Infant feeding in Sydney: A survey of mothers who bottle feed

Abstract

Two hundred and seventy-four mothers who were bottle feeding their infants aged from 1 to 9 months, were interviewed. Particular attention was paid to mixing technique, storage of reconstituted formulae, the reasons for deciding to bottle feed and what influenced the choosing of a particular milk. Following the interview, a sample of milk from a previously prepared bottle was taken to measure osmolality and bacterial colony count. Eighty-two per cent of the mothers had initially attempted breast feeding. The commonest reason for changing to a bottle was that the mother felt she was not able to produce enough milk to satisfy the baby. Thirty per cent chose the milk they were using on the recommendation of the maternity hospital. Errors in reconstituting the formulae, compared with the manufacturer's instructions were made by 100 (30%) mothers. In 52 cases these were potentially serious errors, usually erring on the side of preparing an overconcentrated formula. This finding from the interviews was confirmed by osmolality analysis of milk samples. Twenty-two per cent of samples collected grew potential pathogens. There was no correlation between the presence of bacterial growth and the use of prewarmed formulae stored in insulated carriers. No correlation was found between triceps skinfold thickness, age of introduction of solids or method of reconstitution of formula.

Formula feed preparation: helping reduce the risks; a systematic review

“…[31][32][33][34][35] No eligible studies published later than 1991 were found. An additional nine investigations published between 1972 and 1979 17-25 were identified, plus 138 articles that were either commentaries on the subject or were studies of related topics.…”

“…Participants in four of the eligible studies were mothers of artificially fed babies who had been selected or identified through routine child health or welfare clinics [31][32][33][34] ; those in the fifth 35 were bottle feeding mothers recruited from a postnatal ward for a randomised trial of ready-to-feed and powdered formula. 36 The numbers of participants in each study varied considerably (table 1).…”

“…The three smallest studies were from the UK and had only 30, 28, and 19 participants respectively. 31 34 35 Of the two larger studies, that by Lilburne and colleagues 33 was most representative of the wider population of mothers with young babies. It recruited and interviewed 272 mothers from 19 clinics in two areas of Australia, selected because of their different characteristics (one area described as predominantly working class, the other as middle class), although unfortunately only 34 samples of reconstituted feed were obtained for analysis.…”

“…It recruited and interviewed 272 mothers from 19 clinics in two areas of Australia, selected because of their different characteristics (one area described as predominantly working class, the other as middle class), although unfortunately only 34 samples of reconstituted feed were obtained for analysis. 33 The remaining study, by McJunkin et al in the USA, 32 enrolled 175 urban mothers and obtained 133 feed samples: 95% of the mothers included were black and on low incomes, with more than half entitled to free infant formula or receiving food stamps.…”

Psychological health, maternal attachment and attachment style in breast‐ and formula‐feeding mothers: a preliminary study

“…Studies have identified this decision as being influenced by the mother's beliefs and expectations concerning the relevant feeding method (Earle, 2000) and the support for that method by her partner and family (Dix, 1991;Freed et al, 1992;Shepherd et al, 2000). Other studies have identified that having more than one child (Losch et al, 1995) and lower socio-economic status (Hitchcock & Coy, 1988;Liliburne et al, 1988;Scott & Bins, 1998;Forster et al, 2004) specifically influence the decision to formula-feed.…”