0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of a baby‐friendly workplace support intervention on exclusive breastfeeding in Kenya

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) during the first 6 months of life is crucial for optimizing child growth, development and survival, as well as the mother's wellbeing. Mother's employment may hinder optimal breastfeeding, especially in the first 6 months. We assessed the effectiveness of a baby‐friendly workplace support intervention on EBF in Kenya. This pre‐post intervention study was conducted between 2016 and 2018 on an agricultural farm in Kericho County. The intervention targeted pregnant/breastfeeding women residing on the farm and consisted of workplace support policies and programme interventions including providing breastfeeding flexi‐time and breaks for breastfeeding mothers; day‐care centres (crèches) for babies near the workplace and lactation centres with facilities for breast milk expression and storage at the crèches; creating awareness on available workplace support for breastfeeding policies; and home‐based nutritional counselling for pregnant and breastfeeding women. EBF was measured through 24‐h recall. The effect of the intervention on EBF was estimated using propensity score weighting. The study included 270 and 146 mother–child dyads in the nontreated (preintervention) group and treated (intervention) group, respectively. The prevalence of EBF was higher in the treated group (80.8%) than in the nontreated group (20.2%); corresponding to a fourfold increased probability of EBF [risk ratio (RR) 3.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.95–5.15]. The effect of the intervention was stronger among children aged 3–5 months (RR 8.13; 95% CI 4.23–15.64) than among those aged <3 months (RR 2.79; 95% CI 2.09–3.73). The baby‐friendly workplace support intervention promoted EBF especially beyond 3 months in this setting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group

          In observational studies, investigators have no control over the treatment assignment. The treated and non-treated (that is, control) groups may have large differences on their observed covariates, and these differences can lead to biased estimates of treatment effects. Even traditional covariance analysis adjustments may be inadequate to eliminate this bias. The propensity score, defined as the conditional probability of being treated given the covariates, can be used to balance the covariates in the two groups, and therefore reduce this bias. In order to estimate the propensity score, one must model the distribution of the treatment indicator variable given the observed covariates. Once estimated the propensity score can be used to reduce bias through matching, stratification (subclassification), regression adjustment, or some combination of all three. In this tutorial we discuss the uses of propensity score methods for bias reduction, give references to the literature and illustrate the uses through applied examples.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores.

            To model the steps involved in preparing for and carrying out propensity score analyses by providing step-by-step guidance and Stata code applied to an empirical dataset.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Social ecological approaches to individuals and their contexts: twenty years of health education & behavior health promotion interventions.

              Social ecological models that describe the interactive characteristics of individuals and environments that underlie health outcomes have long been recommended to guide public health practice. The extent to which such recommendations have been applied in health promotion interventions, however, is unclear. The authors developed a coding system to identify the ecological levels that health promotion programs target and then applied this system to 157 intervention articles from the past 20 years of Health Education & Behavior. Overall, articles were more likely to describe interventions focused on individual and interpersonal characteristics, rather than institutional, community, or policy factors. Interventions that focused on certain topics (nutrition and physical activity) or occurred in particular settings (schools) more successfully adopted a social ecological approach. Health education theory, research, and training may need to be enhanced to better foster successful efforts to modify social and political environments to improve health.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                calistuswilunda@yahoo.co.uk
                Journal
                Matern Child Nutr
                Matern Child Nutr
                10.1111/(ISSN)1740-8709
                MCN
                Maternal & Child Nutrition
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1740-8695
                1740-8709
                08 April 2021
                October 2021
                : 17
                : 4 ( doiID: 10.1111/mcn.v17.4 )
                : e13191
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Maternal and Child Wellbeing Unit African Population and Health Research Center Nairobi Kenya
                [ 2 ] Epidemiology and Prevention Group, National Cancer Center Tokyo Japan
                [ 3 ] United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) N'djamena Chad
                [ 4 ] United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Nairobi Kenya
                [ 5 ] Department of Food Science and Technology Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology Juja Kenya
                [ 6 ] Warwick Medical School University of Warwick Coventry UK
                [ 7 ] School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences Loughborough University Loughborough UK
                [ 8 ] School of Clinical Medicine University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg South Africa
                [ 9 ] United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Headquarters New York USA
                [ 10 ] MARCH Centre London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine London UK
                [ 11 ] School of Public Health University of the Western Cape Bellville South Africa
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Calistus Wilunda, African Population and Health Research Center , APHRC Campus, 2nd Floor , Manga Close, Off Kirawa Road , PO Box 10787‐00100, Nairobi, Kenya.

                Email: calistuswilunda@ 123456yahoo.co.uk

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5272-616X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6606-6534
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5190-9845
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0591-9724
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8545-1545
                Article
                MCN13191
                10.1111/mcn.13191
                8476432
                33830636
                d5d8a02c-8003-4f36-acd1-9a5638b4507c
                © 2021 The Authors. Maternal & Child Nutrition published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 12 March 2021
                : 22 December 2020
                : 15 March 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 10, Words: 7823
                Funding
                Funded by: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation , doi 10.13039/100000865;
                Award ID: 43191524
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                October 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.8 mode:remove_FC converted:27.09.2021

                baby‐friendly workplace,breastfeeding support,infant feeding behaviour,mother‐friendly workplace,propensity score weighting

                Comments

                Comment on this article