Keywords
breastfeeding - weaning - humanization - natural childbirth - cesarean section
Palavras-chave
aleitamento materno - desmame - humanização - parto normal - cesárea
Introduction
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) on demand,
in the first six months of life, and, later, breastfeeding must be supplemented with
other foods up to 2 years of age or older.[1] It is said that an infant is in EBF when he/she feeds only on breast milk, without
consuming other foods or liquids.[2] This is the most complete food, and it meets the nutritional needs in the first
six months of life.[3] The benefits of breastfeeding go beyond nutritional gains, as breast milk has immunological
properties, favors cognitive development, and protects infants from diseases such
as dehydration, diarrhea and pneumonia, which are important causes of infant mortality.[4] For the puerperal woman, it promotes the affective bond with her baby, prevents
bleeding, and reduces the risk of developing cancer.[3]
Increasing EBF rates are a goal to be achieved worldwide, and the WHO and the United
Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) promote and encourage the continuity of EBF.[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6] In 2011, the global EBF rate in infants from 0 to 6 months was of 35%, and it increased
to 40% in 2019.[2]
[7] In Brazil, although the EBF index is gradually increasing, its maintenance is observed
for shorter periods than the recommended six months.[8]
Research[3]
[4]
[6] shows that the duration and continuity of EBF are linked to socioeconomic variables
such as age and maternal schooling, family income and occupation, and to obstetric
and perinatal variables, such as assiduous participation in prenatal care, delivery
and type of assistance received during childbirth, as well as the support provided
by the professionals and family members to breastfeeding. Given the aforementioned
information, the present study intended to analyze the factors associated with the
prevalence of EBF for up to six months in mother/infant binomials cared for at a maternity
of usual risk that is reference in good practices in care for childbirth, with Baby–Friendly
Hospital Initiative (BFHI) reputation.
Methods
The present is a descriptive, longitudinal, prospective study with a quantitative
approach. It was performed in a habitual-risk public maternity hospital in the city
of Curitiba, state of Paraná (PR), Brazil, a reference in humanization, with the BFHI
reputation. The inclusion criteria were: women aged ≥ 18 years who gave birth to live
newborns at term (≥ 37 weeks), by normal delivery or cesarean section, at the maternity
hospital. Women who had premature births, stillbirths, whose newborn or themselves
were transferred to high-complexity care, and who did not answer the second questionnaire
were excluded.
Data were collected in two moments: 1) by interview in the maternity hospital, within
the first 48 hours of life, in the months of January and February 2019; and 2) through
a phone call with the mother, at 6 months of life of the infant, in August 2019. The
collection was prospective and used 2 structured questionnaires, composed of 12 and
10 questions respectively, prepared by the researchers and previously tested. In the
first questionnaire, socioeconomic, obstetric and perinatal variables were collected,
while in the second, we collected information about the duration of the EBF and the
type of breastfeeding the infant was on at six months. [Fig. 1] shows the flowchart of the data collection and the selection of mother/infant binomials
based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Fig. 1 Flowchart of the data collection and selection of mother/infant binomials.
In the first contact, the women who agreed to participate signed the free and informed
consent form (FICF), with a total of 141 participants. Telephone contact was obtained
with only 101 participants in the second collection, even after 3 attempts to call
at different dates and times. We analyzed the outcome and the type of breastfeeding
according to the classification by the WHO: EBF, when the infant is fed only breast
milk, without the addition of other foods or liquids; breastfeeding (BF), when, in
addition to breast milk, the infant is fed other liquid and/or solid foods; and mixed
breastfeeding (MBF), when the infant is fed breast milk and baby formula.[9]
We collected socioeconomic variables (age and maternal schooling, family income, occupation
and maternity leave), obstetric variables (type of delivery, parity, and number of
prenatal consultations), and variables related to good perinatal practices (skin-to-skin
contact [when the infant stays with the mother immediately after the birth for at
least 1 hour], breastfeeding in the first hour of life, and support to breastfeeding
from a professional or family member) to look for an association with EBF. Regarding
the variable maternal schooling, illiterate women and those with incomplete elementary education were included in
the ‘less than 8 years of schooling’ group, while those with complete elementary education
up to complete higher education were included in the ‘more than 8 years of schooling’
group. The factors that made breastfeeding difficult and the factors that motivated
weaning were also analyzed.
The information was tabulated in Excel 2016 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, US) spreadsheets,
and the statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, US), version 21.0. The absolute and relative
frequencies were calculated, in addition to the search for an association of the variables
with EBF through the chi-squared test of independence, in which values of p < 0.05 were considered significant. The variables that had values of p < 0.25 in the Chi-squared test were tested for an analysis of the odds ratio (OR)
using the MedCalc web site (https://www.medcalc.org/calc/odds_ratio.php). The present research was submitted to analysis and approved by the Ethics in Research
Committee of the municipality of Curitiba (under opinion No. 3,060,900 on December
6, 2018).
Results
Overall, 101 mother/newborn binomials were interviewed, most of which were still breastfeeding
(74.3%) ([Table 1]). As for the type of breastfeeding at six months of life, 42.6% remained on EBF,
and almost a third of the sample continued to breastfeed, but not exclusively (BF = 18.8%;
MBF = 12.9%), and only 25.7% of the infants weaned early ([Table 1]).
Table 1
Breastfeeding outcome (n = 101)
|
Variable
|
|
n
|
%
|
|
Breastfeeding
|
Yes
|
75
|
74.3
|
|
No
|
26
|
25.7
|
|
Breastfeeding type
|
Exclusive breasfeeding
|
43
|
42.6
|
|
Breastfeeding
|
19
|
18.8
|
|
Mixed breastfeeding
|
13
|
12.9
|
|
Weaning
|
26
|
25.7
|
Regarding the characteristics of the population, the most prevalent maternal age group
was 20 to 34 years (80.2%), and just over 80% of the mothers had more than 8 years
of schooling ([Table 2]). It is noteworthy that there were no illiterate women, and that 71.3% of them had
at least graduated from High School. The most frequent family income was more than
2 minimum wages (74.3%), and half of the women reported contributing to the houehold
income, since they worked (49.5%; [Table 2]). As for the employment relationship, 36.6% were employed with a formal contract,
and 12.9% declared themselves self-employed. Regarding maternity leave, 38.6% enjoyed
a period of 4 to 6 months of maternity leave. Most women were primiparous (47.5%),
had a normal birth (73.3%), and had regular prenatal care with more than 6 consultations
(93.1%). Regarding good practices, skin-to-skin contact stood out as the experience
most lived by women (78.2%), which results in a good rate of breastfeeding in the
first hour of life (65.3%). Also noteworthy is the high prevalence of ‘support to
breastfeeding’ (74.3%), showing the engagement of the team and family members in breastfeeding.
This support was defined as a set of practices and information that the puerperal
woman received from the multiprofessional team during hospitalization, and, later,
the support she received at home from the family to continue breastfeeding.
Table 2
Association of exclusive breastfeeding and socioeconomic, obstetric and perinatal
variables (n = 101)
|
Variable
|
|
Exclusive breastfeeding
|
p-value
|
Total
|
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
n (%)
|
n (%)
|
n (%)
|
|
|
43
|
58
|
101
|
|
Age
|
18–19 years
|
4 (9.3)
|
5 (8.6)
|
0.96
|
9 (8.9)
|
|
20–34 years
|
34 (79.1)
|
47 (81.0)
|
81 (80.2)
|
|
> 35 years
|
5(11.6)
|
6 (10.4)
|
11 (10.9)
|
|
Schooling
|
< 8 years
|
11(25.6)
|
8 (13.8)
|
0.71
|
19 (18.8)
|
|
> 8 years
|
32 (74.4)
|
50 (86.2)
|
|
82 (81.2)
|
|
Family income
|
≤ 2 minimum wages
|
9 (20.9)
|
17 (29.3)
|
0.56
|
26 (25.7)
|
|
> 2 minimum wages
|
34 (79.1)
|
41 (70.7)
|
75 (74.3)
|
|
Currently employed
|
Yes
|
19 (44.2)
|
31 (53.4)
|
0.26
|
50 (49.5)
|
|
No
|
24 (55.8)
|
27 (46.6)
|
51 (50.5)
|
|
Maternity leave
|
Yes
|
13 (30.2)
|
26 (44.8)
|
0.02*
|
39 (38.6)
|
|
No
|
30 (69.8)
|
32 (55.2)
|
62 (61.4)
|
|
Birth type
|
Normal
|
30 (69.8)
|
44 (75.9)
|
0.31
|
74 (73.3)
|
|
Cesarean section
|
13 (30.2)
|
14 (24.1)
|
27 (26.7)
|
|
Parity
|
First pregnancy
|
19 (44.2)
|
29 (50.0)
|
|
48 (47.5)
|
|
2–3 pregnancies
|
21 (48.8)
|
24 (41.4)
|
0.75
|
45 (44.6)
|
|
≥ 4 pregnancies
|
3 (7.0)
|
5 (8.6)
|
|
8 (7.9)
|
|
Prenatal consultation
|
< 6
|
3(7.0)
|
4 (6.9)
|
0.98
|
7 (6.9)
|
|
≥ 6
|
40 (93.0)
|
54 (93.1)
|
94 (93.1)
|
|
Skin-to-skin contact
|
Yes
|
30 (69.8)
|
49 (84.5)
|
0.07
|
79 (78.2)
|
|
No
|
13 (30.2)
|
9 (15.5)
|
22 (21.8)
|
|
Breastfeeding in the first hour
|
Yes
|
26 (60.5)
|
40 (69.0)
|
0.37
|
66 (65.3)
|
|
No
|
17 (39.5)
|
18 (31.0)
|
35 (34.7)
|
|
Support to breastfeeding
|
Yes
|
38 (88.4)
|
37 (63.8)
|
0.005*
|
75 (74.3)
|
|
No
|
5 (11.6)
|
21 (36.2)
|
26 (25.7)
|
Source: Data of the survey, 2019.
Note: *p < 0.05.
The comparison between the mother/infant binomials who maintained EBF with those that
did not, and the association with the socioeconomic, obstetric and perinatal variables
were performed using the Chi-squared test ([Table 2]). Regarding the socioeconomic variables, only maternity leave was statistically
different among the groups. Contrary to expectations, the women who did not take maternity
leave maintained EBF for longer periods when compared with those who took leave (p = 0.02). The obstetric variables type of delivery, prenatal consultations, and parity did not present a statistically significant difference among the women who maintained
EBF or not at six months ([Table 2]). As for the variables related to good perinatal practices, EBF was more prevalent
among the women who received support to breastfeed than among the women who did not
maintain EBF (p = 0.005), and the variable skin-to-skin contact, despite not having presented a statistically significant difference, tended to be
lower among the mother/infant binomials who maintained EBF.
Then, we evaluated whether the variables maternity leave, support to breastfeeding (which were associated with breastfeeding) and skin-to-skin contact (which tended to be associated with breastfeeding) were risk or protective factors
for EBF through the calculation of the OR. This analysis showed that taking maternity
leave tended to increase the probability of maintenance of the EBF (OR = 0.533; 95%
confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.232 to 1.225; p = 0.138), and skin-to-skin contact tended to decrease this probability (OR = 2.359;
95%CI: 0.90 to 6.1845; p = 0.081). In contrast, professional and family support to breastfeeding increased
the chance of breastfeeding 4-fold (OR = 0.232; 95%CI: 0.079 to 0.679; p = 0.008).
Finally, the factors that made breastfeeding difficult and that influence weaning
were investigated ([Table 3]). Approximately half of the interviewees (46.5%) reported some difficulty in breastfeeding,
the most predominant being ‘nipple fissure’ (22.8%), followed by the complaint of
low ‘milk production’ (17.8%). Weaning affected 25.7% of the population, and low milk
production appears as the main driver (42.3%), followed by weaning by maternal option
(30.8%) and return to work (26.9%).
Table 3
Main difficulties with breastfeeding and reasons for weaning (n = 101)
|
Variable
|
|
n
|
%
|
|
Difficulty breastfeeding
|
No
|
54
|
53.5
|
|
N = 101
|
Fissure
|
23
|
22.8
|
|
Mastitis
|
5
|
5.0
|
|
Engorgement
|
1
|
1.0
|
|
Low milk production
|
18
|
17.8
|
|
Reason for weaning
N = 26
|
Return to work
|
7
|
26.9
|
|
Low milk production
|
11
|
42.3
|
|
By option
|
8
|
30.8
|
Source: Research data, 2019.
Discussion
In view of the benefits for the mother/infant binomial and the WHO recommendations
regarding the maintenance of EBF in the first six months of life of the infant, the
aim of the present study was to describe the socioeconomic, obstetric and perinatal
aspects related to childbirth care that influenced EBF in an usual-risk maternity,
a reference in good practices in childbirth and birth care. There was a high rate
of breastfeeding (73.4%) among the population studied, in addition to EBF rates (42.6%)
above the data estimated for Brazil (38.6%) and the world (40%), according to data
from the UNICEF.[7] In Brazil, EBF rates have been gradually increasing, and although they are almost
twice as high as those in middle- and upper-income countries (23.9%), they are still
far behind the rates of countries like Rwanda (86.9%), Burundi (82.3%) and Sri Lanka
(82%), which have the highest EBF rates in the world.[7] In the state of Pernambuco, Brazil, a study revealed that the median period of EBF
was of only 60.84 days, which indicates that the good practices of the institution
studied here and the BFHI seem to have positively influenced the maintenance of EBF.[8]
Age is one of the factors that can affect EBF. Some authors believe that women over
the age of 30 breastfeed longer than younger women, and that adolescence can be a
weaning factor.[3]
[4] In the present study, most women were aged between 20 and 34 years, but age was
not associated with EBF. Likewise, the EBF was not related to schooling. There are
reports that mothers with more than eight years of schooling breastfeed more, as they
have more access to information.[3] In addition, the low level of schooling can also delay the beginning of prenatal
care, which directly results in successful breastfeeding.[3] In contrast, the higher level of schooling of the women can increase the rate of
formal employment and result in an early return to work, which influenced the early
weaning of 7 of the 26 patients who stopped breastfeeding before 6 months.[8]
In the present study, women who did not take maternity leave breastfed more. There
are studies that state that the mother's presence at home is positive for the continuity
of EBF, while others claim the opposite.[3]
[10] In the present study, all unemployed women belonged to the group who did not receive
maternity leave, so we believe that staying at home for this population is a factor
that protects breastfeeding.
Regular prenatal care with more than six consultations and mainly with quality of
care and guidance is a greatly for the success of breastfeeding.[2]
[8] A high adherence to prenatal care was observed in the studied group (93% had had
≥ 6 consultations). A longitudinal study[2] with 531 infants in 2012 found that the absence of prenatal care increased the chance
of reducing breastfeeding time by 173%.
The studied population had a high rate of normal delivery (73.3%), the most recommended
route for birth by the WHO. Cesarean section, in turn, is considered a hindrance to
breastfeeding in the first hour of life, a variable that has already been related
to the longer duration of breastfeeding.[3]
[8] Although two thirds of the mothers studied had breastfed in the first hour of life,
there was no association between this variable and EBF.
A Cochrane review[13] sought randomized trials on skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding, and concluded
that mothers who had skin-to-skin contact breastfed exclusively for longer periods.[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13] Although skin-to-skin contact was more frequent among women who weaned in this particular
sample, the practice is encouraged by the WHO, and it corresponds to step four of
the Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding in the BFHI.[12]
Women who received ‘support to breastfeeding’' were 4 times more likely to maintain
EBF (p = 0.008). The support network for the puerperal woman must start in the prenatal
period, and remain during the care received at the hospital and after discharge, since,
due to the difficulties that arise during the breastfeeding period, the puerperal
woman can seek support and continue to breastfeed.[6] The support of the partner in this network reinforces the importance of family members
involvement in the whole process of gestating, giving birth and maternal. The importance
of the team in maintaining EBF during hospitalization at the maternity hospital is
highlighted, as the mother/infant binomials discharged on EBF are 2.5 times more likely
to maintain the EBF.[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14] The hospital where the present study took place offers support through the promotion,
protection and encouragement of breastfeeding during the entire hospitalization. This
is done through guidance and assistance in breastfeeding, added to the good practices
of care during childbirth. The maternity in question has an Interdisciplinary Committee
on Breastfeeding, which is composed of an engaged multidisciplinary team (doctors,
nurses, nutritionist, social worker and speech therapist) and promotes courses, workshops,
lectures, research and discussions in this field, with the objective of supporting
breastfeeding and increasing breastfeeding rates. The assistance team works with individualized
care and daily physical examination of the breasts to identify nipple fissures, engorgement
and solve the doubts of the women during the entire hospitalization. The maternity
hospital also has an exclusive breastfeeding support room, a pleasant and reserved
place, which is ideal for individualized and differentiated care. All women should
be instructed on the importance of breastfeeding, on the correct position to breastfeed,
on milking the breasts when necessary, and on the prevention of fissures and other
complications, and as to when to seek help and professional support.
Difficulties in breastfeeding usually occur in cascade. The position of the mother/infant
binomial affects the grip and suction, which can result in nipple fissure that generates
pain.[5] Due to pain, the puerperal woman tends to offer the breast less often to the infant,
which increases the likelihood of low milk production or results in breast engorgement.[15] Nipple fissure, the most frequent complaint in this population, is seen in the literature
as an important factor for weaning.[15] Although many women have reported insufficient milk production, it is known that,
biologically, the production is sufficient for their children. This statement denotes
the insecurity that usually disappears over time, if the mother receives adequate
guidance and support.[6]
The bias of postpartum memory failure and the fact that the second part of the data
collection was performed by telephone, which may allow for some misunderstanding in
the questions used, are the main limitations of the present study. Thus, it is necessary
to conduct new studies with the local population, and to compare different institutions
to promote current results that strengthen breastfeeding assistance.
Conclusion
The factors that were associated with the duration of EBF in the present study were
staying at home with the child longer, and the support of the professional or family
members to breastfeeding, which reduced the chance of interrupting EBF four-fold.
Although the other variables discussed here are not significant, it is known that
good practices reflect on all of assistance provided and throughout the life of the
mother/infant binomial. Finally, data on the factors associated with early weaning
provide a basis to support interventions and discussions capable of improving the
quality of care for the maternal and infant population.
