Thompson-Chagoyán OC, Contreras-Miranda MG, Almazán-Roldán R, López-Ayllón RM

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 143-146
PDF size: 131.63 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective. To evaluate the influence of a program to promote breast-feeding on the consumption of infant formulas.
Material and methods. We reviewed the reports of consumption of infants formulas during the 22 months previous to (period A) and after (period B) the beginning of the campaign. The total number of tins consumed and the number of liters prepared was recorded, and the quantity consumed and the cost per child was calculated. The data were analyzed by non-paired Student’s t test, and the level of statistical significance was fixed at p ‹ 0.05.
Results. There were statistically significant differences regarding the number of tins, kilograms of formula, liters of prepared milk, total cost of the product, consumption of formula per child and cost of feeding per child. The differences in all variables were favorable to period B.
Discussion. Our results suggest that breast-feeding campaigns decrease the consumption of infant formulas and the cost of feeding the newborn.

REFERENCES

1. Editorial. Infant feeding today. Lancet 1986; I: 17-8.

2. Thompson-Chagoyán OC, Del Río IM, López-Ayllón RM, Arteaga NM, López PM, Escobedo E. Alimentación de recién nacidos pretérmino con dos fórmulas lácteas. Rev Mex Ped 1994; 61: 7-11.

3. Shahani KM, Kwan AJ, Friend BA. Role and significance of enzymes in human milk. Am J Clin Nutr 1980; 33: 1861-69.

4. Carpenter G . Epidermal growth factor is a major growth promoting agent in human milk. Science 1980; 210: 198-9.

5. Lucas A. Alimentación del lactante pretérmino. En: Ballabriga D, Brunse O, Dobbling J, Gricey M, Senterre J eds. Nutrición clínica en la infancia. Raven Press New York 1991; Vol 2: 317-36.

6. Rose J, Gibbons K, Cartson SE, Koo WW. Nutrient needs of the preterm infant. Nutr Clin Pract 1993; 8: 226-32.

7. Chan Y, Yu SZ, Li WX. Artificial feeding and hospitalization in the first 18 months of life. Pediatrics 1988; 81: 58-2.

8. Margen S, Melnick V, Neuhauser L, Ríos E. Infant feeding in México. A study of health facility and mothers practices in three regions. Nestle Infants Formula Audit Commission. Washington 1991: 2.

9. World Health Organization (WHO). The international code of marketing of breast substitutes. Geneva: WHO 1981.

10. WHO Resolution WHA 34, 22. International code of marketing of breast milk substitutes. Geneva: 1981 Mar 21.

11. International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN). International Code of Marketing of breast milk substitutes. Lithosphere Printing Co-operative Ltd. London 1983: 5.

12. Sanghvi TG, Lutter C. Estudio de la eficacia en función de costos de la promoción de la lactancia materna por medio de los Hospitales de América Latina. Conferencia regional sobre los costos, la cobertura, la calidad y la eficiencia de las actividades de promoción de la lactancia materna. Santos, Brasil. Jul 20 al 22 de 1994.

13. Barry LP. La leche materna: La mejor fuente de nutrición para lactantes de término y pretérmino. Clin Pediatr North Am 1994; 41: 941-55.

14. Perez-Escamilla R. Promoción de la lactancia materna en tres salas de maternidad en México. Conferencia regional sobre los costos, cobertura, calidad y la eficiencia de las actividades de promoción de la lactancia materna. Jul 20 al 22 de 1994. Santos Brasil.

15. Barnard-Bonin AC, Stachtchenco S, Guylaine G, Rousseau E. Hospital practices and breastfeeding duration: A meta analysis of controlled trials. Birth 1989; 16: 64-6.

16. Caldeira AP, Goncalves E. Assessment of the impact of implementing the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2007; 83: 127-32.

17. Pérez-Escamilla R. Evidence based breast-feeding promotion: the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative. J Nutr 2007; 137: 484-7.

18. Baby-Friendly: snappy slogan or standard of care? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006; 91: F145-9.