ArticleRevista espanola de salud publica2019
[Evaluation of good practices about breastfeeding in a mother and child hospital.]
Article in Revista espanola de salud publica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barriers and Facilitators for Exclusive Breastfeeding within the Health System and Public Policies from In-Depth Interviews to Primary Care Midwives in Tenerife (Canary Islands, Spain).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Healthy Habits and Emotional Balance in Women during the Postpartum Period: Differences between Term and Preterm Delivery.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveProtection, promotion and support to the breastfeeding is considered as an area of priority in public health care and as a determining factor of child and maternal health. The use of good practice guides improves health outcomes and patients safety. The aim of study was to assess the impact on breastfeeding of a Guide of Good Clinic Practices about breastfeeding in the Mother and Child Center of the Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital in Granada.
methodsCross-sectional descriptive study. Mothers and newborns attended from 2015 to 2018 were studied. Process and outcome variables were considered to perform a descriptive and bivariate analysis for the comparison between years.
resultsThe rate of exclusive breastfeeding at discharge went from 58.3% to 72.2%. Significant differences were found for the first intake of exclusive breastfeeding in eutocic births and in C-sections, from 90.8% to 93.2% in the first and from 21.7% to 60% in the second. Improvements were detected in the assessment of intake, postnatal education and onset and duration of skin-to-skin contact.
conclusionsPostnatal protocolized actions carried out by health professionals, such as the assessment of the intake of breastfeeding and postnatal education, were effective for the establishment of breastfeeding. The first moment of skin-to-skin contact and its duration are aspects to be reinforced for effective support.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31690715PMC11582995What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.