Maternal and Infant Nutrition and Nurture Unit (MAINN). School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), Preston, PR12HE, UK.
School of Nursing, UCLan, Preston, PR12HE, UK.
Int J Equity Health. 2021 Mar 20;20(1):83. doi: 10.1186/s12939-021-01393-7.
There are inequalities in breastfeeding initiation and continuation rates, whereby socio-economically disadvantaged mothers are least likely to breastfeed. Breastfeeding peer support (BPS) interventions are recommended as a solution, and in the UK non-profit organisations are commissioned to deliver BPS services in areas of socio-economic deprivation. BPS interventions have a mixed evidence base, offering limited knowledge about the interaction between context and intervention and how this affects women's experiences.
This interpretive study used a case study methodology to explore how and why two BPS services developed their services in socio-economically deprived contexts. Methods aimed to generate holistic understanding of BPS service development. Data collected across both cases comprised; observation (n = 1), and semi-structured interviews with: mothers who had (n = 10) and had not (n = 9) engaged with the BPS services, peer supporters (PSs) (n = 9), community health professionals (n = 5), infant feeding co-ordinators (n = 2), non-profit organisation managers (n = 3), and public health commissioners (n = 2). Inductive grounded theory analytic techniques of open coding and constant comparisons, followed by cross case comparisons, were used to analyse the data.
The over-arching theme - 'the transcending influence of society' - offers insights into the underlying context and drivers impacting service development. It reflects how funding and data sharing arrangements determined service operation and the peer's access to women. Four underpinning themes explain how: peer supporters were resourceful in adapting their services ('adapting and modifying the support'); BPS organisations worked to enable women's access to supportive breastfeeding environments, but did not necessarily focus service development on the needs of women living in areas of deprivation ('supporting women's journeys to access'); the BPS-professional connections for supporting access and how BPS could result in more supportive community environments ('embedding within healthcare practice'); and how management practices precluded meaningful use of data to provide context led service development ('ways of using knowledge').
Findings suggest that while PSs are commissioned to focus on those most in need, there is limited discussion, collection, or use of knowledge about women's lives to develop needs-led service delivery. The key recommendation is the development of a social ecological tool to facilitate the use and application of contextual knowledge.
母乳喂养的起始率和持续率存在不平等现象,社会经济地位较低的母亲最不可能进行母乳喂养。母乳喂养同伴支持(BPS)干预措施被推荐为一种解决方案,在英国,非营利组织受委托在社会经济贫困地区提供 BPS 服务。BPS 干预措施的证据基础参差不齐,提供的关于干预措施与背景之间的相互作用以及这如何影响妇女体验的知识有限。
本解释性研究采用案例研究方法,探讨了两个 BPS 服务如何以及为何在社会经济贫困背景下发展其服务。方法旨在全面了解 BPS 服务的发展。在两个案例中收集的数据包括:观察(n=1)和半结构化访谈,访谈对象包括:曾经(n=10)和未曾(n=9)使用 BPS 服务的母亲、同伴支持者(PS)(n=9)、社区卫生专业人员(n=5)、婴儿喂养协调员(n=2)、非营利组织经理(n=3)和公共卫生专员(n=2)。采用开放式编码和不断比较的归纳扎根理论分析技术,然后进行跨案例比较,对数据进行分析。
总体主题-“社会的深远影响”-提供了有关影响服务发展的背景和驱动因素的深入见解。它反映了资金和数据共享安排如何决定服务运营以及同伴与妇女的接触。四个基础主题解释了以下内容:同伴支持者在调整服务方面很有创意(“调整和修改支持”);BPS 组织努力使妇女能够获得支持母乳喂养的环境,但不一定将服务发展重点放在生活在贫困地区的妇女的需求上(“支持妇女获得支持的旅程”);BPS 与专业人员的联系以支持获得支持,以及 BPS 如何导致更支持性的社区环境(“嵌入医疗保健实践中”);以及管理实践如何阻止有意义地使用数据来提供以需求为导向的服务开发(“使用知识的方式”)。
研究结果表明,虽然委托 PS 专注于最需要的人,但很少讨论、收集或使用有关妇女生活的知识来制定以需求为导向的服务交付。主要建议是开发一种社会生态工具,以促进对背景知识的使用和应用。