Teleintervention’s effects on breastfeeding in low-income women in high income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Madeleine Corkery-Hayward, Mohammad Talaei
{"title":"Teleintervention’s effects on breastfeeding in low-income women in high income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Madeleine Corkery-Hayward, Mohammad Talaei","doi":"10.1186/s13006-024-00631-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many mothers in high-income countries (HIC) do not breastfeed to the World Health Organisation’s recommendation of two years. This is particularly true for low-income women (LIW). They often face additional socio-structural barriers that encourage early discontinuation and are inadequately supported by current healthcare interventions. Teleinterventions are flexible and widely used following the global pandemic and increase maternal autonomy over intervention delivery. They show promise in improving other maternal conditions in LIW, including postpartum depression. Teleinterventions can increase breastfeeding rates in the wider maternal population, however their efficacy for this underserved population has not yet been systematically assessed. This meta-analysis aimed to identify if teleinterventions increase ‘exclusive’ or ‘any’ breastfeeding by LIW in HIC at 1-, 3–4, and 6-months postpartum. We searched five online databases for randomised controlled trials assessing breastfeeding teleinterventions for LIW in HIC. Risk ratios (RR) were used to calculate the average effect of teleinterventions on ‘any’ and ‘exclusive’ breastfeeding at at 1-, 3–4, and 6-months postpartum using random effects meta-analysis. Study bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB2), and outcome quality was evaluated against GRADE criteria. Nine studies met inclusion criteria: six providing telephone calls, two text messages and one an online support group. All the studies were conducted in the United States, with small sample sizes and a high risk of bias. Pooled results indicate teleinterventions modestly increase ‘any’ and ‘exclusive’ breastfeeding at all time points, with a statistically significant increase in ‘exclusive’ breastfeeding after 3–4 months (RR 1.12, 95% CI [1.00,1.25]). At 3–4 months teleinterventions providing peer support were more effective than educational teleinterventions at promoting any and exclusive breastfeeding. Evidence for all outcomes were rated ‘low’ or ‘very low’ quality using the GRADE tool, mainly due to high attrition and low power. Despite insufficient high-quality research into breastfeeding teleinterventions for LIW, our results suggest teleinterventions may improve exclusive and any breastfeeding. Given breastfeeding is particularly low in LIW population from HIC, our findings are promising and require further exploration by larger, methodologically sound trials in other HIC.","PeriodicalId":54266,"journal":{"name":"International Breastfeeding Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Breastfeeding Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-024-00631-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many mothers in high-income countries (HIC) do not breastfeed to the World Health Organisation’s recommendation of two years. This is particularly true for low-income women (LIW). They often face additional socio-structural barriers that encourage early discontinuation and are inadequately supported by current healthcare interventions. Teleinterventions are flexible and widely used following the global pandemic and increase maternal autonomy over intervention delivery. They show promise in improving other maternal conditions in LIW, including postpartum depression. Teleinterventions can increase breastfeeding rates in the wider maternal population, however their efficacy for this underserved population has not yet been systematically assessed. This meta-analysis aimed to identify if teleinterventions increase ‘exclusive’ or ‘any’ breastfeeding by LIW in HIC at 1-, 3–4, and 6-months postpartum. We searched five online databases for randomised controlled trials assessing breastfeeding teleinterventions for LIW in HIC. Risk ratios (RR) were used to calculate the average effect of teleinterventions on ‘any’ and ‘exclusive’ breastfeeding at at 1-, 3–4, and 6-months postpartum using random effects meta-analysis. Study bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB2), and outcome quality was evaluated against GRADE criteria. Nine studies met inclusion criteria: six providing telephone calls, two text messages and one an online support group. All the studies were conducted in the United States, with small sample sizes and a high risk of bias. Pooled results indicate teleinterventions modestly increase ‘any’ and ‘exclusive’ breastfeeding at all time points, with a statistically significant increase in ‘exclusive’ breastfeeding after 3–4 months (RR 1.12, 95% CI [1.00,1.25]). At 3–4 months teleinterventions providing peer support were more effective than educational teleinterventions at promoting any and exclusive breastfeeding. Evidence for all outcomes were rated ‘low’ or ‘very low’ quality using the GRADE tool, mainly due to high attrition and low power. Despite insufficient high-quality research into breastfeeding teleinterventions for LIW, our results suggest teleinterventions may improve exclusive and any breastfeeding. Given breastfeeding is particularly low in LIW population from HIC, our findings are promising and require further exploration by larger, methodologically sound trials in other HIC.
远程干预对高收入国家低收入妇女母乳喂养的影响:系统回顾与荟萃分析
高收入国家(HIC)的许多母亲并没有按照世界卫生组织的建议母乳喂养两年。低收入妇女(LIW)的情况尤其如此。她们往往面临更多的社会结构性障碍,这些障碍促使她们过早停止母乳喂养,而且目前的医疗保健干预措施也没有为她们提供足够的支持。远程干预在全球大流行后得到了灵活而广泛的应用,并提高了产妇对干预措施实施的自主权。远程干预有望改善产妇的其他状况,包括产后抑郁。远程干预可以提高广大产妇的母乳喂养率,但其对这一服务不足人群的疗效尚未得到系统评估。本荟萃分析旨在确定远程干预是否能提高高危产妇在产后 1 个月、3-4 个月和 6 个月的 "纯 "母乳喂养率或 "任何 "母乳喂养率。我们在五个在线数据库中搜索了评估针对高收入国家内陆妇女的母乳喂养远程干预的随机对照试验。采用随机效应荟萃分析法计算了远程干预对产后 1 个月、3-4 个月和 6 个月的 "任何 "和 "纯 "母乳喂养的平均影响的风险比 (RR)。使用修订版 Cochrane 随机试验偏倚风险工具 (RoB2) 对研究偏倚进行评估,并根据 GRADE 标准对结果质量进行评估。九项研究符合纳入标准:其中六项提供电话支持,两项提供短信支持,一项提供在线支持小组支持。所有研究均在美国进行,样本量较小,偏倚风险较高。汇总结果表明,在所有时间点,远程干预都能适度增加 "任何 "和 "纯 "母乳喂养,3-4 个月后,"纯 "母乳喂养的增加具有统计学意义(RR 1.12,95% CI [1.00,1.25])。在促进母乳喂养和纯母乳喂养方面,3-4 个月时提供同伴支持的远程干预比教育性远程干预更有效。根据 GRADE 工具,所有结果的证据质量均被评为 "低 "或 "极低",这主要是由于自然减员率高和功率低造成的。尽管针对低收入人群的母乳喂养远程干预的高质量研究不足,但我们的研究结果表明,远程干预可改善纯母乳喂养和任何情况下的母乳喂养。鉴于高收入国家低收入人群的母乳喂养率特别低,我们的研究结果很有希望,需要在其他高收入国家进行规模更大、方法更合理的试验来进一步探讨。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Breastfeeding Journal
International Breastfeeding Journal Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
11.40%
发文量
76
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊介绍: Breastfeeding is recognized as an important public health issue with enormous social and economic implications. Infants who do not receive breast milk are likely to experience poorer health outcomes than breastfed infants; mothers who do not breastfeed increase their own health risks. Publications on the topic of breastfeeding are wide ranging. Articles about breastfeeding are currently published journals focused on nursing, midwifery, paediatric, obstetric, family medicine, public health, immunology, physiology, sociology and many other topics. In addition, electronic publishing allows fast publication time for authors and Open Access ensures the journal is easily accessible to readers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信