Cargando…

How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months

OBJECTIVES: To compare the food, nutrient and ‘family meal’ intakes of infants following baby-led weaning (BLW) with those of infants following a more traditional spoon-feeding (TSF) approach to complementary feeding. STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional study of dietary intake and feeding...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morison, Brittany J, Taylor, Rachael W, Haszard, Jillian J, Schramm, Claire J, Williams Erickson, Liz, Fangupo, Louise J, Fleming, Elizabeth A, Luciano, Ashley, Heath, Anne-Louise M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4861100/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27154478
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010665
_version_ 1782431171759570944
author Morison, Brittany J
Taylor, Rachael W
Haszard, Jillian J
Schramm, Claire J
Williams Erickson, Liz
Fangupo, Louise J
Fleming, Elizabeth A
Luciano, Ashley
Heath, Anne-Louise M
author_facet Morison, Brittany J
Taylor, Rachael W
Haszard, Jillian J
Schramm, Claire J
Williams Erickson, Liz
Fangupo, Louise J
Fleming, Elizabeth A
Luciano, Ashley
Heath, Anne-Louise M
author_sort Morison, Brittany J
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To compare the food, nutrient and ‘family meal’ intakes of infants following baby-led weaning (BLW) with those of infants following a more traditional spoon-feeding (TSF) approach to complementary feeding. STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional study of dietary intake and feeding behaviours in 51 age-matched and sex-matched infants (n=25 BLW, 26 TSF) 6–8 months of age. METHODS: Parents completed a questionnaire, and weighed diet records (WDRs) on 1–3 non-consecutive days, to investigate food and nutrient intakes, the extent to which infants were self-fed or parent-fed, and infant involvement in ‘family meals’. RESULTS: BLW infants were more likely than TSF infants to have fed themselves all or most of their food when starting complementary feeding (67% vs 8%, p<0.001). Although there was no statistically significant difference in the large number of infants consuming foods thought to pose a choking risk during the WDR (78% vs 58%, p=0.172), the CI was wide, so we cannot rule out increased odds with BLW (OR, 95% CI: 2.57, 0.63 to 10.44). No difference was observed in energy intake, but BLW infants appeared to consume more total (48% vs 42% energy, p<0.001) and saturated (22% vs 18% energy, p<0.001) fat, and less iron (1.6 vs 3.6 mg, p<0.001), zinc (3.0 vs 3.7 mg, p=0.001) and vitamin B(12) (0.2 vs 0.5 μg, p<0.001) than TSF infants. BLW infants were more likely to eat with their family at lunch and at the evening meal (both p≤0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Infants following BLW had similar energy intakes to those following TSF and were eating family meals more regularly, but appeared to have higher intakes of fat and saturated fat, and lower intakes of iron, zinc and vitamin B(12). A high proportion of both groups were offered foods thought to pose a choking risk.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4861100
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48611002016-05-27 How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months Morison, Brittany J Taylor, Rachael W Haszard, Jillian J Schramm, Claire J Williams Erickson, Liz Fangupo, Louise J Fleming, Elizabeth A Luciano, Ashley Heath, Anne-Louise M BMJ Open Nutrition and Metabolism OBJECTIVES: To compare the food, nutrient and ‘family meal’ intakes of infants following baby-led weaning (BLW) with those of infants following a more traditional spoon-feeding (TSF) approach to complementary feeding. STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional study of dietary intake and feeding behaviours in 51 age-matched and sex-matched infants (n=25 BLW, 26 TSF) 6–8 months of age. METHODS: Parents completed a questionnaire, and weighed diet records (WDRs) on 1–3 non-consecutive days, to investigate food and nutrient intakes, the extent to which infants were self-fed or parent-fed, and infant involvement in ‘family meals’. RESULTS: BLW infants were more likely than TSF infants to have fed themselves all or most of their food when starting complementary feeding (67% vs 8%, p<0.001). Although there was no statistically significant difference in the large number of infants consuming foods thought to pose a choking risk during the WDR (78% vs 58%, p=0.172), the CI was wide, so we cannot rule out increased odds with BLW (OR, 95% CI: 2.57, 0.63 to 10.44). No difference was observed in energy intake, but BLW infants appeared to consume more total (48% vs 42% energy, p<0.001) and saturated (22% vs 18% energy, p<0.001) fat, and less iron (1.6 vs 3.6 mg, p<0.001), zinc (3.0 vs 3.7 mg, p=0.001) and vitamin B(12) (0.2 vs 0.5 μg, p<0.001) than TSF infants. BLW infants were more likely to eat with their family at lunch and at the evening meal (both p≤0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Infants following BLW had similar energy intakes to those following TSF and were eating family meals more regularly, but appeared to have higher intakes of fat and saturated fat, and lower intakes of iron, zinc and vitamin B(12). A high proportion of both groups were offered foods thought to pose a choking risk. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4861100/ /pubmed/27154478 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010665 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Nutrition and Metabolism
Morison, Brittany J
Taylor, Rachael W
Haszard, Jillian J
Schramm, Claire J
Williams Erickson, Liz
Fangupo, Louise J
Fleming, Elizabeth A
Luciano, Ashley
Heath, Anne-Louise M
How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
title How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
title_full How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
title_fullStr How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
title_full_unstemmed How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
title_short How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
title_sort how different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? a cross-sectional study of infants aged 6–8 months
topic Nutrition and Metabolism
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4861100/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27154478
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010665
work_keys_str_mv AT morisonbrittanyj howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT taylorrachaelw howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT haszardjillianj howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT schrammclairej howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT williamsericksonliz howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT fangupolouisej howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT flemingelizabetha howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT lucianoashley howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months
AT heathannelouisem howdifferentarebabyledweaningandconventionalcomplementaryfeedingacrosssectionalstudyofinfantsaged68months