Baby-friendly hospital initiative improves breastfeeding initiation rates in a US hospital setting.

OBJECTIVE: Breastfeeding initiation rates were compared at Boston Medical Center before (1995), during (1998), and after (1999) Baby-Friendly policies were in place. Boston Medical Center, an inner-city teaching hospital that provides care primarily to poor, minority, and immigrant families, achieved Baby-Friendly status in 1999. METHODS: Two hundred complete medical records, randomly selected by a computer, were reviewed from each of 3 years: 1995, 1998, and 1999. Infants were excluded for medical records missing feeding data, human immunodeficiency virus-positive parent, neonatal intensive care unit admission, maternal substance abuse, adoption, incarceration, or hepatitis C-positive mother. All infant feedings during the hospital postpartum stay were tallied, and each infant was categorized into 1 of 4 groups: exclusive breast milk, mostly breast milk, mostly formula, and exclusive formula. RESULTS: Maternal and infant demographics for all 3 years were comparable. The breastfeeding initiation rate increased from 58% (1995) to 77.5% (1998) to 86.5% (1999). Infants exclusively breastfed increased from 5.5% (1995) to 28.5% (1998) to 33.5% (1999). Initiation rates increased among US-born black mothers in this population from 34% (1995) to 64% (1998) to 74% (1999). CONCLUSIONS: Full implementation of the Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding leading to Baby-Friendly designation is an effective strategy to increase breastfeeding initiation rates in the US hospital setting.

The impact of Put Prevention into Practice on selected clinical preventive services in five Texas sites.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the implementation of the Put Prevention Into Practice (PPIP) office-based system would increase the delivery rates of specific clinical preventive services among demonstration clinics. METHODS: Chart review was conducted before (n=372) and 33 to 39 months after (n=376) the implementation of the PPIP office-based system in two community health centers and three family practice residency programs in Texas. The population included all adult patients aged > or = 19 years who had presented to the clinic during the study periods. RESULTS: Documentation of timely cholesterol screening increased from 70% to 84%; smoking assessment, from 56% to 80%; for women, up-to-date Papanicolaou smear, from 70% to 81%; annual mammograms (women aged > or =51), from 30% to 48%; and up-to-date tetanus-diphtheria immunizations, from 19% to 59%. For adults aged > or =66 years, documentation of pneumococcal immunization increased from 22% to 48%, while influenza immunizations improved, although not significantly (45% to 49%). Blood pressure screening was almost universal (99%) at baseline and at 33- to 39-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: PPIP system changes were associated with an observed increase in delivery of selected clinical preventive services.

Maintaining prevention in practice: survival of PPIP in primary care settings. Put Prevention Into Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Put Prevention Into Practice (PPIP) consists of a kit of office-based tools intended to support the provision of preventive services by primary care providers. The purpose of this study was to examine the institutionalization of PPIP within five primary care clinics funded by the Texas Department of Health to implement PPIP, and to examine the organizational determinants of program institutionalization. METHODS: We utilized an adaptation of the Level of Institutionalizaton (LoIn) scales for qualitative data collection and for development of an institutionalization score for each site. The determinants of institutionalization were derived from the organizational behavior and health promotion literatures and used as categories for analysis. In addition, for purposes of triangulation, chart audit data for three documentation behaviors were also collected. RESULTS: PPIP has been maintained--at varying degrees of integration--in four of the five sites studied, for 6 years after adoption. Organizational factors that facilitated the institutionalization process were the site's institutional strength, the integration of PIPP within extant programs and services, visibility of the program within and outside the site, planning for the termination of grant funding, and presence of a program champion with mid- to upper-level managerial authority. Successful initiation of the program was not a predictor of institutionalization outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We have highlighted the need to consider organizational determinants of institutionalization in relation to their specific sociopolitical contexts, and in relation to each other, not in isolation.