Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT): A Randomized Trial in the Republic of Belarus | Breastfeeding | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.175.212.130. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Kovar MG, Serdula MG, Marks JS.  et al.  Review of the epidemiologic evidence for an association between infant feeding and infant health.  Pediatrics.1984;74:615-638.Google Scholar
2.
Jason JM, Nieburg P, Marks JS. Mortality and infectious disease associated with infant-feeding practices in developing countries.  Pediatrics.1984;74:702-727.Google Scholar
3.
Feachem RG, Koblinsky MA. Interventions for the control of diarrhoeal diseases among young children: promotion of breast feeding.  Bull World Health Organ.1984;62:271-291.Google Scholar
4.
Habicht J-P, DaVanzo J, Butz WP. Does breastfeeding really save lives, or are apparent benefits due to biases?  Am J Epidemiol.1986;123:279-290.Google Scholar
5.
Victora CG, Vaughan JP, Lambardi C.  et al.  Evidence for protection by breast-feeding against infant deaths from infectious diseases in Brazil.  Lancet.1987;2:319-322.Google Scholar
6.
Rubin DH, Leventhal JM, Krasilnikoff PA.  et al.  Relationship between infant feeding and infectious illness: a prospective study of infants during the first year of life.  Pediatrics.1990;85:464-471.Google Scholar
7.
Howie PW, Forsyth JS, Ogston SA, Clark A, du V Florey C. Protective effect of breast feeding against infection.  BMJ.1990;300:11-16.Google Scholar
8.
Cunningham AS, Jelliffe DB, Jelliffe EF. Breast-feeding and health in the 1980's: a global epidemiologic review.  J Pediatr.1991;118:659-666.Google Scholar
9.
Beaudry M, Dufour R, Marcoux S. Relation between infant feeding and infections during the first six months of life.  J Pediatr.1995;126:191-197.Google Scholar
10.
Dewey KG, Heinig MJ, Nommsen-Rivers LA. Differences in morbidity between breast-fed and formula-fed infants.  J Pediatr.1995;126:696-702.Google Scholar
11.
Raisler J, Alexander C, O'Campo P. Breast-feeding and infant illness: a dose-response relationship?  Am J Public Health.1999;89:25-30.Google Scholar
12.
Saarinen UM, Backman A, Kajosaari M, Simes MA. Prolonged breast-feeding as prophylaxis for atopic disease.  Lancet.1979;2:163-166.Google Scholar
13.
Hide DW, Guyer BM. Clinical manifestations of allergy related to breast and cows' milk feeding.  Arch Dis Child.1981;56:172-175.Google Scholar
14.
Golding J, Emmett PM, Rogers IS. Eczema, asthma and allergy.  Early Hum Dev.1997;49(suppl):S121-S130.Google Scholar
15.
Oddy WH, Holt PG, Sly PD.  et al.  Association between breast feeding and asthma in 6 year old children: findings of a prospective birth cohort study.  BMJ.1999;319:815-819.Google Scholar
16.
Hill AB. A Short Textbook of Medical StatisticsLondon, England: Hodder & Stoughton; 1977:27.
17.
Sauls HS. Potential effect of demographic and other variables in studies comparing morbidity of breast-fed and bottle-fed infants.  Pediatrics.1979;64:523-527.Google Scholar
18.
Bauchner H, Leventhal JM, Shapiro ED. Studies of breast-feeding and infections: how good is the evidence?  JAMA.1986;256:887-892.Google Scholar
19.
Losch M, Dungy CI, Russell D, Dusdieker LB. Impact of attitudes on maternal decisions regarding infant feeding.  J Pediatr.1995;126:507-514.Google Scholar
20.
WHO/UNICEF.  Protecting, Promoting and Supporting Breastfeeding: The Special Role of Maternity ServicesGeneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1989.
21.
Renfrew MJ, Lang S. Feeding schedules in hospitals for newborn infants [Cochrane Review on CD-ROM]. Oxford, England: Cochrane Library, Update Software;2000; issue 4.
22.
Sikorski J, Renfrew MJ. Support for breastfeeding mothers [Cochrane Review on CD-ROM]. Oxford, England: Cochrane Library, Update Software;2000; issue 4.
23.
Renfrew MJ, Lang S. Early vs delayed initiation of breastfeeding [Cochrane Review on CD-ROM]. Oxford, England: Cochrane Library, Update Software;2000; issue 4.
24.
Renfrew MJ, Lang S. Interventions for improving breastfeeding technique [Cochrane Review on CD-ROM]. Oxford, England: Cochrane Library, Update Software;2000; issue 4.
25.
 Indicators for Assessing Breast-Feeding Practices . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1991. WHO Document WHO/CDD/SER/91.14.
26.
Collet J-P, Burtin P, Kramer MS, Floret D, Bossard N, Ducruet T. Type of day-care setting and risk of recurrent infection.  Pediatrics.1994;94(suppl):997-999.Google Scholar
27.
Shipley MJ, Smith PG, Dramaix M. Calculation of power for matched pair studies when randomization is by group.  Int J Epidemiol.1989;18:457-461.Google Scholar
28.
Gail MH, Byar DP, Pechacek TF, Corle DK. Aspects of statistical design for the community intervention trial for smoking cessation (COMMIT).  Control Clin Trials.1992;13:6-21.Google Scholar
29.
Morrow AL, Guerrero ML, Shults J.  et al.  Efficacy of home-based peer counselling to promote exclusive breastfeeding: a randomised controlled trial.  Lancet.1999;353:1226-1231.Google Scholar
30.
Ford RPK, Taylor BJ, Mitchell EA.  et al.  Breastfeeding and the risk of sudden infant death syndrome.  Int J Epidemiol.1993;22:885-890.Google Scholar
Original Contribution
January 24/31, 2001

Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT): A Randomized Trial in the Republic of Belarus

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of Pediatrics (Drs Kramer and Collet) and Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Drs Kramer, Shapiro, and Collet and Mr Ducruet), McGill University Faculty of Medicine, Montreal, Quebec; Centre for Research in Women's Health (Dr Chalmers), Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre (Dr Chalmers), and Faculty of Nursing (Dr Hodnett), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario; Departments of Maternal and Child Health (Drs Sevkovskaya, Mknuik, and Gluchanina) and Foreign Relations (Ms Mezen), Belarussian Ministry of Health and Belarussian Maternal and Child Health Research Institute (Drs Dzikovich, Vanilovich, Shishko, Zubovich, Dombrovskiy, Ustinovitch, Kot, and Bogdanovitch and Ms Ovchinikova), Minsk, Belarus; and the Nutrition Unit, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark (Dr Helsing).

JAMA. 2001;285(4):413-420. doi:10.1001/jama.285.4.413
Abstract

Context Current evidence that breastfeeding is beneficial for infant and child health is based exclusively on observational studies. Potential sources of bias in such studies have led to doubts about the magnitude of these health benefits in industrialized countries.

Objective To assess the effects of breastfeeding promotion on breastfeeding duration and exclusivity and gastrointestinal and respiratory infection and atopic eczema among infants.

Design The Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT), a cluster-randomized trial conducted June 1996–December 1997 with a 1-year follow-up.

Setting Thirty-one maternity hospitals and polyclinics in the Republic of Belarus.

Participants A total of 17 046 mother-infant pairs consisting of full-term singleton infants weighing at least 2500 g and their healthy mothers who intended to breastfeed, 16491 (96.7%) of which completed the entire 12 months of follow-up.

Interventions Sites were randomly assigned to receive an experimental intervention (n = 16) modeled on the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative of the World Health Organization and United Nations Children's Fund, which emphasizes health care worker assistance with initiating and maintaining breastfeeding and lactation and postnatal breastfeeding support, or a control intervention (n = 15) of continuing usual infant feeding practices and policies.

Main Outcome Measures Duration of any breastfeeding, prevalence of predominant and exclusive breastfeeding at 3 and 6 months of life and occurrence of 1 or more episodes of gastrointestinal tract infection, 2 or more episodes of respiratory tract infection, and atopic eczema during the first 12 months of life, compared between the intervention and control groups.

Results Infants from the intervention sites were significantly more likely than control infants to be breastfed to any degree at 12 months (19.7% vs 11.4%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.69), were more likely to be exclusively breastfed at 3 months (43.3% vs 6.4%; P<.001) and at 6 months (7.9% vs 0.6%; P = .01), and had a significant reduction in the risk of 1 or more gastrointestinal tract infections (9.1% vs 13.2%; adjusted OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.40-0.91) and of atopic eczema (3.3% vs 6.3%; adjusted OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.31-0.95), but no significant reduction in respiratory tract infection (intervention group, 39.2%; control group, 39.4%; adjusted OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.59-1.28).

Conclusions Our experimental intervention increased the duration and degree (exclusivity) of breastfeeding and decreased the risk of gastrointestinal tract infection and atopic eczema in the first year of life. These results provide a solid scientific underpinning for future interventions to promote breastfeeding.

×