TABLE 3

Breastfeeding Effectiveness After Surgical Procedures (RCTs)

StudyAge, d (IQR, Range, Mean, or Mean ± SD)Baseline MeasuresOutcomes at 5 dOutcomes at 8 wk
Study Design/Setting
Groups, n Enrollment/n Final
Quality
LATCH
 Emond et al 20139Mean at 5 d follow-up (IQR)G1+G2: ≤ 8Median (IQR)Median (IQR)
  RCT/Hospital clinicG1: 11 (8–14)G1: 9 (8–10)G1: 10 (10–10)
  G1: Frenotomy, 55/52G2: 11 (8–16)G2: 9 (8–10)G2: 10 (10–10)
  G2: Usual care, 52/50G1 vs. G2: P = 1.0G1 vs. G2: P = .41
  Quality: Good
 Dollberg et al 200611Range of daysMean ± SD.Mean ± SD.NA
  RCTG1+G2: 1–21G1+G2: 6.4±2.3G1+ G2: 6.8±2.0
  G1: Frenotomy, breastfeeding/ sham, breastfeeding, 15/14P = .06 compared with baseline
  G2: Sham, breastfeeding, frenotomy, breastfeeding, 11/11
  Quality: Poor
BSES-SF
 Emond et al 20139Mean at 5 d follow-up (IQR)NRMedian (IQR)Median (IQR)
  RCT/Hospital clinicG1: 11 (8–14)G1: 54 (43–62)G1: 63 (59–68)
  G1: Frenotomy, 55/52G2: 11 (8–16)G2: 53 (40.8–61)G2: 63 (57–69)
  G2: Usual care, 52/50G1 vs. G2: P = .53G1 vs. G2: P = .62
  Quality: Fair
IBFAT
 Emond et al 20139Mean at 5 d follow-up (IQR)NRMedian (IQR)Median (IQR)
  RCT/Hospital clinicG1: 11 (8–14)G1: 12 (11–12)G1: 12 (12–12)
  G1: Frenotomy, 55/52G2: 11 (8–16)G2: 12 (11–12)G2: 12 (12–12)
  G2: Usual care, 52/50G1 vs. G2: P = .76G1 vs G2: P = .58
  Quality: Good
 Buryk et al 20117Mean days ± SD at enrollmentIBFAT, mean ± SE.Immediately after procedure, mean ± SE.NA
  RCT/Newborn nursery or clinic, otolaryngology clinicG1: 6.2 ± 6.9G1: 9.3 ± 0.69G1: 11.6 ± 0.81
  G1: Frenotomy, 30G2: 6.0 ± 7.0G2: 8.5 ± 0.73G2: 8.07 ± 0.86
  G2: Sham procedure, 28G1 vs G2, P = .029
  Quality: GoodEffect size: 0.31
  • Not all RCTs reported these measures. BSES-SF, Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form; G, group; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported.