Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 21;11(12):e050179. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050179.
Maternity care providers play an essential role in supporting women to breast feed. It is critical that their professional associations limit influence from breastmilk substitute (BMS) manufacturers. Aims of this study were (i) to examine whether maternity care provider associations had policy or positions statements addressing BMS marketing and (ii) to explore the type of funding received by these associations.
An online cross-sectional review.
National or regional maternity provider professional associations in Australia, New Zealand, the USA, Canada and the UK.
Twenty-eight maternity care provider (obstetricians, midwives, nurses and others involved in perinatal care) professional association websites.
Websites were examined from November 2019 to October 2020.
Evidence of BMS industry funding and policy or position statements addressing acceptance of funding from industries such as BMS.
Policies addressing the BMS industry were found for 14 associations (50%). UK-based associations (5/5, 100%) and perinatal associations (4/6, 67%) were most likely to have a policy. Six associations (6/28, 21%) received some form of BMS financial support. The highest rates of BMS support were seen in the form of event advertising (5/28, 18%); closely followed by event sponsorship (4/28, 14%). At a provider level, obstetric associations had the highest rates of BMS support (2/4, 50%). At a country level, US-based associations were most likely to receive BMS support (3/7, 43%).
BMS industry financial support was received by one-fifth of maternity care provider associations. Half of these associations had policies addressing BMS marketing. BMS industry support can create conflicts of interest that can threaten efforts to support, protect and promote breast feeding. Healthcare provider associations should avoid BMS funding and at a minimum have policy or position statements addressing BMS marketing.
产妇护理提供者在支持妇女母乳喂养方面发挥着重要作用。至关重要的是，他们的专业协会应限制来自母乳代用品（BMS）制造商的影响。本研究的目的是：（i）检查产妇护理提供者协会是否有针对 BMS 营销的政策或立场声明；（ii）探讨这些协会收到的资金类型。
在线横断面研究。
澳大利亚、新西兰、美国、加拿大和英国的国家或地区产妇护理提供者专业协会。
28 家产妇护理提供者（产科医生、助产士、护士和其他参与围产期护理的人员）专业协会网站。
2019 年 11 月至 2020 年 10 月对网站进行了检查。
有证据表明接受了 BMS 等行业的资金，以及有关接受此类资金的政策或立场声明。
发现 14 个协会（50%）制定了针对 BMS 行业的政策。英国协会（5/5，100%）和围产期协会（4/6，67%）最有可能制定政策。有 6 个协会（28/6，21%）获得了某种形式的 BMS 财务支持。BMS 支持率最高的形式是活动广告（28/5，18%）；其次是活动赞助（28/4，14%）。在提供者层面，产科协会获得的 BMS 支持率最高（4/2，50%）。在国家层面，美国协会最有可能获得 BMS 支持（7/3，43%）。
有五分之一的产妇护理提供者协会收到了 BMS 行业的财政支持。其中一半的协会制定了针对 BMS 营销的政策。BMS 行业的支持可能会产生利益冲突，从而威胁到支持、保护和促进母乳喂养的努力。医疗保健提供者协会应避免接受 BMS 资金，并在最低限度上制定针对 BMS 营销的政策或立场声明。
