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

Abstract

ObjectivesTo 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 participantsCross-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.MethodsParents 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’.ResultsBLW 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 B12 (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).ConclusionsInfants 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 B12. A high proportion of both groups were offered foods thought to pose a choking risk.

Baby‐led complementary feeding: Randomized controlled study

“…Although we did not assess the energy density of the foods offered, only 2% of infants from the BLW group were underweight according to WHO growth charts . Furthermore, Morison et al ., in their small sample study, reported that energy intake was similar between the BLW and traditional feeding styles . In contrast to low‐energy purees, which are frequently made of fruits or vegetables, finger foods, if carefully chosen, can be very nutrient dense, therefore an infant who appears to be eating little when self‐feeding may potentially be closer to meeting their nutrient requirements.…”

“…In the present study, BLW mothers were more likely to breast‐feed their infants exclusively to 6 months, and wait until 6 months to introduce solids. The baby‐led approach to weaning has also been identified as the strongest predictor of weaning (introduction of complementary foods) at the recommended age …”

Baby-Led Weaning: The Evidence to Date

“…Comparison of intake at 7 months [23 •• ] and 12 months [24] found no significant difference in energy intake between the two groups.…”

Savoring Sweet: Sugars in Infant and Toddler Feeding

“…The standard practice of exposing the infant to new flavors, smells, tastes, and textures through spoon-feeding by an adult may not be the only or the best strategy. A baby-led approach to feeding has been advocated in which advances in CF are determined and directed by the baby, relying on the child's curiosity [46][47][48][49] . This type of self-feeding mirrors the strategy used by Clara Davis in her landmark studies on toddler self-feeding in the 1920s [50] .…”