Choose the ONE systematic review topic that is of most interest to you, or most relevant to your practice situation, from the required List of Approved Systematic Reviews (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..
Please complete this assignment on the worksheet attached.
1. Choose the ONE systematic review topic that is of most interest to you, or most relevant to your practice situation, from the required List of Approved Systematic Reviews (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..
2. Follow the grading criteria below to formulate your practice issue, which must be based on the topic of the systematic review you have selected.
3. Download the required Milestone 1 Practice Issue and Evidence Summary Worksheets (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. (both worksheets appear in ONE form) to document the practice issue presented and approved by your instructor in the Week 2 Discussions.
4. You are required to complete the form using the productivity tools required by Chamberlain University, which is Microsoft Office Word 2013 (or later version), or Windows and Office 2011 (or later version) for MAC. You must save the file in the “.docx” format. Do NOT save as Word Pad. A later version of the productivity tool includes Office 365, which is available to Chamberlain students for FREE by downloading from the student portal at http://my.chamberlain.edu (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. Click on the envelope at the top of the page.
5. Your practice issue will be the same for all three Milestone assignments in this course.
6. Please type your answers directly into the worksheet.
Evidence Summary Worksheet Directions
1. Develop an evidence summary by following the grading criteria below.
2. Document this on the evidence summary portion of the worksheet.
3. You will use this worksheet to incorporate your evidence summary into your Week 4 Milestone 2 assignment.
4. Please type your answers directly into the worksheet.
THE CHOSEN REVIEW SYSTEM
Obstetrics/Delivery
McFadden, A., Gavine, A., Renfrew, M. J., Wade, A., Buchanan, P., Taylor, J. L., … MacGillivray, S. (2017). Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD001141. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001141.pub5
Abstract
Background
There is extensive evidence of important health risks for infants and mothers related to not breastfeeding. In 2003, the World Health Organization recommended that infants be breastfed exclusively until six months of age, with breastfeeding continuing as an important part of the infant’s diet until at least two years of age. However, current breastfeeding rates in many countries do not reflect this recommendation.
Objectives
To describe forms of breastfeeding support which have been evaluated in controlled studies, the timing of the interventions and the settings in which they have been used.
To examine the effectiveness of different modes of offering similar supportive interventions (for example, whether the support offered was proactive or reactive, face-to-face or over the telephone), and whether interventions containing both antenatal and postnatal elements were more effective than those taking place in the postnatal period alone.
To examine the effectiveness of different care providers and (where information was available) training.
To explore the interaction between background breastfeeding rates and effectiveness of support.
Search methods
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth’s Trials Register (29 February 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
Selection criteria
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing extra support for healthy breastfeeding mothers of healthy term babies with usual maternity care.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
Main results
This updated review includes 100 trials involving more than 83,246 mother-infant pairs of which 73 studies contribute data (58 individually-randomised trials and 15 cluster-randomised trials). We considered that the overall risk of bias of trials included in the review was mixed. Of the 31 new studies included in this update, 21 provided data for one or more of the primary outcomes. The total number of mother-infant pairs in the 73 studies that contributed data to this review is 74,656 (this total was 56,451 in the previous version of this review). The 73 studies were conducted in 29 countries. Results of the analyses continue to confirm that all forms of extra support analyzed together showed a decrease in cessation of ‘any breastfeeding’, which includes partial and exclusive breastfeeding (average risk ratio (RR) for stopping any breastfeeding before six months 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 0.95; moderate-quality evidence, 51 studies) and for stopping breastfeeding before four to six weeks (average RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; moderate-quality evidence, 33 studies). All forms of extra support together also showed a decrease in cessation of exclusive breastfeeding at six months (average RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.92; moderate-quality evidence, 46 studies) and at four to six weeks (average RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.89; moderate quality, 32 studies). We downgraded evidence to moderate-quality due to very high heterogeneity.
We investigated substantial heterogeneity for all four outcomes with subgroup analyses for the following covariates: who delivered care, type of support, timing of support, background breastfeeding rate and number of postnatal contacts. Covariates were not able to explain heterogeneity in general. Though the interaction tests were significant for some analyses, we advise caution in the interpretation of results for subgroups due to the heterogeneity. Extra support by both lay and professionals had a positive impact on breastfeeding outcomes. Several factors may have also improved results for women practising exclusive breastfeeding, such as interventions delivered with a face-to-face component, high background initiation rates of breastfeeding, lay support, and a specific schedule of four to eight contacts. However, because within-group heterogeneity remained high for all of these analyses, we advise caution when making specific conclusions based on subgroup results. We noted no evidence for subgroup differences for the any breastfeeding outcomes.
Authors’ conclusions
When breastfeeding support is offered to women, the duration and exclusivity of breastfeeding is increased. Characteristics of effective support include: that it is offered as standard by trained personnel during antenatal or postnatal care, that it includes ongoing scheduled visits so that women can predict when support will be available, and that it is tailored to the setting and the needs of the population group. Support is likely to be more effective in settings with high initiation rates. Support may be offered either by professional or lay/peer supporters, or a combination of both. Strategies that rely mainly on face-to-face support are more likely to succeed with women practising exclusive breastfeeding.