母乳喂养益处相关的语言或配方奶喂养风险相关的语言是否会促进助产士和护士对母乳喂养更积极的态度？

Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses?

机构信息

Department of Reproductive Health Nursing, Graduate School of Health Care Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.

Office of International Academic Affairs, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 Mar 11;23(1):163. doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w.

DOI:10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w

PMID:36906522

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10007738/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Midwives and nurses are crucial in breastfeeding support. Few studies have explored appropriate language for nursing education on breastfeeding. We assessed the impact of the language used on breastfeeding attitudes among midwives and nurses.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted online in Japan among 174 midwives and nurses who had work experience in obstetrics or pediatrics. Participants were allocated to three groups to receive different text messages as the intervention (the benefit of breastfeeding for Group 1; the risk of formula feeding for Group 2; the importance of childcare for Group 3 as the comparison). The Japanese version of the Iowa Infant Feeding Attitude Scale (IIFAS-J) was used to assess breastfeeding attitudes before and after reading the texts. Also, participant reactions to the text were assessed by their responses to three statements. ANOVA, the chi-square test, and the t-test were used for outcome assessments.

RESULTS

The post-test IIFAS-J score was significantly higher than the pre-test score only for Group 1 (p < 0.01). The percentage of participants who agreed with the content of the text was 70.7% in Group 1 and 48.3% in Group 2. The percentage of participants who reported discomfort with the text was 34.5% in Group 1 and 55.2% in Group 2. No significant difference among groups existed regarding interest in the text. In all three groups, participants who agreed with the text had a higher post-test IIFAS-J score than those who disagreed with the text (6.85 points higher, p < 0.01 in Group 1; 7.19 points higher, p < 0.01 in Group 2; 8.00 points higher, p < 0.02 in Group 3). Discomfort with the text and interest in the text were associated with a significantly higher post-test IIFAS-J score in Group 1 and Group 2 but not in Group 3.

CONCLUSIONS

"Benefits of breastfeeding" language, which conveys the information in a positive manner, appears to be more appropriate than "risks of infant formula" language for creating a positive attitude toward breastfeeding in nursing education.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000023322). Registered 05/08/2016.

摘要

背景

助产士和护士在母乳喂养支持中至关重要。很少有研究探讨护理教育中关于母乳喂养的合适语言。我们评估了语言使用对助产士和护士母乳喂养态度的影响。

方法

在日本进行了一项准实验研究，共有 174 名有产科或儿科工作经验的助产士和护士参与。参与者被分为三组，接受不同的短信作为干预（第 1 组为母乳喂养的益处；第 2 组为配方奶喂养的风险；第 3 组为儿童保育的重要性作为比较）。使用日语版爱荷华婴儿喂养态度量表（IIFAS-J）在阅读文本前后评估母乳喂养态度。还通过参与者对三个陈述的回答来评估他们对文本的反应。采用方差分析、卡方检验和 t 检验进行结果评估。

结果

仅第 1 组的后测 IIFAS-J 评分明显高于前测评分（p<0.01）。同意文本内容的参与者比例在第 1 组为 70.7%，在第 2 组为 48.3%。对文本感到不适的参与者比例在第 1 组为 34.5%，在第 2 组为 55.2%。三组之间对文本的兴趣没有显著差异。在所有三组中，同意文本的参与者的后测 IIFAS-J 评分均高于不同意文本的参与者（第 1 组高 6.85 分，p<0.01；第 2 组高 7.19 分，p<0.01；第 3 组高 8.00 分，p<0.02）。对文本的不适和对文本的兴趣与第 1 组和第 2 组后测 IIFAS-J 评分的显著升高相关，但与第 3 组无关。