A scoping review of breastfeeding peer support models applied in hospital settings.
Breastfeeding
Breastfeeding peer supporters (BFPS)
Peer support
Journal
International breastfeeding journal
ISSN: 1746-4358
Titre abrégé: Int Breastfeed J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101251562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 11 2020
14 11 2020
Historique:
received:
29
01
2020
accepted:
15
10
2020
entrez:
15
11
2020
pubmed:
16
11
2020
medline:
17
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The 2013 updated guidelines on management of severe acute malnutrition in infants and children recommends the support of exclusive breastfeeding. These guidelines are inconsistently applied in low and middle income countries (LMICs) due to barriers including unclear implementation guides, technical support and epidemiological factors. Peer support strategies have been used to offer psychological support to families with infants in NICU and improve mental health outcomes. Breastfeeding peer supporters (BFPS) have been shown to be effective in improving breastfeeding outcomes in community settings however, their success within hospital settings in LMICs is unknown. We conducted a scoping review to explore implementation of breastfeeding peer support strategies as have been applied to hospitalized infants globally and highlight their implementation strategies in order to guide future research and practice. A scoping review of the literature was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. A search was conducted in five online databases (PubMed, Cochrane library, Hinari, Google Scholar and Open Grey library). Data were extracted and charted in data extraction tables to capture general characteristics, modes of peer support delivery, implementation details and evaluation procedures. From the online search 276 articles were identified, however only 18 met the inclusion criteria for the study. The majority of these articles were reports on in-patient breastfeeding peer support interventions applied in Europe and the United States of America and only two were from LMICs. The articles described peer supporters' identification, training (n = 13) and supervision (n = 14). The majority of the BFPS were employed (n = 10) compared to volunteers (n = 3) and support was mainly one-to-one (n = 11) rather than group support. Process and impact evaluation (n = 13) reported positive breastfeeding outcomes associated with breastfeeding peer support. Breastfeeding peer support strategies are applied in different hospital settings and can be used to improve breastfeeding outcomes. However, to achieve integration, scalability and comparability of impact and outcomes, there is a need to standardize training, develop consistent implementation and supervision plans of in-patient peer supporters' strategies. Further research to assess sustainability and evaluate cost-effectiveness of in-patient breastfeeding peer support strategies will improve uptake and scalability of these potentially lifesaving interventions.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The 2013 updated guidelines on management of severe acute malnutrition in infants and children recommends the support of exclusive breastfeeding. These guidelines are inconsistently applied in low and middle income countries (LMICs) due to barriers including unclear implementation guides, technical support and epidemiological factors. Peer support strategies have been used to offer psychological support to families with infants in NICU and improve mental health outcomes. Breastfeeding peer supporters (BFPS) have been shown to be effective in improving breastfeeding outcomes in community settings however, their success within hospital settings in LMICs is unknown. We conducted a scoping review to explore implementation of breastfeeding peer support strategies as have been applied to hospitalized infants globally and highlight their implementation strategies in order to guide future research and practice.
METHODS
A scoping review of the literature was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. A search was conducted in five online databases (PubMed, Cochrane library, Hinari, Google Scholar and Open Grey library). Data were extracted and charted in data extraction tables to capture general characteristics, modes of peer support delivery, implementation details and evaluation procedures.
RESULTS
From the online search 276 articles were identified, however only 18 met the inclusion criteria for the study. The majority of these articles were reports on in-patient breastfeeding peer support interventions applied in Europe and the United States of America and only two were from LMICs. The articles described peer supporters' identification, training (n = 13) and supervision (n = 14). The majority of the BFPS were employed (n = 10) compared to volunteers (n = 3) and support was mainly one-to-one (n = 11) rather than group support. Process and impact evaluation (n = 13) reported positive breastfeeding outcomes associated with breastfeeding peer support.
CONCLUSION
Breastfeeding peer support strategies are applied in different hospital settings and can be used to improve breastfeeding outcomes. However, to achieve integration, scalability and comparability of impact and outcomes, there is a need to standardize training, develop consistent implementation and supervision plans of in-patient peer supporters' strategies. Further research to assess sustainability and evaluate cost-effectiveness of in-patient breastfeeding peer support strategies will improve uptake and scalability of these potentially lifesaving interventions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33189155
doi: 10.1186/s13006-020-00331-7
pii: 10.1186/s13006-020-00331-7
pmc: PMC7666507
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
95Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/R002738/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 107769/Z/10/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
J Hum Lact. 2013 Aug;29(3):313-22
pubmed: 23563112
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005 Sep;159(9):836-41
pubmed: 16143742
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 28;2:CD001141
pubmed: 28244064
Midwifery. 2016 Jan;32:58-65
pubmed: 26453506
Bull World Health Organ. 1997;75(3):191-6
pubmed: 9277005
Public Health Nutr. 2013 Oct;16(10):1732-40
pubmed: 23039968
Matern Child Nutr. 2020 Apr 21;:e13016
pubmed: 32319227
J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2016 Apr;7(2):172-84
pubmed: 26708714
Matern Child Nutr. 2020 Jan;16(1):e12868
pubmed: 31264337
J Ment Health. 2019 Aug;28(4):341-344
pubmed: 31070066
Int J Nurs Stud. 2003 Mar;40(3):321-32
pubmed: 12605954
Adv Neonatal Care. 2014 Aug;14(4):274-80
pubmed: 25000105
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006 Jul;160(7):681-5
pubmed: 16818832
Pediatrics. 2000 Jun;105(6):E85
pubmed: 10835098
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 31;14(7):e0219743
pubmed: 31365559
Pediatrics. 2013 Jan;131(1):e162-70
pubmed: 23209111
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004 Sep;158(9):897-902
pubmed: 15351756
Ethn Dis. 2010 Spring;20(2):189-94
pubmed: 20503902
Ann Fam Med. 2015 Aug;13 Suppl 1:S2-8
pubmed: 26304968
J Hum Lact. 2003 Feb;19(1):72-6
pubmed: 12587648
Birth. 2002 Jun;29(2):95-100
pubmed: 12000411
Int Breastfeed J. 2020 May 14;15(1):40
pubmed: 32408904
Adv Neonatal Care. 2014 Aug;14(4):E1-8
pubmed: 25000101
BMJ. 2012 Jan 25;344:d8287
pubmed: 22277543