Influential Factors of Breastfeeding after Assisted Reproduction: A Spanish Cohort
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Measurement
- Sociodemographic characteristics: Maternal age, level of education (primary or secondary education), and participants’ nationality;
- Obstetric–neonatal characteristics: Mode of conception, mode of birth, gestational age, use of an epidural, previous births, weight at birth, NB health status, 5-minute Apgar score, BF in the delivery room (which occurs in the first two hours after delivery), and feeding behaviors (exclusive BF or not).
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- American Academy of Pediatrics. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics 2012, 129, e827–e841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grummer-Strawn, L.M.; Rollins, N. Summarising the health effects of breastfeeding. Acta Paediatr. 2015, 104, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alves, E.; Magano, R.; Amorim, M.; Nogueira, C.; Silva, S. Factors influencing parent reports of facilitators and barriers to human milk supply in neonatal intensive care units. J. Hum. Lact. 2016, 32, 695–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization (WHO); United Nations Children’s Fund. Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative: Revised, Updated and Expanded for Integrated Care. Available online: http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/bfhi_trainingcourse/en/ (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- Rollins, N.C.; Bhandari, N.; Hajeebhoy, N.; Horton, S.; Lutter, C.K.; Martines, J.C.; Victora, C.G. Breastfeeding: Why invest, and what it will take to improve breastfeeding practices. Lancet 2016, 387, 491–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashley, T.J.; Levy, G. Breastfeeding: Factors that Affect Initiation and Duration of Breastfeeding. CINAHL Nursing Guide-Evidence-Based Care Sheet 2017. Available online: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=T702034&lang=es&site=ehost-live&scope=site (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- Silva, E.P.D.; Lima, R.T.D.; Osorio, M.M. Impact of educational strategies in low-risk prenatal care: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Cien. Saude. Colet. 2016, 21, 2935–2948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Paramashanti, B.A.; Hadi, H.; Gunawan, I.M.A. Timely initiation of breastfeeding is associated with the practice of exclusive breastfeeding in Indonesia. Asia Pac. J. Clin. Nutr. 2016, 25, s52–s56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Puapornpong, P.; Raungrongmorakot, K.; Manolerdtewan, W.; Suksamarnwong, M.; Wongin, S. Effect of Obesity and Early Breastfeeding Initiation on Exclusive Breastfeeding Rates. J. Med. Assoc. Thai. 2016, 99, S36–S42. [Google Scholar]
- French, C.A.; Cong, X.; Chung, K.S. Labor epidural analgesia and breastfeeding: A systematic review. J. Hum. Lact. 2016, 32, 507–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mascarenhas, M.N.; Flaxman, S.R.; Boerma, T.; Vanderpoel, S.; Stevens, G.A. National, regional, and global trends in infertility prevalence since 1990: A systematic analysis of 277 health surveys. PLoS Med. 2012, 9, e1001356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moreau, C.; Bouyer, J.; Ducot, B.; Spira, A.; Slama, R. When do involuntarily infertile couples choose to seek medical help? Fertil. Steril. 2010, 93, 737–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glujovsky, D. Estadísticas sobre reproducción asistida en todo el mundo. Fertility Argentina. Available online: http://espanol.fertilityargentina.com/estadisticas-sobre-reproduccion-asistida-en-todo-el-mundo/ (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- Matorras, W.R.; Coroleu, B.; Romeu, A.; Pérez, F. Libro Blanco Sociosanitario. La Infertilidad en España: Situación Actual y Perspectivas; Sociedad Española de Fertilidad: Madrid, Spain, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad y Sociedad Española de Fertilidad. Registro Nacional de Actividad 2019—Registro SEF. Informe estadístico de Técnicas de Reproducción Asistida 2019. Madrid. Available online: https://www.registrosef.com/public/docs/sef2019_IAFIVm.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- Cromi, A.; Serati, M.; Candeloro, I.; Uccella, S.; Scandroglio, S.; Agosti, M.; Ghezzi, F. Assisted reproductive technology and breastfeeding outcomes: A case-control study. Fertil. Steril. 2015, 103, 89–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fisher, J.; Hammarberg, K.; Wynter, K.; McBain, J.; Gibson, F.; Boivin, J.; McMahon, C. Assisted conception, maternal age and breastfeeding: An Australian cohort study. Acta Paediatr. 2013, 102, 970–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wiffen, J.; Fetherston, C. Relationships between assisted reproductive technologies and initiation of lactation: Preliminary observations. Breastfeed. Rev. 2016, 24, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Barnes, M.; Roiko, A.; Reed, R.; Williams, C.; Willcocks, K. Outcomes for women and infants following assisted conception: Implications for perinatal education, care, and support. J. Perinat. Educ. 2012, 21, 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michels, K.A.; Mumford, S.L.; Sundaram, R.; Bell, E.M.; Bello, S.C.; Yeung, E.H. Differences in infant feeding practices by mode of conception in a United States cohort. Fertil. Steril. 2016, 105, 1014–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hammarberg, K.; Fisher, J.R.W.; Wynter, K.H.; Rowe, H.J. Breastfeeding after assisted conception: A prospective cohort study. Acta Paediatr. 2011, 100, 529–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Quinn, C.; Metcalfe, A.; McDonald, S.W.; Raguz, N.; Tough, S.C. Exclusive breastfeeding and assisted reproductive technologies: A Calgary cohort. Reprod. Sys. Sex. Disord. 2012, S5, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kermani, R.; Nedaeifard, L.; Tehrani, M.; Nateghi, M.R.; Fazeli, A. Pattern of breastfeeding in infants conceived by assisted reproductive techniques at royan institute from birth to 6 months in Tehran-Iran. J. Family Reprod. Health 2012, 6, 105–109. [Google Scholar]
- Barnes, M. Experiences of birth and breastfeeding following assisted conception. Breastfeed. Rev. 2013, 21, 9. [Google Scholar]
- Roncallo, P.G.; Alvarez, A.E.; Barret, F.B.; de Miguel, M.S.; Artetxe, F.O.; Arranz, E. Vínculo materno-fetal y postnatal: Posibles diferencias en madres tras el tratamiento de Reproducción Asistida. Cuad. Med. Psicosom. Psiquiatr. Enlace 2017, 1, 86–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barrera, C.M.; Kawwass, J.F.; Boulet, S.L.; Nelson, J.M.; Perrine, C.G. Fertility treatment use and breastfeeding outcomes. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019, 220, 261-e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gila-Díaz, A.; Carrillo, G.H.; López de Pablo, Á.L.; Arribas, S.M.; Ramiro-Cortijo, D. Association between Maternal Postpartum Depression, Stress, Optimism, and Breastfeeding Pattern in the First Six Months. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mode of Conception | χ2 | p | Remainder Cohort N = 10,077 | χ2 | p | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spontaneous n = 906 (75%) | ART n = 302 (25%) | ||||||||||
N | % | N | % | ||||||||
Born in Spain | 600 | 66.2% | 264 | 87.4% | 49.943 | p < 0.001 | 6855 | 66.0% | 0.012 | 0.913 | |
Maternal Age | >30 | 498 | 55.0% | 263 | 87.1% | 100.240 | p < 0.001 | 5617 | 54.1% | 0.241 | 0.623 |
<30 | 408 | 45.0% | 39 | 12.9% | 4762 | 45.9% | |||||
Secondary education | 621 | 68.5% | 252 | 83.4% | 25.093 | p < 0.001 | 7227 | 69.6% | 0.466 | 0.495 | |
Previous parity | 488 | 53.9% | 57 | 18.9% | 111.984 | p < 0.001 | 5610 | 54.1% | 0.016 | 0.899 | |
Preterm Birth | 44 | 4.9% | 37 | 12.3% | 19.801 | p < 0.001 | 381 | 3.7% | 3.232 | 0.072 | |
Normal delivery | 781 | 86.2% | 175 | 57.9% | 109.539 | p < 0.001 | 9113 | 87.8% | 1.972 | 0.160 | |
Epidural | 319 | 35.2% | 136 | 45.0% | 9.309 | 0.002 | 3864 | 37.2% | 1.457 | 0.227 | |
Apgar < 7 | 37 | 4.1% | 18 | 6.0% | 1.835 | 0.176 | 317 | 3.1% | 2.907 | 0.088 | |
Healthy NB | 807 | 89.1% | 239 | 79.1% | 19.248 | p < 0.001 | 9259 | 89.2% | 0.016 | 0.899 | |
Underweight | 43 | 4.7% | 48 | 15.9% | 40.410 | p < 0.001 | 392 | 3.8% | 2.112 | 0.146 | |
Sex | Female | 454 | 50.1% | 161 | 53.3% | 0.929 | 0.335 | 5115 | 49.3% | 0.229 | 0.633 |
Male | 452 | 49.9% | 141 | 46.7% | 5264 | 50.7% | |||||
Discharge BF | 525 | 57.9% | 127 | 42.1% | 23.033 | p < 0.001 | 6136 | 59.1% | 0.474 | 0.491 | |
BF in Delivery room | 412 | 45.5% | 78 | 25.8% | 36.263 | p < 0.001 | 4831 | 46.5% | 0.384 | 0.535 | |
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Z | p | Mean | SD | Z | p | ||
Maternal age (years) | 30.27 | 5.93 | 35.44 | 4.99 | −12.822 | p < 0.001 | 30.27 | 5.93 | −0.077 | 0.939 | |
NB Gestational age (weeks) | 39.25 | 1.51 | 38.66 | 1.78 | −4.558 | p < 0.001 | 39.23 | 1.34 | −1.112 | 0.266 | |
NB weight (grams) | 3314.39 | 461.40 | 3077.19 | 562.82 | −5.902 | p < 0.001 | 3298.44 | 501.49 | −1.593 | 0.111 | |
Apgar | 8.72 | 1.14 | 8.60 | 1.15 | −1.188 | 0.235 | 8.71 | 0.98 | −1.499 | 0.134 |
Mode of Conception | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spontaneous n = 781 | ART n = 175 | χ2 | p | ||||
N | % | N | % | ||||
Born in Spain | 508 | 65.0% | 150 | 85.7% | 28.468 | p < 0.001 | |
Maternal Age | >30 | 415 | 53.1% | 151 | 86.3% | 65.043 | p < 0.001 |
<30 | 366 | 46.9% | 24 | 13.7% | |||
Secondary education | 529 | 67.7% | 147 | 84.0% | 18.265 | p < 0.001 | |
Previous parity | 435 | 55.7% | 46 | 26.3% | 49.472 | p < 0.001 | |
Preterm Birth | 36 | 4.6% | 20 | 11.4% | 12.055 | 0.001 | |
Epidural | 276 | 35.3% | 96 | 54.9% | 22.912 | p < 0.001 | |
Apgar < 7 | 24 | 3.1% | 10 | 5.7% | 2.908 | 0.088 | |
Healthy NB | 704 | 90.1% | 145 | 82.9% | 7.631 | 0.006 | |
Underweight | 31 | 4.0% | 23 | 13.1% | 22.575 | p < 0.001 | |
Sex | Female | 387 | 49.6% | 86 | 49.1% | 0.010 | 0.922 |
Male | 394 | 50.4% | 89 | 50.9% | |||
Discharge BF | 463 | 59.3% | 89 | 50.9% | 4.160 | 0.041 | |
BF in Delivery room | 411 | 52.6% | 78 | 44.6% | 3.711 | 0.054 | |
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Z | p | ||
Maternal age (years) | 30.06 | 5.97 | 34.87 | 4.51 | −9.951 | p < 0.001 | |
NB Gestational age (weeks) | 39.26 | 1.33 | 38.90 | 1.73 | −1.844 | 0.065 | |
NB weight (grams) | 3309.99 | 491.03 | 3134.63 | 529.99 | −3.824 | p < 0.001 | |
Apgar | 8.76 | 0.86 | 8.62 | 1.13 | −1.369 | 0.171 |
B | Standard Error | p | OR | 95% C.I. for EXP(B) | R2 Cox and Snell | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower | Upper | ||||||
Factors Associated with BF when Discharged in the Whole Sample (n = 1208) | |||||||
Preterm Birth Yes (Ref) No | −0.901 | 0.308 | 0.003 | 0.406 | 0.222 | 0.743 | 0.092 |
Epidural Yes (Ref) No | −0.266 | 0.126 | 0.034 | 0.766 | 0.599 | 0.980 | |
Underweight Yes (Ref) No | −0.885 | 0.294 | 0.003 | 0.413 | 0.232 | 0.734 | |
Apgar < 7 Yes (Ref) No | −0.688 | 0.336 | 0.040 | 0.503 | 0.260 | 0.971 | |
Healthy NB Yes (Ref) No | 0.415 | 0.210 | 0.048 | 1.515 | 1.004 | 2.286 | |
Conception ART(Ref) Spontaneous | −0.353 | 0.144 | 0.014 | 0.703 | 0.530 | 0.931 | |
BF in Delivery room Yes (Ref) No | 0.597 | 0.127 | p < 0.001 | 1.816 | 1.417 | 2.328 | |
Factors Associated with BF when Discharged in ART (n = 302) | |||||||
Preterm Birth Yes (Ref) No | −1.372 | 0.598 | 0.022 | 0.254 | 0.079 | 0.819 | 0.151 |
Normal Delivery Yes (Ref) No | 0.856 | 0.259 | 0.001 | 2.354 | 1.416 | 3.914 | |
Secondary Education Yes (Ref) No | 0.803 | 0.344 | 0.020 | 2.233 | 1.138 | 4.382 | |
Underweight Yes (Ref) No | −1.609 | 0.530 | 0.002 | 0.200 | 0.071 | 0.566 | |
Factors Associated with BF when Discharged inVaginal Births with ART (n = 175) | |||||||
Healthy NB Yes (Ref) No | 1.041 | 0.534 | 0.051 | 2.833 | 0.995 | 8.065 | 0.135 |
Low Weight Yes (Ref) No | −2.173 | 0.789 | 0.006 | 0.114 | 0.024 | 0.535 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sáez, J.D.; Granero-Molina, J.; López-Rodríguez, M.M.; Aceituno Velasco, L.; Fernández-Sola, C.; Hernández-Padilla, J.M.; Fernández-Medina, I.M. Influential Factors of Breastfeeding after Assisted Reproduction: A Spanish Cohort. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2673. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19052673
Sáez JD, Granero-Molina J, López-Rodríguez MM, Aceituno Velasco L, Fernández-Sola C, Hernández-Padilla JM, Fernández-Medina IM. Influential Factors of Breastfeeding after Assisted Reproduction: A Spanish Cohort. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(5):2673. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19052673
Chicago/Turabian StyleSáez, Jorge Diaz, José Granero-Molina, María M. López-Rodríguez, Longinos Aceituno Velasco, Cayetano Fernández-Sola, José Manuel Hernández-Padilla, and Isabel María Fernández-Medina. 2022. "Influential Factors of Breastfeeding after Assisted Reproduction: A Spanish Cohort" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 5: 2673. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19052673
APA StyleSáez, J. D., Granero-Molina, J., López-Rodríguez, M. M., Aceituno Velasco, L., Fernández-Sola, C., Hernández-Padilla, J. M., & Fernández-Medina, I. M. (2022). Influential Factors of Breastfeeding after Assisted Reproduction: A Spanish Cohort. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(5), 2673. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19052673