various CWCs to participate in the FGDs. Forty-two (42) CHWs were selected from 21 CWCs and 36 CHVs were chosen from 21 communities within the districts.

Data collection

The data was collected in the districts between 6th September and 15th December, 2018.

Translation and transcription of the data were done between January and May 2019.

All the nine sessions of the FGDs were held at the premises of the District Health Directorate on different days.

The Focus Group Discussion guide was a modified version from previous related studies [13, 26, 27], which were also undertaken to access cultural factors that influence infant feeding practices. The FGD guide was pretested to assess for reliability, clarity and simplicity of the tool among six health workers who were recruited from two health centres. The FGD guide comprised of six(6) discussion topics. The discussion questions included HWs opinions on socio-cultural factors that prevent early initiation of breastfeeding within at least 30 minutes after birth and exclusive breastfeeding of infants for the first six (6) months of life. Other discussion questions focused on HWs’ opinions on social influences exerted by significant persons in households that prevented mothers from adopting optimal breastfeeding practices, foods commonly introduced to infants before they attain six (6) months of age and why they are given to babies. The FGD guide had a question that gave the HWs an opportunity to share their observations and experiences related to feeding of infants below two (2) years during their home visits and community health outreach activities.

A total of nine (9) FGDs were conducted among the CHWs and CHVs in groups of between 8 and 10 members. The FGDs were conducted in the predominant languages of the people—Ewe, Twi and Frafra. Each FGD took approximately 1 hour 10 minutes to complete and they were conducted until the point of data saturation. After completing the eighth FGD, the research team had a discussion and realized that data saturation had been achieved since no new information was emerging from the study participants and therefore data collection was stopped after the nineth FGD. The proceedings of all FGDs were audio-recorded; and detailed notes and pictures were taken. The first author and a Public Health Nurse acted as the facilitators, with the help of three trained research assistants who were technical officers working in the district health directorate. Two of the research assistants took notes and ensured that the session was audio-recorded, whiles one helped with translation of the questions into the local dialects when it was necessary.

Analysis of data

Qualitative thematic analysis techniques as described by Braun and Clark [28] were employed in the data analysis. The audio records which were in local dialects (Twi, Ewe and Frafra) were translated and transcribed into English. The first step of the thematic analysis involved familiarization with the qualitative data. The transcripts, with the hand-written notes taken during the FGD sessions, were read several times to make better meaning out of the responses and were compared across the different FGDs by two independent translators (Research Assistants). The second step after familiarization of data entailed coding which was done independently by the authors and subsequently compared. All discrepancies were resolved by the authors and the codes were refined until no new codes were identified. The coding involved identifying key words and phrases that best described and clarified each response from the FGDs. The third step involved the generation of themes. A matrix table was used to list the codes generated and all related codes were categorised under one theme. The themes were then reviewed and refined to ensure that they (themes) encompassed all the codes. The refined themes were eventually reported narratively and discussed. It was also ensured that the various statements and interpretations given under each theme reflected the implications gotten from the responses of the HWs. NVivo 10 qualitative software was used for the analysis.

Research team and reflexivity

The two moderators of the FGDs had a background in Public Health Nutrition and Public Health Nursing. The two field assistants who took field notes and did the translations had a background in Disease Control and Health Informatics. It is important to note that the lead researchers and the team were all Ghanaians, but not indigenous people from the study area. The diverse background of researchers was to ensure reflexivity. There was also a rapport between the researchers and study participants and as a result of that, study participants were more willing to share their perceptions and experiences. Additionally, coding and interpretation of data were also discussed among researchers who had backgrounds in Nutrition, Social Science and Public Health. This eventually reduced personal biases of the researchers and therefore reduced influences of the researchers on the data outcomes.

Results

The demographic information of the HWs who participated in the study is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Demographic information of study participants.

Characteristics Frequency (%)
Sex
Female 51 (65.4)
Male 27 (34.6)
Category of Health Worker
Community health Workers 42 (53.8)
Community health Volunteers 36 (46.2)
Work experience (in years)
5–10 24 (30.8)
11–15 38 (48.7)
>15 16 (20.5)
Participation in any child nutrition training workshop (n =??)
Yes 67 (85.9)
No 11 (14.1)
Number of times participated in child nutrition workshop (n = 67)
Once 21 (31.3)
Twice 33 (49.3)
Thrice 13 (19.4)
Theme focus of child nutrition workshop attended
Breastfeeding counselling and lactation management 46 (36.5)
Community management of Acute Malnutrition (CMAM) 41 (32.5)
Complementary Feeding 39 (31.0)

The results presented in Table 1 show that majority of the study participants were females (65.4%) and had worked between 11 and 15 years (48.7%). Again, a higher (85.9%) proportion had participated in a child nutrition workshop. Out of those (67) who had participated in a child nutrition workshop, almost half 33(49.3%) had attended such workshops on two occasions. These workshops were focused on breastfeeding counseling, Community Management of Acute Malnutrition (CMAM) and on complementary feeding.

The findings that emerged from the FGDs are presented under three main themes: perceptions of mothers that prevent them from practicing EBF, misconceptions of mothers with regard to EBF and cultural practices in the community that prevent mothers from exclusively breastfeeding their babies. Most of the participants reported that they learnt about these misconceptions and beliefs from mothers they had come into contact with at their Child Welfare Clinics (CWCs). It is important to note that all the statements and reports presented in this study are perceptions of the HWs based on their interactions with mothers, grandmothers and observations made during their outreach programmes and home visits within their communities of operation.

Perceptions of mothers that prevents them from practicing EBF

Respondents were asked to deliberate over perceptions of mothers that prevented them from practicing EBF. The items that guided the discussion programmes solicited for information on some perceptions held on by mothers that prevented them from exclusively breastfeeding their babies for the first six months of their lives. According to the HWs some of the perceptions of mothers were that they were of the view that HWs themselves do not practice EBF and that their grandmothers and great grandmothers did not practice EBF. The statements of some of the HWs are captured below.

HWs themselves do not practice EBF

The following statements by CHVs from different communities demonstrate that some mothers have the perception that health workers (HWs) themselves do not exclusively breastfeed their children, but they advise other mothers to practice EBF.

One CHV reported: "I once encountered a mother who told me that she was not practicing EBF because even nurses who told mothers to practice EBF were not practicing it themselves".(CHV 2, FGD 2 KAPND).

Another CHV reported: " During one of my home visits, I came across a grandmother giving maize porridge to a baby who was about four weeks old. When I asked the mother why she was not giving only breastmilk, she replied that the nurses do not want to tell them the truth about feeding babies under 6 months, because they think mothers do not take good care of their feeding bottles. As a result they advise mothers to breastfeed their babies until 6 months. But she has seen nurses who give lactogen to their babies when they are less than 6 months" (CHV 1, FGD 3 KAPND).

Grandmothers and great grandmothers did not practice EBF

According to the CHWs and CHVs, another barrier that prevented mothers from exclusively breastfeeding their babies was the perception of some grandmothers that they never practice EBF on their own children but they grew well as expected; and they were also healthy.

The following reports were made by some CHWs and CHVs:

One CHV narrated some encounters she had with grandmothers during her home visits activities. She stated: "During home visits, grandmothers would always complain that they fed their own babies under 6 months with porridge and soup, and nothing happened to them. So why are health workers worrying them with EBF?"(CHV 1, FGD 2 KAPSD).

The CHWs/CHVs indicated that some mothers continue to tell them that they have been feeding their babies on light food before they attain 6 months of age, and nothing happens to them. So why should they practice EBF?

One CHW indicated: "Some mothers with babies under 6 months whom they feed with various food items would tell you that this was what our mothers and grandmothers did, and there was no problem with their children. So if they do the same, there would not be any problem". (CHW 2, FGD 4 KAPND).

Misconceptions of mothers reported by health workers

The HWs were asked what they perceived as some misconceptions held by mothers that discouraged them from practicing EBF. The findings indicate that some of the misconceptions held by mothers with respect to EBF are that babies cannot survive without water and therefore must be given water in addition to breastmilk. Another misconception of some mothers is that breastmilk is watery in nature and does not contain enough food to satisfy infants. Again mothers thought gestures and actions of babies suggest their readiness to start eating food. In addition, mothers had the misconception that babies who are not exclusively breastfed gain weight better and faster than those who are exclusively breastfed. According to the HWs, some mothers were of the view that breastmilk does not contain enough water to satisfy the thirst of babies. So, they give them water after feeding them just as adults usually drink water after eating. The responses of the CHWs and CHVs on these misconceptions of mothers are reflected in the following statements:

Babies cannot survive without water

According to the HWs, some mothers had the perception that water is a basic necessity in life and therefore it is impossible for a baby to survive for the first six months of life without drinking water. The following reports by the HWs demonstrate that some mothers do not accept and believe that a newborn baby can survive solely on breastmilk to meet their water requirements for the first six months of life.

One CHW, narrated an interaction she had with a mother who had a 2-month-old baby, on the need to practice exclusive breastfeeding. According to the CHW, "this mother openly refused to exclusively breastfeed her baby, because she lost a child when she practiced it for four months without giving the baby any water. She thinks the child died as a result of exclusive breastfeeding. Therefore, she is not encouraged to practice it again on any of the children she would have". (CHW 2, FGD 4 KAPND)

Another CHV indicated that: "Some mothers always say their mothers, grandmothers and great grandmothers gave water to their babies, and nothing happened to their children. So there is no way they are going to change this trend of giving water to their babies".(CHV 2, FGD 4 KAPSD)

Breastmilk is watery in nature and does not contain enough food to satisfy infants

According to HWs, some mothers who do not exclusively breastfeed their babies suggest that breastmilk is watery in nature and does not contain sufficient food to satisfy infants.

One CHW stated: "Some mothers give other foods such as porridge mixed with groundnut paste or fish powder to infants less than 6 months, because they believe breastmilk is watery and does not satisfy the hunger needs of a child". (CHW 1, FGD 4 KAPSD)

Another CHW reported: "Some mothers also claim that there is a great difference between breastmilk and water. Yet health workers continue to say that breastmilk contains adequate water for a baby. Hence there is no need to give water to children below six months of age. Most mothers are skeptical of this assertion about the water content of breastmilk". (CHW 2, FGD 4 KAPND)

According to the HWs some mothers also give water to infants less than 6 months, because they claim the hot weather makes babies thirsty and uncomfortable, exhibited in frequent crying and inability to sleep soundly.

The reports of some of the HWs are presented in the statement below:

Mothers' belief that the hot weather makes babies thirsty

According to one CHW: " Some mothers express fears that children will become dehydrated if they are not given water to drink, considering the hot weather condition that makes one thirsty often" (CHW 2, FGD 5 KAPND)

Male babies may not be satisfied when they solely feed on breastmilk

It was also revealed from the responses of the HWs that some mothers with male babies had the misconception that they may not be satisfied when they are only fed on breastmilk as compared with female babies.

One of the CHW's reported that: " Most mothers with male babies either exclusively breastfeed for just about one month or never practice exclusive breastfeeding on their male babies. They claim boys breastfeed for longer periods; and they doubt whether male babies are satisfied by only depending on breastmilk for the first six months of their lives". (CHW 2, FGD 2 KAPND)

Gestures and actions of babies suggest their readiness to start eating food

Some of the HWs indicated that some mothers say that whenever they eat the child looks at them intently as if they also want to eat. So, they are compelled to give some of the food to the child.

One CHW narrated: "Some mothers say their babies put their hands or other objects into their mouth and chew them, while others say their babies chew and suck their fingers; and this suggests that the child is ready to eat other foods and not only breastmilk. " (CHW 1, FGD 5 KAPND)

Another CHV stated: " Some mothers also say that there are situations when babies cry a lot when they see them or other family members eat and this suggests that they want to start eating. So, they give them some of the food to eat" (CHV 2, FGD 3 KAPSD)

Babies gain weight faster when not exclusively breastfed but when fed on infant milk formulas

The responses of the CHWs and CHVs on this misconception of mothers are reflected in the following statements:

One of the CHV stated: "there are situations in which a mother may not be practicing EBF and her child gains weight and grows better than children of mothers practicing EBF. This discourages other mothers from practicing EBF."(CHV 2, FGD 5 KAPND)

Another CHW indicated that "There are also cases where mothers who have money, decide to feed their babies on "Lactogen" (an infant milk formula), because they believe it enables infants to grow faster, bigger and chubbier than when solely fed on breastmilk".(CHW 2, FGD 4 KAPND)

Cultural practices that prevent EBF

The HWs were asked to share some cultural practices that they perceived as discouraging mothers from practicing EBF, on the basis of their observations during home visits and community outreach programmes. Most of the CHWs and CHVs indicated that, generally, mothers do not exclusively breastfeed their babies for the first 6 months of their lives. Some mothers practice EBF for only a month or two and stop for a number of reasons. The findings indicate that some rituals that are performed before babies are allowed to come out in public and giving certain foods to babies during the first few days after birth to welcome them prevented mothers from exclusively breastfeeding their babies. The statements presented below indicate some of the reasons reported by the CHWs and CHVs for the break in the practice of EBF.

Performing rituals for newborns before they are allowed to come out in public

The following narrations by some CHVs indicate that some rituals performed for newborns before they can be seen in public may also prevent EBF:

One CHW asserted: "In some idol worshipping homes, every newborn child owes allegiance to the gods. As a result, certain rituals must be performed by giving a newborn baby some herbal concoctions during the first week after birth which are believed to protect, cleanse the internal body system and give some extraordinary powers to the child to scare away evil spirits before it is allowed to come out in public or show up at CWCs". (CHW 2, FGD 5 KAPND).

Another CHV further commented on this practice of hiding newborns until rituals are performed for them: "This practice is common among mothers who deliver at home and not in a health facility". (CHV 2, FGD 3 KAPSD)

Giving certain foods to babies during the first few days immediately after birth to welcome them

According to the CHWs and CHVs who participated in the FGDs, there are some cultural practices and customs that lead to the giving of certain foods to babies during the first few days immediately after birth to welcome them. According to the HWs, these customs prevented mothers from exclusively breastfeeding their babies. As one CHV said: "In some communities, as a tradition and by custom, when a child is born, corn flour is mixed with water and given to the child to welcome him or her with the following statement: This is what we have been eating before you arrived, so if you have joined us today you are also going to eat the same." (CHV 2, FGD 2 KAPND).

Another CHW narrated: "There are some cultural practices which demand that light porridge is given to newborn babies during the first few days after birth to welcome them, because it is believed that the child has travelled over a long distance into this world and, for that matter, is hungry. " (CHW 2, FGD 4 KAPSD)

Another CHV stated: "For children under 6 months, some mothers also boil 'Jathrofa (a flowering plant) ' with 'negro pepper'(Xylopia aethiopica) in a pot and give it to babies. They believe that this enables the child to sleep well and protects the child against diseases. They give negro pepper (Xylopia aethiopica), locally called 'hwentia', because they believe it heals sores in the stomach of newborns and prevents diarrhoea in babies" (CHV 2, FGD 4 KAPND)

One CHV also reported: "Some mothers give shea butter mixed with warm water to their babies who are less than 6 months to drink. They believe it enables them have free bowels." (CHV 3, FGD 2 KAPSD)

Discussion

The perceptions and reports of Community Health Workers (CHWs) and Community Health Volunteers (CHVs) regarding the cultural practices and misconceptions of mothers that inhibit 6-months of EBF were explored through FGDs. According to the health workers, some misconceptions held on to by mothers prevented them from exclusively breastfeeding their babies.

The findings revealed HWs report that some mothers had the misconception that HWs themselves do not practice EBF. The statements from the HWs imply some mothers had the perception that nurses who advised them to exclusively breastfeed their babies were unfortunately going contrary to their own advice, which resulted in not encouraging some mothers to practice EBF. Although, the HWs did not confirm or refute this misconception and as to whether this perception is the real case, this report from the HWs has implications on the services that they provide to help mothers care for their babies. However, in support of the reports by mothers to this effect, studies that were conducted in Brazil [29] and Northwest Ethiopia [30] also found out that some health professionals were not adhering to the recommended period of exclusive breastfeeding.

In the study that was carried out in Northwest Ethiopia [30] which assessed EBF practices of nurses and midwives, it was found that though they had adequate knowledge on breastfeeding, their high knowledge level was not translated into their practice of EBF. The exclusive breastfeeding rate among the nurses was found to be 35.9%; and almost half (49.4%) of them exclusively breastfed their babies for only three months or less. Likewise, a study undertaken among health professionals in an accredited baby friendly hospital in Brazil revealed that only 28.3% sustained exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of their babies’ lives [29].

Some of the common reasons mentioned by the nurses and midwives for their failure to exclusively breastfeed their babies included work-related problems, for instance, short three(3)-months duration of maternity leave, lack of nearby child care facilities and inflexible work schedules that prevented them from taking nursing breaks [29, 30]. It is important to note that these past studies [29, 30] were quantitative studies which were aimed at assessing the prevalence of EBF among health professionals and no information was obtained with respect to socio-cultural factors influencing EBF practices.

These reports however may suggest the need for HWs to act as "role-models" in order to encourage mothers to heed their advice as most mothers greatly rely on health workers’ advice on infant feeding, and consult HWs whenever they experience breastfeeding challenges. The recommendation on the need for HWs to act as role-models is based on the Motivational theory of role modeling [22] which has implications on the findings of this study. Role models through their exemplary deeds are often described as motivating others to set and achieve ambitious goals to follow their examples. The Motivational Theory of Role Modeling, highlights ways in which the influence of role models can be employed to improve role aspirants’ motivation, strengthen their existing goals, and facilitate their acceptance of new goals [22]. With regard to the applicability of the motivational theory to this study, the role modelling responsibility of nurses can be harnessed to increase the motivational level and facilitate the adoption of new practices (EBF) by role aspirants’ (in this study, lactating mothers).

Another misconception is based on the perception of mothers that their grandmothers and great grandmothers did not practice EBF, but their children survived and grew as expected. The responses of the HWs suggest that mothers in these rural settings are likely to tap into the experiences of grandmothers who may influence the breastfeeding practices of their daughters when they bring their own infant feeding beliefs and practices to support their daughters to enable them care for newborns. In a related study that was undertaken in rural areas in Kenya, mothers indicated that their parents advised them to give sugary water and other pre-lacteal foods to their babies, and it was difficult to ignore their advice. This was because their parents had gone through it before. They did not exclusively breastfeed their children. Yet, they grew as expected and were healthy [31].

An interpretation that can be given to the finding that mothers are likely not to practice EBF as a result of advices that are given by grandmothers can be based on the theory of planned behaviour. The theory explains the relationship between the intention to exclusively breastfeed, and the factors that affect a women’s final decision regarding exclusive breastfeeding. The theory explains how significant persons (in this case grandmothers) can determine and influence behavioural change and the adoption of new health behaviours. In this case, grandmothers might be perceived by mothers as good advisers, because of their knowledge of existing social norms, past experiences and this may influence their infant feeding choices. The implication of this finding emphasizes the need for HWs to also target grandmothers when planning and conducting health education programmes on child nutrition.

The responses of the HWs suggested that some mothers had wrong perceptions about the water content of breast milk perhaps because they do not have adequate knowledge about the water and nutrient composition of breastmilk. Similar to the reports of the health workers, other related studies reported that mothers had the perception that breastmilk alone was insufficient for their babies. Rather, mother believed that water in addition to breast milk was necessary to hydrate infants and to quench their thirst [32, 33]. The findings suggest that if HWs are able to address this knowledge gap of mothers using evidence to support their assertions; it may reassure mothers that the water and nutrient needs of their babies can be met by practicing EBF.

According to the HWs, some mothers also had the perception that gestures and actions by babies suggested their readiness to start eating other family foods. This finding is consistent with other studies that were carried out in Australia which explored why mothers introduced solid foods early [34, 35]. A major reason cited for the commencement of complementary feeding prior to six months of age was gestures and cues exhibited by infants, suggesting their readiness to start eating food [34, 35]. In these studies, mothers explained that these signals indicated that infants "wanted" or "were ready" for solid foods, regardless of their age. These findings imply that mothers have to learn and understand infant’s cues, gestures and behaviours regarding specific needs. This is especially important during the first few months of infancy when they are familiarizing themselves with a newborn baby. These reports by HWs suggest that the interpretations given to infant gestures and behaviours influence early introduction of foods and the inability of mothers to exclusively breastfeed their babies. This finding suggests the need to include in the health education of expectant mothers’ and “first-time” mothers’ interventions that focus on accurate interpretation of infant cues, gestures and behaviours as putative weaning signs.

There were reports that some mothers with male babies are unable to exclusively breastfeed them. Their argument is that since boys eat a lot as compared with girls, it is doubtful whether they are satisfied when fed solely on breastmilk for the first six months of their lives. In support of this assertion by some mothers, it was found out in some previous studies in Zimbabwe [36] and Denmark [37] that girls were introduced to complementary foods later than boys when they were less than six months old. In a related study conducted in Kenya, it was reported that mothers with male children complained that they breastfed often which sometimes made them feel dizzy after suckling. As a result, there was a greater propensity to an earlier introduction to other foods and shorter breastfeeding duration with boys than girls [13]. This misconception of some mothers that have male babies may be as a result of low or lack of knowledge about the potential capacity of breastmilk to optimally support growth and prevent malnutrition in infants regardless of the sex of the child [38]. Another reason that can be attributed to this misconception is perhaps the lack of guidance and encouragement given by HWs to mothers to enable them practice EBF. This misconception perhaps suggests the need for HWs to use scientific evidence to support the information shared with mothers. Alternatively, with the permission of mothers who have exclusively breastfed their male babies, HWs can use their children as examples during CWC sessions to encourage other mothers to also practice EBF.

This finding has implications for the need to intensify nutrition counseling services by HWs to boost the confidence of mothers that when they eat healthy foods, they will be in a better position to produce more nutritious breastmilk as reported in a systematic review paper by Bravi et al. [39] to satisfy their babies, regardless of their sex, while remaining healthy and strong as well. This misconception perhaps also suggests the need for HWs to use scientific evidence to support child feeding and nutrition information or recommendations that are shared with mothers. Alternatively, with the permission of mothers who have exclusively breastfed their male babies, HWs can use their children as examples during CWC sessions to encourage other mothers to also practice EBF.

The Health workers also reported the practice of giving new-born babies some herbal concoctions believed to confer protection and give some powers that fights against wicked spirits before they appear at public places such as at CWCs. The giving of herbal concoctions which is an example of pre-lacteal feeding have been shown to delay the initiation of breastfeeding [40], interfere with exclusive breastfeeding and makes it difficult for breastfeeding to be established in newborns. The use of herbal concoctions has been found to make newborns more prone to early risk of severe gastrointestinal infections [41] which can result in loss of appetite and consequently reduce their intake of breastmilk. These reports by the HWs have health and safety implications given that there are grave concerns with respect to the dosage and safety of herbal preparations. There is also the possibility that infants with their immature digestive system may have difficulty digesting, absorbing and utilizing these herbal preparations.

Another misconception of mothers reported by HWs is that babies who are not exclusively breastfed gain weight faster and grow better. This misconception is perhaps as a result of the perception that breastmilk alone does not satisfy babies and therefore might not support the attainment of any substantial weight gain in infants. In support of these assertions by mothers, some studies have revealed that longer duration of exclusive breastfeeding is negatively related to infant weight gain [38, 42]. In a systematic review report [42], it was concluded that duration of more than 4 months of exclusive breastfeeding may be associated with a reduction in weight gain in late infancy.

An explanation that can be given for the rapid weight gain in children who are not exclusively breastfed for six months but are quickly introduced to infant formula and other foods is their higher protein intake [42]. Hence, it is assumed that exclusively breastfeeding for the recommended period of six months may result in slower weight gain in later infancy. These findings suggest that HWs must emphasize more on the future or long-term benefits of EBF, such as its being protective against overweight and obesity and Type 1 Diabetes especially during the adulthood stages of life [43]. Regarding Type 1 Diabetes, the human milk contains substances that promote maturation of the immune system, conferring protection against its onset later in life [43].

The reports by the HWs also suggest that certain traditions and rituals that are performed for newborns, sometimes before a mother can start breastfeeding, could delay early initiation of breastfeeding, prevent EBF and lead to prelacteal feeding practices. An example is the practice of mixing corn flour and water which is given to newborns in most African countries [44]. Similarly, in a related study in slums in Nairobi, Kenya, light porridge was given to newborns because of the belief that children from the ethnic group, Luhya, are always hungry right from birth [13]. Another possible explanation that can be given to this practice is that corn is one of the major staple foods in Ghana. Hence, giving corn to infants can be a way of introducing them to a common food item that they are likely to eat for the entire period of their lives. These misconceptions and cultural practices that hinder EBF practices can prevent infants from reaping the benefits of EBF such as a lowered risk of gastrointestinal infection, pneumonia, otitis media and urinary tract infections [45].

Limitations of the study

One limitation associated with this study is that it was conducted in some communities in only two rural districts and therefore did not capture reports of other HWs from other districts in the country. However, the goal of the study was to explore misconceptions and cultural practices that acted as barriers and prevented mothers from exclusively breastfeeding their babies in this rural setting rather than generalization.

In addition, the cross-sectional study design used to collect data also makes it difficult to demonstrate cause-and-effect relationships. Regardless of these limitations, the findings provide a starting point for other surveys and interventions to reduce the impact of negative socio- cultural factors and lack of knowledge on recommended IYCF practices.

Another limitation associated with this study is that health workers were providing their viewpoints on the basis of their interactions with mothers and observations that they had made in households of community members. These viewpoints of the HWs can be described as being “second-hand” information since they were not coming directly from mothers or grandmothers. The limitation is that these perceptions of the HWs may not entirely or exactly reflect the viewpoints of mothers who were expected to practice exclusive breastfeeding. Again, there was no verification of whether HWs actually believed these socio-cultural factors perceived as influencing EBF, particularly because it could affect their delivery of health education in the community.

Recommendations from the study

Some recommendations are made on the basis of the findings in the study. One recommendation is that, since it is difficult to change the cultural beliefs of people, there is the need for innovation and borrowing from other effective behavioural change strategies around culture in the design and implementation of interventions that target improved exclusive breastfeeding practices.

Interventions that focus on behavioural change through the giving of information, rational discussion, and skill development that can lead to the change in the attitudes and beliefs of mothers are worth considering. There is also the need for HWs to be well-informed with current recommendations on EBF in order to avoid giving contradictory information that will cast doubts in the minds of mothers regarding appropriate EBF practices.

The findings suggest the need to intensify community social mobilization programmes that target all significant stakeholders, including fathers and grandmothers, through participatory approaches, to promote best EBF practices. With regard to mothers' perceptions that HWs themselves do not practice EBF, although this was not verified, healthcare providers such as nurses and midwives should consider becoming role-models by using their own children as examples in attesting to the fact that EBF has numerous benefits to children. This role modeling may have a positive impact in preparing pregnant women or those who are still at the stage of getting breastfeeding established, and enable them gain confidence in the breastfeeding information communicated to them.

Regarding the perception of mothers that children who are exclusively breastfed do not gain weight and grow as expected, HWs could consider openly praising mothers who adhere to EBF practices; and with the consent of such mothers, use their children as examples that are worth emulating, for other mothers to also strive at improving their breastfeeding practices. Mothers and HWs who are able to exclusively breastfeed their children can also be given an opportunity to share their experiences with other mothers during CWCs.

Conclusions

Our results show that misconceptions of mothers and grandmothers and some cultural practices as reported by the HWs continue to hinder EBF practices in the study area. The findings reveal that long-standing cultural norms that encourage mothers to give their babies water and other herbal concoctions, even immediately after birth, still persist in the study area. Generally, as reported by the HWs, grandmothers did not support EBF and they influenced the breastfeeding practices of their daughters. The revelations made by the HWs also suggests a gap in the knowledge levels of mothers regarding the adequacy of only breastmilk in satisfying the hunger and thirsty needs of babies for the first six months of life. The findings also have implications for the need to engage grandmothers, mothers-in-law and other influential community leaders like queen mothers as stakeholders in the development and implementation of interventions to promote exclusive breastfeeding practices in the districts.

Acknowledgments

The authors highly acknowledge the data collection and management team made up of Mr. David Kwame Tsotorvor, Mrs. Victoria Parkoo, Mr Fabrics Asinyo, Mr Frank Kwasi Arthur and Mr Isaac Manford. The authors appreciate the study participants for providing a receptive environment for the study to be conducted. We also acknowledge all the support, technical advice and assistance in many ways given by the District Health Directors, Mr. Robert Kweku Bio and Mrs. Joana Amankwah, during the data collection period in the districts.

Abbreviations

CHW

Community health worker

CHV

Community health Volunteer

CWCs

Child Welfare Clinics

EBF

Exclusive Breastfeeding

FGD

Focus group discussion

GDHS

Ghana Demographic and Health Survey

GHS

Ghana Health Service

HWs

Health Workers

KAPND

Kwahu Afram Plains North District

KAPSD

Kwahu Afram Plains South District

UNICEF

United Nations Children’s Fund

WHO

World Health Organization

Data Availability

The recorded audiotapes that were translated and transcribed into English from the focused group discussions cannot be shared publicly because it contains sensitive and some personal identifying information from the participants. However, data are available from the District Health Management Committee on Human Research and Ethics (Cordinator's Email: davekwame066@gmail.com) or the corresponding author (Email:cbuxton@ucc.edu.gh) upon request from researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.UNICEF. From the first hour of life (Making the case for improved infant and young child feeding everywhere.). New York, NY: Unicef; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.NEOVITA Study Group. Timing of initiation, patterns of breastfeeding, and infant survival: prospective analysis of pooled data from three randomised trials. The Lancet Global Health. 2016; 4(4): 266–275. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sankar MJ, Sinha B, Chowdhury R, Bhandari N, Taneja S, Martines J, et al. Optimal breastfeeding practices and infant and child mortality: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Acta paediatrica. 2015; 104: 3–13. 10.1111/apa.13147 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), Ghana Health Service (GHS), ICF International. Demographic and health survey, vol. 2015. Rockville: GSS, GHS, ICF International. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), Ghana Health Service (GHS), ICF International. Demographic and health survey, Rockville: GSS, GHS, ICF International; 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), Ghana Health Service (GHS), ICF International. Demographic and health survey, Rockville: GSS, GHS, ICF International; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Cai X, Wardlaw T, Brown DW. Global trends in exclusive breastfeeding. International breastfeeding journal. 2012;7(1):12–17. 10.1186/1746-4358-7-12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bhanderi DJ, Pandya YP, Sharma DB. Barriers to exclusive breastfeeding in rural community of central Gujarat, India. Journal of family medicine and primary care. 2019; 8(1):54 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_329_18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Khatun H, Comins CA, Shah R, Islam MM, Choudhury N, Ahmed T. Uncovering the barriers to exclusive breastfeeding for mothers living in Dhaka’s slums: a mixed method study. International breastfeeding journal. 2018. 1;13(1):44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Moyo G, Magaisa T, Pagiwa A, Kandawasvika R, Nyanga L, Gomora Z, et al. Identifying Barriers and Enablers to Exclusive Breastfeeding in Mwenezi and Chiredzi Districts, Zimbabwe. Current Developments in Nutrition. 2020;4(Supplement_2):249–. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kavle JA, LaCroix E, Dau H, Engmann C. Addressing barriers to exclusive breast-feeding in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review and programmatic implications. Public Health Nutrition. 2017. December;20(17):3120–34. 10.1017/S1368980017002531 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ayawine A, Ayuurebobi K. Determinants of exclusive breastfeeding: a study of two sub-districts in the Atwima Nwabiagya District of Ghana. The Pan African medical journal. 2015; 22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Wanjohi M, Griffiths P, Wekesah F, Muriuki P, Muhia N, Musoke RN, et al. Sociocultural factors influencing breastfeeding practices in two slums in Nairobi, Kenya. International Breastfeeding Journal. 2016; 12(1): 5–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Tampah-Naah AM, Kumi-Kyereme A. Determinants of exclusive breastfeeding among mothers in Ghana: a cross-sectional study. International breastfeeding journal. 2013; 8(1):13–18. 10.1186/1746-4358-8-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Thepha T, Marais D, Bell J, Muangpin S. Perceptions of northeast Thai breastfeeding mothers regarding facilitators and barriers to six-month exclusive breastfeeding: focus group discussions. International breastfeeding journal. 2018; 13(1):14–20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Thet MM, Khaing EE, Diamond-Smith N, Sudhinaraset M, Oo S, Aung T. Barriers to exclusive breastfeeding in the Ayeyarwaddy Region in Myanmar: Qualitative findings from mothers, grandmothers, and husbands. Appetite. 2016; 96: 62–69. 10.1016/j.appet.2015.08.044 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Agunbiade OM, Ogunleye OV. Constraints to exclusive breastfeeding practice among breastfeeding mothers in Southwest Nigeria: implications for scaling up. International breastfeeding journal. 2012;7(1): 5–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Balogun OO, Dagvadorj A, Anigo KM, Ota E, Sasaki S. Factors influencing breastfeeding exclusivity during the first 6 months of life in developing countries: a quantitative and qualitative systematic review. Maternal & child nutrition. 2015;11(4): 433–451. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Radzyminski S, Callister LC. Health professionals’ attitudes and beliefs about breastfeeding. The Journal of perinatal education. 2015; 24(2): 102–108. 10.1891/1058-1243.24.2.102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Aseyo RE, Mumma J, Scott K, Nelima D, Davis E, Baker KK, et al. Realities and experiences of community health volunteers as agents for behaviour change: evidence from an informal urban settlement in Kisumu, Kenya. Human resources for health. 2018;16(1):53 10.1186/s12960-018-0318-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Vareilles G, Pommier J, Marchal B, Kane S. Understanding the performance of community health volunteers involved in the delivery of health programmes in underserved areas: a realist synthesis. Implementation Science. 2017. December 1;12(1):22 10.1186/s13012-017-0554-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Morgenroth T, Ryan MK, Peters K. The motivational theory of role modeling: How role models influence role aspirants’ goals. Review of General Psychology. 2015;19(4):465–467. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.District Planning Co-Ordinating Unit. Kwahu Afram Plains North District Assembly Report. Medium-Term Development Plan 2014–2017. Annual Progress Report, 2017. Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development
  • 24.District Planning Co-Ordinating Unit. Kwahu Afram Plains South District Assembly Report. Medium-Term Development Plan 2014–2017. Annual Progress Report, 2017. Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development
  • 25.Ofosu DK. Assessing the spatial distribution of health facilities in the Eastern Region of Ghana. Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology; 2012 [Google Scholar]
  • 26.DaCosta S. Ethno-Cultural Factors That Influence Infant Feeding Among South Asians In the Region of Peel: Findings from Stakeholder Consultations. Peel region.ca. 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Mogre V, Dery M, Gaa PK. Knowledge, attitudes and determinants of exclusive breastfeeding practice among Ghanaian rural lactating mothers. International breastfeeding journal. 2016;11(1): 12–14 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006; 1;3(2):77–101. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Melo RS, Costa AC, Santos LH, Saldan PC, Santos LH, Saldan PC. Exclusive breastfeeding practices among health professionals of a baby friendly accredited hospital. Cogitare Enferm [Internet]. 2017;22(4): e50523. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Dachew BA, Bifftu BB. Breastfeeding practice and associated factors among female nurses and midwives at North Gondar Zone, Northwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional institution based study. International breastfeeding journal. 2014; 9(1): 11–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Talbert AW, Ngari M, Tsofa B, Mramba L, Mumbo E, Berkley JA, et al. “When you give birth you will not be without your mother” A mixed methods study of advice on breastfeeding for first-time mothers in rural coastal Kenya. International breastfeeding journal. 2016;11(1):10–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Swigart TM, Bonvecchio A, Théodore FL, Zamudio-Haas S, Villanueva-Borbolla MA, Thrasher JF. Breastfeeding practices, beliefs, and social norms in low-resource communities in Mexico: Insights for how to improve future promotion strategies. PloS one. 2017;12(7): e0180185 10.1371/journal.pone.0180185 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Mgongo M, Hussein TH, Stray-Pedersen B, Vangen S, Msuya SE, Wandel M. “We give water or porridge, but we don’t really know what the child wants:” a qualitative study on women’s perceptions and practises regarding exclusive breastfeeding in Kilimanjaro region, Tanzania. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2018. December;18(1):1–9 10.1186/s12884-017-1633-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Russell CG, Taki S, Azadi L, Campbell KJ, Laws R, Elliott R, et al. A qualitative study of the infant feeding beliefs and behaviours of mothers with low educational attainment. BMC pediatrics. 2016;16(1): 69–73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Walsh A, Kearney L, Dennis N. Factors influencing first-time mothers’ introduction of complementary foods: a qualitative exploration. BMC public health. 2015;15(1): 939–943. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Zvinavashe MMFMM, Haruzivishe C, Ndaimani DMA. Perceptions and Barriers to Exclusive Breastfeeding in Manicaland, Zimbabwe. Journal of Health, Medicine and Nursing. 2015; 21: 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kronborg H, Foverskov E, Væth M. (2014). Predictors for early introduction of solid food among Danish mothers and infants: an observational study. BMC pediatrics. 2014;14(1); 243–246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Cherop C, Keverenge-Ettyang A, Mbagaya GM. Barriers to exclusive breastfeeding among infants aged 0–6 months in Eldoret municipality, Kenya. East African journal of public health. 2009; 6(1): 1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Bravi F, Wiens F, Decarli A, Dal Pont A, Agostoni C, Ferraroni M. Impact of maternal nutrition on breast-milk composition: a systematic review. The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2016; 104(3):646–62. 10.3945/ajcn.115.120881 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Kanagasabapathy S, Sadhasivam M. Pre lacteal feeding practice among rural mothers in Tamil Nadu-A questionnaire based study. Int J Biomed Adv Res. 2015;6(6): 484–487. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Tekaly G, Kassa M, Belete T, Tasew H, Mariye T, Teshale T. Pre-lacteal feeding practice and associated factors among mothers having children less than two years of age in Aksum town, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2017: a cross-sectional study. BMC pediatrics. 2018;18(1):310–313. 10.1186/s12887-018-1284-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Hörnell A, Lagström H, Lande B, Thorsdottir I. Breastfeeding, introduction of other foods and effects on health: a systematic literature review for the 5th Nordic Nutrition Recommendations. Food & nutrition research. 2013; 57(1): 20823. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hassan NE, El-Masry SA, El Batrawy SR, Khalil A, Ali MM, Al Tohamy M, et al. Relationship between breast feeding duration and risk of overweight/obesity among Egyptian children. Egyptian Pediatric Association Gazette. 2018; 66(1): 9–14. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Aborigo RA, Moyer CA, Rominski S, Adongo P, Williams J, Logonia G, et al. Infant nutrition in the first seven days of life in rural northern Ghana. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2012; 12(1): 76–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.World Health Organization, (2011). Promoting proper feeding for infants and young children [online]. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/infantfeeding/en/index.html

Decision Letter 0

Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh

15 Jun 2020

PONE-D-20-11663

Mothers' misconceptions and socio-cultural factors prevent exclusive breastfeeding: findings from two rural districts in Ghana

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Christiana Nsiah-Asamoah,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 30 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh, MD, MSc, DrPH

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include additional information regarding the interview guide used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a guide as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information.In addition, please provide further details concerning participant recruitment, including the dates during which this was performed.

3.We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

4. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: 

[The authors received no specific funding for this work].

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

The paper addresses an important issue in Maternal, Newborn and Child Health. The paper requires some revision.

1. Please address the comments of the reviewers - some very important issues have been raised by them

2. The title of the paper does not give an impression of a qualitative study... please revise

3. Reading the conclusion of the abstract creates the impression that "mothers" directly reported the issues under discussion. Please do well to project the findings as coming from healthcare workers

4. Under the "study design and population", you mention "random sampling" - that sounds like a "quantitative" approach to participant selection

5. Page 6 - the expression "breastmilk is only water and does not contain..." - was the "water" there in reference to "water" as we know it or to a "liquid"? The interpretations either way might be slightly different.

6. Page 8 - the ritual of an elder spitting into the mouth of a child - unlike the other "rituals" that seem to be common place, this one does not seem to be that documented. Did it come out overwhelmingly in the interviews or it was a one-off finding? It will be good to place it in context if it is an isolated practice. Also the health implications of such an act goes beyond breast feeding, so would need to be addressed in the discussions, conclusions and recommendations.

7. Page 12 - the last sentence of the second paragraph is not clear, please revise.

8. Also follow the guidelines for reporting qualitative studies as suggested by the reviewers

Thank you.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Reviewer report

Title: Mothers' misconceptions and socio-cultural factors prevent exclusive breastfeeding:

findings from two rural districts in Ghana

Authors: Nsiah-Asamoah et al

COMMENTS

General comments

• It is a good article, highlighting misconceptions and cultural barriers and shows what the HWs know about this in relation to the mothers they deal with. It is important for HWs to understand the community beliefs so that they can appropriately deal with them, beyond only tackling the clinical interventions.

• Authors need to read through and make grammatical edits

o E.g. sentence 1 under Conclusions section in the abstract

o Sentence 1 of introduction is long and could be better edited or divided into 2, and other grammatical errors in document.

Major Compulsory Revisions

Overall methods comment

Using qualitative guidelines for paper writing will help to ensure that the methods are more fully described e.g. COREQ or other guidelines. Authors would be able to add more information on things like participant refusals or drop outs, places where interviews were held, a brief indication of what was in the FGD guides, training of research assistants, research team and reflexivity, among others.

Data analysis

• More details also needed for the analysis, for instance which kind of coding, did the coding team hold discussions to come up with themes, who did the coding, was analysis done manually or using software, was data saturation discussed, etc.

Results

Under section about grandmothers not doing EBF

• The 1st quote seems to be what HWs heard from the grandmothers, but not what the mothers themselves perceived.

• The last paragraph on that page (page 5/11) belongs to the discussion section because it is going beyond reporting results to listing their implications. The same applies to the first paragraph on page 7 (13), as well as later on the same page where authors discuss feeding of male babies, later on page 8 and in other places in the results – page 9 on herbal concoctions even cites other literature.

Limitations

• While it is good to understand the HWs view points, they are providing “second hand” information from the mothers, so it is not directly from the mothers, which is a limitation of this study.

• I think what is also missing was verification of whether HWs actually believe these things too, especially if they are from the same community. This could affect their delivery of health education.

Conclusion

• Good recommendations made. However, the difficulty in changing cultural beliefs needs to be acknowledged, and the need for innovation therein and possibly borrowing from other behavioural change interventions around culture.

Minor Essential Revisions

Introduction

• The literature and examples of barriers to EBF in the introduction only focus on cultural issues and misconceptions. There are other barriers to EBF and it would be good to briefly mention these as well.

• The last paragraph of the introduction explains why the CHWs and CHVs need to know the myths. Authors need to explain why they focused on these 2 groups only and maybe not the other HWs who deal with mothers and may be key to initiating breastfeeding at birth, for instance midwives.

• Also when authors refer to HWs, do they specifically mean only the CHWs and CHVs for this study? This needs to be clear to avoid confusion.

Study design and population

• Paragraph 1, last sentence: please specify which group of people you refer to when you say underweight. Is it children, babies, etc?

• Paragraph 2: Why should the HWs have been working for at least 5 years in the district?

• More information may be needed on the random sampling process, and how many were from CWCs and from the communities? Are these CWCs in hospitals?

• Do we have the demographics of the HWs?

• How were participants recruited? E.g. face to face, etc?

Data Collection

• Sentence 1: Focus not Focused

Data analysis

• Thematic analysis and thematic framework analysis are being used interchangeably, would you like to pick 1?

Results

• There is some repetition in the results section, for example when authors introduce the theme and then go on to the sub-themes, they need to reduce repetition of words there.

Discussion

• Remember to mention in which country or region the studies you are citing were done and possibly any limitations or strengths of the study – critique some of them.

• Highlight study strengths

Conclusion

• It may be better to have the recommendations well outlined in the discussion rather than in the conclusion.

Discretionary Revisions

Introduction

• Is there another source of breastfeeding data in Ghana beyond the GDHS? It would be a good addition to the literature, to back up the statements. This is because the DHS also has some reporting challenges. For instance, is EBF reducing or it could also be issues around reporting and data collection?

Discussion

• It would be good to elaborate on motivational theory so readers don’t have to look for it

• For studies on HWs not EBF, what were the reasons for this?

Reviewer #2: 1. Title: The title of the paper is misleading. The title suggests that the perceptions/misconceptions on exclusive breastfeeding are from the mothers’ perspective. Until you start reading, you will not have an idea that the perspectives from are health workers point of view. The authors should work on the title to reflect the views from the health workers. Example can be “Mothers misconceptions and socio-cultural factors prevent exclusive breastfeeding: Perspectives from health care providers from two rural districts of Ghana.

2. Characteristics of Health workers:

Description of CHWS and CHVs and the role they play will go a long way to help readers appreciate who these category of health providers are in the health system of Ghana. The authors will help a great deal by letting readers appreciate the context in which the study was done. E.g Who is a CHW? What does he/she do? What level of health staff is a CHW etc

3. Study design and population:

Description of the study area is very crucial to the study. It helps readers to appreciate the area where the study was conducted and also to put the results of the study in context. For instance, in the two districts where the study was done, how many health facilities are there? E.g. Is there a district hospital? Do women/community members patronise the district hospitals/health centre/CHPS compounds? The communities selected for the interviews, how close are they to the district hospital or CHPs compounds? All these will help readers appreciate the study and put the results.

Aside the health system, what is the occupation of the inhabitants in the selected communities? All these information, when provided can help to understand the people who are being studied.

4. The authors mentioned that the two districts were selected from the then Eastern Region. What is the name of the current region which host the two districts now?

5. When was the study done? How long did it take the authors from start of study to finish?

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Doris Kwesiga

Reviewer #2: Yes: Charlotte Tawiah Agyemang

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewer report_EBF in Ghana_Doris.pdf

PLoS One. 2020 Sep 17;15(9):e0239278. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239278.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


4 Aug 2020

Many thanks for the comments and suggestions given to improve the paper, Thank you.

The table below contains the Reviewers and Academic Editor’s Comments and the authors responses. Please the line numbers stated under the authors responses refer to the revised manuscript with track changes document, thank you.

Author’s Responses to Reviewer 1

General Comment

Authors need to read through and make grammatical edits o E.g. sentence 1 under Conclusions section in the abstract

Sentence 1 of introduction is long and could be better edited or divided into 2, and other grammatical errors

Authors Response:Please, sentence 1 under conclusions section of the abstract has been corrected, please refer to lines 34 and 35.

Please, sentence 1 of the introduction has been divided into two sentences, please see lines 46 - 49.

Overall methods comment

Using qualitative guidelines for paper writing will help to ensure that, the methods are fully described. E.g COREQ or other guidelines

Authors Response:Many thanks and well appreciated. We went through the COREQ guidelines and the manuscript has been revised accordingly to a large extent.

Authors would be able to add more information on things like participant refusals or drop outs, places where interviews were held, a brief indication of what was in the FGD guides, training of research assistants, research team and reflexivity, among others

Authors Response:Thank you for the comments. Please, in this study there were no issues with participant refusals or drop outs.

- The places where the FGDs were conducted, that is, at the District Health Directorate’s office has been indicated in the revised manuscript, please see lines 191 and 192, under Data collection section.

- A brief indication of what was in the FGD guides has been added to the revised manuscript, please see lines 196 - 205.

- A short section on the research team and reflexivity have been added to the revised manuscript, please refer to lines 239 - 247.

Data Analysis

More details also needed for the analysis, for instance which kind of coding, did the coding team hold discussions to come up with themes, who did the coding, was analysis done manually or using software, was data saturation discussed, etc.

Authors Response:Many thanks. The data analysis section has been revised to address the comments raised, please see lines 219 - 237.

- Regarding discussion of data saturation by the research team, please refer to lines 209 - 212.

Results

Under section about grandmothers not doing EBF

• The 1st quote seems to be what HWs heard from the grandmothers, but not what the mothers themselves perceived.

Authors Response:Thank you for the observation. We agree some of the quotes were what HWs had heard from grandmothers and not mothers. Please, the title has been revised to include grandmothers, please refer to lines 3 -5.

Results

-The last paragraph on that page (page 5/11) belongs to the discussion section because it is going beyond reporting results to listing their implications.

-The same applies to the first paragraph on page 7 (13), as well as later on the same page where authors discuss feeding of male babies, later on page 8 and in other places in the results – page 9 on herbal concoctions even cites other literature

Limitations

-While it is good to understand the HWs view points, they are providing “second hand” information from the mothers, so it is not directly from the mothers, which is a limitation of this study.

-I think what is also missing was verification of whether HWs actually believe these things too, especially if they are from the same community. This could affect their delivery of health education.

Authors Response:Thank you for the observation. The various sections on pages 5-11 which discuss the findings have been deleted from the results section and moved to the discussion section as shown in track changes on lines 303-306, 327-331, 378-382, 420-423, 463- 467.

Limitations

Authors Response:Thank you for the comment. We agree the HWs are providing “second hand” information based on their encounters with mothers, grandmothers and observations made in the community. This limitation of the study has been captured under the limitation section, please see lines 664 - 670.

Authors Response:Please, we agree that this is also another limitation of the study and has been indicated under the limitation section, please refer to lines 670-672.

Conclusion

-Good recommendations made.

-However, the difficulty in changing cultural beliefs needs to be acknowledged, and the need for innovation therein and possibly borrowing from other behavioural change interventions around culture.

Authors Response:Thank you, please, a sentence has been inserted under the recommendations from study section acknowledging the difficulty associated with changing cultural beliefs of people and as such the need for innovation and borrowing from other effective behavioural change interventions around culture. Please refer to lines 675 - 681.

Minor Essential Revisions

Introduction

-The literature and examples of barriers to EBF in the introduction only focus on cultural issues and misconceptions. There are other barriers to EBF and it would be good to briefly mention these as well.

Authors Response: Many thanks for the suggestion. Please, in the introduction section, other barriers to EBF have been indicated briefly, please refer to lines 70 -78.

Introduction

-The last paragraph of the introduction explains why the CHWs and CHVs need to know the myths. Authors need to explain why they focused on these 2 groups only and maybe not the other HWs who deal with mothers and may be key to initiating breastfeeding at birth, for instance midwives.

Authors Response:In the last paragraph of the introduction, an explanation has been given on why the study focused on CHWs and CHVs and not the other categories of health workers.

Please refer to lines 102 -116.

Introduction

- Also, when authors refer to HWs, do they specifically mean only the CHWs and CHVs for this study? This needs to be clear to avoid confusion.

Authors Response:

Authors Response: Many thanks. Please, the abbreviation HWs refers collectively to the study participants in this study (CHWs and CHVs). An insertion has been made in the last sentence of the introduction -(collectively referred to as HWs for the purpose of this study) to indicate this. Please see lines 125 - 127.

Study design and population

-Paragraph 1, last sentence: please specify which group of people you refer to when you say underweight. Is it children, babies, etc?

Authors Response:Please, underweight refers to children under five years of age in the region. This insertion has been made, please refer to line 174.

-Paragraph 2: Why should the HWs have been working for at least 5 years in the district?

Authors Response:This was an assumption that was made by us (the authors). The assumption was that this number of years might have given HWs ample experiences to be able to provide information on socio-cultural and misconception issues influencing EBF within the selected districts. This information has been added to the section study design and population. Please see lines 179 -182

-More information may be needed on the random sampling process, and how many were from CWCs and from the communities? Are these CWCs in hospitals?

Authors Response:The random sampling refers to the selection of the CWCs in various health facilities within the districts. No please, these CWCs are not units within only hospitals but the various health facilities such as health centres, CHPS compounds etc. Please refer to lines 175- 186.

-Do we have the demographics of the HWs.

Authors Response:Please, the only demographic information we have of the HWs are the sex, work experience(in years) and whether they have participated in any workshop on child nutrition issues and a table has now been presented in the revised manuscript. Please refer to Table 1, lines 255 -258

-How were participants recruited?

E.g. face to face, etc?

Authors Response:Please, the participants were recruited face-to-face with assistance from the district nutrition officers and nurse-in-charges in the various CWCs. This information has been added to lines 182 - 186.

Data Collection

-Sentence 1 Focus not Focused.

Authors Response:Thank you. Please “focus” has been changed to “focused", refer to line 193.

Data analysis

-Thematic analysis and thematic framework analysis are being used interchangeably, would you like to pick 1?

Authors Response:Thank you for the observation, we will use Thematic analysis throughout the manuscript.

Results

-There is some repetition in the results section, for example when authors introduce the theme and then go on to the sub-themes, they need to reduce repetition of words there.

Authors Response:Well appreciated. Please, we have read through the results section again and all repetitions in the main theme and sub-themes have been deleted. Please see lines 290, 346,

Discussion

-Remember to mention in which country or region the studies you are citing were done and possibly any limitations or strengths of the study – critique some of them.

Authors Response:Thank you for the comment. All the countries in which the studies that have been cited in the discussion were conducted have been indicated. Please refer to the discussion section on lines 508, 516, 582, 583 and 645.

Conclusion

-It may be better to have the recommendations well outlined in the discussion rather than in the conclusion.

Authors Response:Thank you for the suggestion. The recommendations have been moved to the last paragraph of the discussion, please refer to lines 674 - 697.

Discretionary Revisions

Introduction

-Is there another source of breastfeeding data in Ghana beyond the GDHS? It would be a good addition to the literature, to back up the statements. This is because the DHS also has some reporting challenges. For instance, is EBF reducing or it could also be issues around reporting and data collection.

Authors Response:Many thanks. We agree that the GDHS has limitations such as reporting challenges. However, it is only the GDHS that gives a holistic and comprehensive information regarding child nutrition in Ghana. For instance, World Bank and UNICEF reports on the state of child nutrition in Ghana make reference to the GDHS data and findings.

Discussion

- It would be good to elaborate on motivational theory so readers don’t have to look for it.

- For studies on HWs not practicing EBF, what were the reasons for this?

Authors Response:Thank you for the suggestion, Please, more information about the motivational theory has been indicated in lines 528 -535.

Authors Response:Some reasons for not practicing EBF by nurses and midwives in studies that were cited in the discussion have been inserted in lines 517-520.

Author’s Responses to Reviewer 2

Reviewer’s Comment Author’s response

1. Title: The title of the paper is misleading. The title suggests that the perceptions/misconceptions on exclusive breastfeeding are from the mothers’ perspective. Until you start reading, you will not have an idea that the perspectives from are health workers point of view. The authors should work on the title to reflect the views from the health workers. Example can be “Mothers misconceptions and socio-cultural factors prevent exclusive breastfeeding: Perspectives from health care providers from two rural districts of Ghana.

Authors Response:Thank you for the suggestion. Please, we have revised the title to reflect the content of the manuscript.

2. Characteristics of Health workers:

Description of CHWS and CHVs and the role they play will go a long way to help readers appreciate who these category of health providers are in the health system of Ghana. The authors will help a great deal by letting readers appreciate the context in which the study was done. E.g Who is a CHW? What does he/she do? What level of health staff is a CHW etc

Authors Response:Many thanks for the comments. Please, some information on the CHWs and CHVs has been provided in the introduction. Please refer to lines 102-116.

3. Study design and population:

Description of the study area is very crucial to the study. It helps readers to appreciate the area where the study was conducted and also to put the results of the study in context. For instance, in the two districts where the study was done, how many health facilities are there? E.g. Is there a district hospital? Do women/community members patronise the district hospitals/health centre/CHPS compounds? The communities selected for the interviews, how close are they to the district hospital or CHPs compounds? All these will help readers appreciate the study and put the results.

Authors Response:Thank you for the comment. A sub-heading “Study Area” has been included under the “Subjects and Methods” section which describes the study area. Please refer to lines 141-166.

Aside the health system, what is the occupation of the inhabitants in the selected communities? All this information, when provided can help to understand the people who are being studied. Authors Response:Thank you for the suggestion. Information regarding the occupation of the inhabitants has been provided under the section “Study Area”, please see lines 148-150, 158-159.

4. The authors mentioned that the two districts were selected from the then Eastern Region. What is the name of the current region which host the two districts now?

Authors Response:Thank you for the observation. This is an oversight, the name of region remains the same -Eastern Region. The word “then has been deleted from the 1st and 2nd sentences under the section “Study Design and Population” Please see lines 170, 172.

5. When was the study done? How long did it take the authors from start of study to finish? Authors Response:Please, information about the period and duration of the study has been provided under the Data collection section. Please refer to lines 189 - 192.

Responses to Academic Editor’s Comments

Academic Editor’s Comments Author’s Comments

1.The title of the paper does not give an impression of a qualitative study... please revise Authors Response:Thank you for the suggestion. Please, the title has been revised to show that it is a qualitative study.

Reading the conclusion of the abstract creates the impression that "mothers" directly reported the issues under discussion. Please do well to project the findings as coming from healthcare workers.

Authors Response:Well appreciated. The beginning sentence of the conclusion section under the Abstract has been revised to indicate that the issues discussed in the study are from health workers. Please refer to lines 34-35.

Under the "study design and population", you mention "random sampling" - that sounds like a "quantitative" approach to participant selection.

Authors Response:Please, the random sampling applies to the selection of the 21 Child Welfare Clinics (CWCs). Please it does not refer to the random selection of the participants(CHWs).

From each CWC, the nurse-in-charge assisted in selecting 2 CHWs to participate in the FGD. This has been presented under the study “design and population” section, lines 175 -177.

Page 6 - the expression "breastmilk is only water and does not contain..." - was the "water" there in reference to "water" as we know it or to a "liquid"? The interpretations either way might be slightly different.

Authors Response:Many thanks for the observation. Please, this statement has been revised. The HWs meant some mothers have the perceptions that, breastmilk is more watery in nature and does not contain enough food to satisfy the hunger needs of the child. Please refer to lines 366, 368 and 370.

Page 8 - the ritual of an elder spitting into the mouth of a child - unlike the other "rituals" that seem to be common place, this one does not seem to be that documented. Did it come out overwhelmingly in the interviews or it was a one-off finding? It will be good to place it in context if it is an isolated practice. Also the health implications of such an act goes beyond breast feeding, so would need to be addressed in the discussions, conclusions and recommendations.

Authors Response:The comment is well appreciated. This report is a one-off finding that was reported in one community which has several Fulani herdsmen households. The authors have therefore deleted it from the manuscript since the practice did not come out overwhelmingly in all the 9 FGDs that were conducted. Please see the deletion in lines 451 - 454.

Page 12 - the last sentence of the second paragraph is not clear, please revise.

Authors Response:Well appreciated. The sentence was making reference to the finding on the ritual of an elder person spitting into the mouth of a newborn baby. The sentence has been deleted since this finding which did not come out overwhelmingly in the FGDs has also been deleted from the results section.

Also follow the guidelines for reporting qualitative studies as suggested by the reviewers.

Authors Response: Many thanks and well appreciated. Please, we went through the COREQ guidelines and the manuscript has been revised accordingly to a large extent.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Responses to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh

3 Sep 2020

Mothers’ and Grandmothers’ misconceptions and socio-cultural factors as barriers to exclusive breastfeeding: A qualitative study involving Health Workers in two rural districts of Ghana

PONE-D-20-11663R1

Dear Dr. Christiana Nsiah-Asamoah,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh, MD, MSc, DrPH

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Great effort on the part of the authors... Most of the issues raised have been addressed satisfactorily. Though the manuscript has been passed for acceptance, the authors should address the issues raised by reviewer 1. As mentioned there are a few grammatical and some structural errors. The authors seem to love "long" sentences - some sentences in the changes are still overly long making appreciation of the concepts not so easy. Fragmenting and rewording these would help bring issues out clearly. Under the methods, FGD was spelt as FDG... this and a few others should be corrected. Please finally read over carefully and possibly get a proof reader to go over to ensure any errors are picked up and addressed.

Thank you.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: General comments

• Noted the change in title to include grandmothers as well. The option suggested by the other reviewer was also good.

• Most of the changes have been made as recommended in the first review, and the manuscript has been greatly improved. I only recommend a few minor revisions as below.

• In the abstract it is now explained that you are looking at the perspectives of health workers so that is clearer.

• Authors need to read through and make grammatical edits, especially shortening the very long sentences, which can be broken into two. For instance, these are still present in the abstract, although authors worked on some. There are also areas without good punctuation. You can also reduce repetitions on page 14 – the section explaining why focus of this study was on CHVs and CHWs. Focused group discussions still mentioned on page 16 under data collection. Another is the title for the first theme in the results, and many others. The discussion and conclusion sections would be easier to read with more paragraphs than the big chunks of text.

Minor Essential Revisions

Introduction

If GDHS is the only data source please include a sentence specifying the limitations of this, considering it’s 2014 data

Methods comment

It would be good to indicate whether the lead researchers and the team were Ghanaian and local to the area or not.

Discussion

• Remember to briefly critique some of the other studies cited

• The discussion now has the right content. Authors can focus on editing it to make it more concise, with less repetition of results and more focus on contextualising their study

Conclusion

• It mentions a gap in mothers knowledge but I think grandmothers should be included as well.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Doris Kwesiga

Reviewer #2: Yes: Charlotte Tawiah Agyemang

Acceptance letter

Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh

8 Sep 2020

PONE-D-20-11663R1

Mothers’ and Grandmothers’ misconceptions and socio-cultural factors as barriers to exclusive breastfeeding: A qualitative study involving Health Workers in two rural districts of Ghana

Dear Dr. Nsiah-Asamoah:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Yeetey Akpe Kwesi Enuameh

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewer report_EBF in Ghana_Doris.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Responses to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The recorded audiotapes that were translated and transcribed into English from the focused group discussions cannot be shared publicly because it contains sensitive and some personal identifying information from the participants. However, data are available from the District Health Management Committee on Human Research and Ethics (Cordinator's Email: davekwame066@gmail.com) or the corresponding author (Email:cbuxton@ucc.edu.gh) upon request from researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES