Cited by 29Breastfeeding Practices and InfluencesMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsInfant Development and Preterm Care

Breastfeeding initiation and support: A literature review of what women value and the impact of early discharge

Open access
James, Lucy, Sweet, Linda, Donnellan-Fernandez, Roslyn·2017·Women and Birth

Abstract

Problem Early discharge following birth has become an emerging phenomenon in many countries. It is likely early discharge has an impact on the establishment of breastfeeding.Objective To critically appraise the evidence on what women value in relation to breastfeeding initiation and support, and investigate the impact early discharge can have on these values.Method A literature search was conducted for publications since 2005 using the following databases: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, Scopus and PsycINFO; 21 primary articles were selected and included in the review.Findings There is no standard definition for 'early discharge' worldwide. Due to inconsistent definitions worldwide and minimal literature using a 24h definition, research defining early discharge as up to 72h postpartum is included. Seven key factors in relation to breastfeeding initiation and support following early discharge were identified, namely trust and security, consistent advice, practical breastfeeding support, breastfeeding education, comfortable environment, positive attitudes and emotional support, and individualised care.Conclusion The findings suggest individualised postnatal lengths of stay may be beneficial for the initiation of breastfeeding. Five values were not impacted by early discharge, but rather individual midwives' practice. There is consensus in the literature that early discharge promoted a comfortable environment to support breastfeeding initiation. Wide variations in the definition of early postnatal discharge made it difficult to draw influential conclusions. Therefore, further research is required.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.wombi.2016.09.013

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
James, L., Sweet, L., & Donnellan-Fernandez, R.
Affiliations
Flinders University (AU)
Corresponding author
Sweet, Linda
Venue
Women and Birth
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
87-99
ISSN
1871-5192 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2538421982
Cited by
29
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3
FWCI
0.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Women and Birth (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Breastfeeding Practices and Influences
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
Keywords
breastfeeding initiation, breastfeeding support, women's values, midwifery practice, breastfeeding education, emotional support, individualized care
MeSH terms
Adult, Breast Feeding, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Length of Stay, Mothers, Patient Discharge, Postnatal Care, Pregnancy, Postpartum Period

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review