Cargando…
Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses?
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 condu...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10007738/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36906522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w |
_version_ | 1784905596029370368 |
---|---|
author | Toda, Ayumi Nanishi, Keiko Shibanuma, Akira |
author_facet | Toda, Ayumi Nanishi, Keiko Shibanuma, Akira |
author_sort | Toda, Ayumi |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10007738 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100077382023-03-12 Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? Toda, Ayumi Nanishi, Keiko Shibanuma, Akira BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w. BioMed Central 2023-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10007738/ /pubmed/36906522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Toda, Ayumi Nanishi, Keiko Shibanuma, Akira Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
title | Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
title_full | Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
title_fullStr | Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
title_full_unstemmed | Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
title_short | Does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
title_sort | does benefits-of-breastfeeding language or risks-of-formula-feeding language promote more-positive attitudes toward breastfeeding among midwives and nurses? |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10007738/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36906522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05493-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT todaayumi doesbenefitsofbreastfeedinglanguageorrisksofformulafeedinglanguagepromotemorepositiveattitudestowardbreastfeedingamongmidwivesandnurses AT nanishikeiko doesbenefitsofbreastfeedinglanguageorrisksofformulafeedinglanguagepromotemorepositiveattitudestowardbreastfeedingamongmidwivesandnurses AT shibanumaakira doesbenefitsofbreastfeedinglanguageorrisksofformulafeedinglanguagepromotemorepositiveattitudestowardbreastfeedingamongmidwivesandnurses |