RESUMO
OBJETIVO: Evaluar un programa de apoyo telefónico a madres que dan lactancia materna los 6 primeros meses. MÉTODOS: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado no enmascarado. Colaboraron 5 centros de salud de medio urbano. Se incluyeron madres con recién nacidos sanos que tomaban lactancia materna exclusiva (LME) o parcial (LMP). El grupo control recibió la atención habitual. El grupo intervención recibió además apoyo telefónico semanal los 2 primeros meses y quincenal hasta el sexto mes. Se valoró el tipo de lactancia en las revisiones habituales (1, 2, 4 y 6 meses). RESULTADOS: Grupo intervención n = 193, grupo control n = 187. La mayor diferencia en porcentaje de LME se apreció a los 6 meses: 21,4% de grupo control frente al 30,1% del grupo intervención. No obstante, en el análisis ajustado de las odds ratio los intervalos de confianza no mostraron significación estadística. Las odds ratio al mes, 2 meses, 4 meses y 6 meses para LME fueron respectivamente: 1,45 (0,91-2,31); 1,35 (0,87-2,08); 1,21 (0,80-1,81) y 1,58 (0,99-2,53). Las odds ratio en los mismos cortes para cualquier tipo de lactancia materna (LME+LMP) fueron: 1,65 (0,39-7,00); 2,08 (0,94-4,61); 1,37 (0,79-2,38) y 1,60 (0,98-2,61). CONCLUSIONES: La intervención telefónica no fue suficientemente efectiva como para generalizarla
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a telephone support programme for mothers who breastfeed for the first 6 months. METHODS: A randomised unmasked clinical trial was conducted in 5 urban Primary Care centres that included mothers with healthy newborns who were breastfeeding exclusively (EBF) or partially (PBF). The control group received the usual care. The intervention group also received telephone support for breastfeeding on a weekly basis for the first 2 months and then every 2weeks until the sixth month. The type of breastfeeding was recorded in the usual check-up visit (1, 2, 4 and 6 months). RESULTS: The study included 193 patients in the intervention group, and 187 in a control group. The greatest increase in the percentage of EBF was observed at 6 months: 21.4% in the control group compared to 30.1% in the intervention group. However, in the adjusted odds ratios analysis, confidence intervals did not show statistical significance. The odds ratio at 1 month, 2 months, 4 months, and 6 months for EBF were 1.45 (0.91-2.31), 1.35 (0.87-2.08), 1.21 (0.80-1.81), and 1.58 (0.99-2.53), respectively. The odds ratio in the same age groups for any type of breastfeeding (EBF + PBF) were 1.65 (0.39-7.00), 2.08 (0.94-4.61), 1.37 (0.79-2.38), and 1.60 (0.98-2.61), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone intervention was not effective enough to generalise it
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Adulto , Aleitamento Materno , Telefone , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Razão de Chances , Intervalos de Confiança , Promoção da SaúdeRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a telephone support programme for mothers who breastfeed for the first 6 months. METHODS: A randomised unmasked clinical trial was conducted in 5 urban Primary Care centres that included mothers with healthy newborns who were breastfeeding exclusively (EBF) or partially (PBF). The control group received the usual care. The intervention group also received telephone support for breastfeeding on a weekly basis for the first 2months and then every 2weeks until the sixth month. The type of breastfeeding was recorded in the usual check-up visit (1, 2, 4 and 6 months). RESULTS: The study included 193 patients in the intervention group, and 187 in a control group. The greatest increase in the percentage of EBF was observed at 6 months: 21.4% in the control group compared to 30.1% in the intervention group. However, in the adjusted odds ratios analysis, confidence intervals did not show statistical significance. The odds ratio at 1 month, 2 months, 4 months, and 6 months for EBF were 1.45 (0.91-2.31), 1.35 (0.87-2.08), 1.21 (0.80-1.81), and 1.58 (0.99-2.53), respectively. The odds ratio in the same age groups for any type of breastfeeding (EBF + PBF) were 1.65 (0.39-7.00), 2.08 (0.94-4.61), 1.37 (0.79-2.38), and 1.60 (0.98-2.61), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone intervention was not effective enough to generalise it.
