• JAMA pediatrics · Sep 2017

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Effect of a Baby-Led Approach to Complementary Feeding on Infant Growth and Overweight: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

    • Rachael W Taylor, Sheila M Williams, Louise J Fangupo, Benjamin J Wheeler, Barry J Taylor, Lisa Daniels, Elizabeth A Fleming, Jenny McArthur, Brittany Morison, Erickson Liz Williams LW Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand., Rhondda S Davies, Sabina Bacchus, Sonya L Cameron, and Heath Anne-Louise M AM Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand..
    • Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
    • JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Sep 1; 171 (9): 838-846.

    ImportanceBaby-led approaches to complementary feeding, which promote self-feeding of all nonliquid foods are proposed to improve energy self-regulation and lower obesity risk. However, to date, no randomized clinical trials have studied this proposition.ObjectiveTo determine whether a baby-led approach to complementary feeding results in a lower body mass index (BMI) than traditional spoon-feeding.Design, Setting, And ParticipantsThe 2-year Baby-Led Introduction to Solids (BLISS) randomized clinical trial recruited 206 women (168 [81.6%] of European ancestry; 85 [41.3%] primiparous) in late pregnancy from December 19, 2012, through March 17, 2014, as part of a community intervention in Dunedin, New Zealand. Women were randomized to a control condition (n = 101) or the BLISS intervention (n = 105) after stratification for parity and education. All outcomes were collected by staff blinded to group randomization, and no participants withdrew because of an adverse event. Data were analyzed based on intention to treat.InterventionsMothers in the BLISS group received lactation consultant support (≥5 contacts) to extend exclusive breastfeeding and delay introduction of complementary foods until 6 months of age and 3 personalized face-to-face contacts (at 5.5, 7.0, and 9.0 months).Main Outcomes And MeasuresThe primary outcome was BMI z score (at 12 and 24 months). Secondary outcomes included energy self-regulation and eating behaviors assessed with questionnaires at 6, 12, and 24 months and energy intake assessed with 3-day weighed diet records at 7, 12, and 24 months.ResultsAmong the 206 participants (mean [SD] age, 31.3 [5.6] years), 166 were available for analysis at 24 months (retention, 80.5%). The mean (SD) BMI z score was not significantly different at 12 months (control group, 0.20 [0.89]; BLISS group, 0.44 [1.13]; adjusted difference, 0.21; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.48) or at 24 months (control group, 0.24 [1.01]; BLISS group, 0.39 [1.04]; adjusted difference, 0.16; 95% CI, -0.13 to 0.45). At 24 months, 5 of 78 infants (6.4%) were overweight (BMI≥95th percentile) in the control group compared with 9 of 87 (10.3%) in the BLISS group (relative risk, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6-5.7). Lower satiety responsiveness was observed in BLISS infants at 24 months (adjusted difference, -0.24; 95% CI, -0.41 to -0.07). Parents also reported less food fussiness (adjusted difference, -0.33; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.14) and greater enjoyment of food (adjusted difference, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.43) at 12 months in BLISS infants. Estimated differences in energy intake were 55 kJ (95% CI, -284 to 395 kJ) at 12 months and 143 kJ (95% CI, -241 to 526 kJ) at 24 months.Conclusions And RelevanceA baby-led approach to complementary feeding did not result in more appropriate BMI than traditional spoon-feeding, although children were reported to have less food fussiness. Further research should determine whether these findings apply to individuals using unmodified baby-led weaning.Trial Registrationhttp://anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12612001133820.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…