Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26590179›Full record

ArticleJournal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association2016

"It's Somebody Else's Milk": Unraveling the Tension in Mothers of Preterm Infants Who Provide Consent for Pasteurized Donor Human Milk.

Anita Esquerra-Zwiers, Beverly Rossman, Paula Meier, Janet Engstrom, Judy Janes, Aloka Patel

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Winging it: maternal perspectives and experiences of breastfeeding newborns with complex congenital surgical anomalies.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anita Esquerra-ZwiersDepartment of Women, Children, and Family Nursing, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA Anita_L_Esquerra-Zwiers@rush.edu.
Beverly RossmanDepartment of Women, Children, and Family Nursing, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Paula MeierDepartment of Women, Children, and Family Nursing, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA Pediatrics, Section of Neonatology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Janet EngstromDepartment of Women, Children, and Family Nursing, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Judy JanesPediatrics, Section of Neonatology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Aloka PatelDepartment of Women, Children, and Family Nursing, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA Pediatrics, Section of Neonatology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Rush University · USRush University Medical Center · US

Funding

Health Benefits and Cost of Human Milk Feedings for Very Low Birthweight InfantsR01NR010009 · NINR · RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MEIER, PAULA P · 2007 to 2011
$2.7M
Barriers to Continued Provision of Human Milk for Black Mothers of VLBW InfantsR03HD081412 · NICHD · RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI PATEL, ALOKA LAHOTI · 2014 to 2015
$153k
NICHD NIH HHS R03 HD081412NICHD NIH HHS R03HD081412NINR NIH HHS NR010009NINR NIH HHS R01 NR010009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPasteurized donor human milk (DHM), rather than preterm infant formula, is recommended for premature infants when mother's milk is not available.

objectiveThis study explored the maternal decision-making process in providing consent for DHM feedings.

methodsIn-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 mothers of premature (mean gestational age = 27 weeks, birth weight = 942 grams) infants hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in this qualitative, descriptive study. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze the data.

resultsAlthough only 1 mother had any previous knowledge of DHM, all mothers provided consent for DHM because they "wanted what is best for my baby." Mothers trusted that DHM was better than formula when their infant's feeding requirements exceeded their own milk supply. However, most mothers described a tension between wanting their infants to receive only "their" milk and DHM being "somebody else's milk." This desire to be the only provider of human milk was more common than concerns about the quality and safety of DHM. The mothers' tension was mediated by trusting the NICU clinicians' recommendations, having adequate time to make an informed decision, observing the positive outcomes of DHM, and feeling empowered that they made the best decision for their infant.

conclusionThe experiences of these mothers reflect the importance of approaching mothers for consent only when DHM is needed, respecting mothers' beliefs and values about DHM, and providing help in mediating any tension with regard to their infants receiving "somebody else's milk."

Indexed as

Decision MakingInfant, PrematureMilk, HumanAdultBreast Milk ExpressionFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInfant CareInfant, NewbornInformed ConsentIntensive Care Units, NeonatalInterviews as TopicMilk BanksMother-Child RelationsMothersbreastfeedingdecision makingdonor milkNICUpremature infants

Identifiers

PMID26590179
PMCPMC4959541
OpenAlexW2346586108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.