Oxygen Saturation and Suck-Swallow-Breathe Coordination of Term Infants during Breastfeeding and Feeding from a Teat Releasing Milk Only with Vacuum

Background. Vacuum is an important factor in milk removal from the breast, yet compression is the predominant component of milk removal from bottle teats. Since bottle-feeding infants have lower oxygen saturation, vacuum levels, and different suck-swallow-breathe (SSwB) coordination to breastfeeding infants, we hypothesised that when infants fed from a teat that required a vacuum threshold of −29 mmHg for milk removal, that oxygen saturation, heart rate, and suck-swallow-breathe (SSwB) patterns would be similar to those of breastfeeding. Study Design. Infants (=16) were monitored during one breastfeed and one feed from the experimental teat. Simultaneous recordings were made of oxygen saturation, heart rate, vacuum, tongue movement, respiration, and swallowing. Results. There were no differences in oxygen saturation and heart rate between the breast and the teat. Infants displayed fewer sucks and breaths per swallow during nutritive sucking (NS) compared to non-nutritive sucking (NNS). The number of sucks per breath was similar for NS and NNS although respiratory rates were slower during NS. These patterns did not differ between the breast and the teat. Conclusion. These results suggest that vacuum may be conducive to safe and coordinated milk removal by the infant during both breast and bottle-feeding

Wellbeing of breastfeeding women in Australia and New Zealand during the covid‐19 pandemic: A cross‐sectional study

During the COVID‐19 pandemic, breastfeeding women have experienced restricted access to support, placing them at increased risk of mental health concerns and limited breastfeeding assistance. This study investigated the effect of the pandemic on feeding choices and maternal well-being amongst breastfeeding mothers living in Australian and New Zealand. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey that examined feeding methods, maternal mental wellbeing, worries, challenges, and positive experiences during the pandemic. Most women were exclusively breastfeeding (82%). Partial breastfeeding was associated with perceived low milk supply and longer pregnancy duration during the pandemic. Reduced mental health and wellbeing was associated with lower levels of family functioning, increased perceived stress, and perinatal anxiety. Longer pregnancy duration during the pandemic was associated with lower mental health wellbeing scores, while higher perceived stress scores were reported for regions with higher COVID‐19 infection rates and women with perceived low milk supply. Women reported that the pandemic resulted in less pressure and more time for family bonding, while worries about the pandemic, family health, and parenting challenges were also cited. Mental health concerns of breastfeeding women appear to be exacerbated by COVID‐19, highlighting a critical need for access to mental health and broader family support during the pandemic

Longitudinal changes in wellbeing amongst breastfeeding women in Australia and New Zealand during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted new mothers’ wellbeing and breastfeeding experience. Women have experienced changes in birth and postnatal care and restricted access to their support network. It is unclear how these impacts may have changed over time with shifting rates of infection and policies restricting movement and access to services in Australia and New Zealand. This study investigated the longitudinal effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on breastfeeding and maternal wellbeing in Australia and New Zealand. Mothers (n = 246) completed an online survey every 4 weeks for 6 months that examined feeding methods, maternal mental wellbeing, worries, challenges, and positive experiences during the pandemic. Mothers maintained high full breastfeeding rates at 4 months (81%) which decreased to 37% at 6 months. Perceived low milk supply contributed to the earlier cessation of full breastfeeding. Poor infant sleep was associated with stress, perinatal anxiety, mental wellbeing, and breastfeeding status. Although mothers initially reported that lockdowns helped with family bonding and less pressure, prolonged lockdowns appeared to have adverse effects on access to social networks and extended family support. Conclusion: The results highlight the changing dynamic of the pandemic and the need for adaptable perinatal services which allow mothers access to in-person services and their support network even in lockdowns. Similarly, access to continuous education and clinical care remains critical for women experiencing concerns about their milk supply, infant sleep, and their own wellbeing. What is Known: The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown restrictions have significantly affected perinatal mental health, disrupted maternal services, and subsequent breastfeeding. What is New: In Australia and New Zealand, breastfeeding women experienced challenges to their mental wellbeing, sleep, and breastfeeding, which was likely exacerbated over time by the pandemic. Lockdowns, while initially beneficial for some families, became detrimental to maternal support and wellbeing

Breast shield design impacts milk removal dynamics during pumping: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

INTRODUCTION While many studies have investigated the importance of optimising pumping patterns for milk removal, the influence of breast shield design on milk removal has not been the focus of extensive investigation. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of breast shields with either a 105° or a 90° flange opening angle on breast drainage and milk volume expressed during pumping. MATERIAL AND METHODS This study was a cross-over, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial (Registration; NCT03091985). Mothers (n=49) of breastfeeding infants participated in the study over two study sessions. Participants were randomly assigned to pump both breasts simultaneously for 15 minutes with either the 105° or 90° breast shield in the first session, and the other shield in the second session. Effectiveness (breast drainage) and efficiency (volume expressed) of both breast shields were assessed after 15 minutes of pumping. Intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses were performed to determine if the 105° breast shield was non-inferior to the 90° breast shield for breast drainage and volume expressed. Perceived comfort was assessed via questionnaire. RESULTS The 105° breast shield was both non-inferior and superior compared to the standard 90° shield for breast drainage (intention-to-treat, 3.87% (0.01 - 7.72), p=.049) and volume expressed (intention-to-treat, 9.14 mL (1.37 - 16.91), p=.02). In addition, the 105° shield was rated as feeling more comfortable (p<.001) and as having an improved fit to the breast (p<.001) compared to the 90° shield. CONCLUSIONS Expressing with the 105° breast shield was more efficient, effective and comfortable compared to the 90° shield. Breast shield design can significantly impact pumping outcomes, and an opening angle of 105° improves both the dynamics and comfort of milk removal