» Articles » PMID: 39725435

Exploring the Factors Associated with Prelacteal Feeds in Papua New Guinea: a Population-based Survey

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2024 Dec 26
PMID 39725435
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Prelacteal feeding disrupts early breastfeeding initiation and exclusive breastfeeding, and increases the risk of childhood illnesses and under-five mortality. Despite its negative health outcomes, newborns are given prelacteal feeds in Papua New Guinea (PNG). This study investigated the factors associated with prelacteal feeding practices among women in PNG.

Design: A population-based cross-sectional study based on Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data. Multivariable logistic regression using complex sample analysis was performed to control for the effects of potential confounders. Variables with p ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Setting: Papua New Guinea.

Participants: A total weighted sample of 4399 women was included in the study.

Outcome Measure: Prelacteal feeds.

Results: About 10% of women provided prelacteal feeds to their infants. The most frequently reported prelacteal feed was plain water (71.7%), followed by grain-based (eg, noodles) (47.1%), dark green leafy vegetables (42.1%) and soup (39.7%). Women with no formal (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 1.4, 95% CI: 1.0-3.0) or primary (AOR 1.5, 95% CI: 1.0-2.9) education, who had a caesarean section (AOR 4.1, 95% CI: 2.4-7.2), had given birth at home or in the village (AOR 3.7, 95% CI: 2.1-6.8) and from the Islands region (AOR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.5-3.5) had higher odds of providing prelacteal feeds.

Conclusion: Our study revealed that providing prelacteal feeds is common in PNG. Tailored health education and behaviour change communication are necessary to address this harmful infant feeding practice. Furthermore, the promotion of facility-based births and early breastfeeding practices should be prioritised using existing strategies, especially for disadvantaged and rural women.

References
1.
Rollins N, Bhandari N, Hajeebhoy N, Horton S, Lutter C, Martines J . Why invest, and what it will take to improve breastfeeding practices?. Lancet. 2016; 387(10017):491-504. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01044-2. View

2.
Valero-Chilleron M, Mena-Tudela D, Cervera-Gasch A, Gonzalez-Chorda V, Soriano-Vidal F, Quesada J . Influence of Health Literacy on Maintenance of Exclusive Breastfeeding at 6 Months Postpartum: A Multicentre Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(9). PMC: 9104596. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19095411. View

3.
Zong X, Wu H, Zhao M, Magnussen C, Xi B . Global prevalence of WHO infant feeding practices in 57 LMICs in 2010-2018 and time trends since 2000 for 44 LMICs. EClinicalMedicine. 2021; 37:100971. PMC: 8343261. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100971. View

4.
Li R, Scanlon K, Serdula M . The validity and reliability of maternal recall of breastfeeding practice. Nutr Rev. 2005; 63(4):103-10. DOI: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2005.tb00128.x. View

5.
Victora C, Bahl R, Barros A, Franca G, Horton S, Krasevec J . Breastfeeding in the 21st century: epidemiology, mechanisms, and lifelong effect. Lancet. 2016; 387(10017):475-90. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01024-7. View