Comparison of Maternal Absenteeism and Infant Illness Rates among Breast-Feeding and Formula-Feeding Women in Two Corporations

Abstract
Purpose.: A comparison was made between breast-feeding and formula-feeding among employed mothers. Absenteeism directly related to child care was examined.Design.: This quasi-experimental study followed convenience samples of breast-feeding and formula-feeding mothers until their infants were weaned or reached 1 year of age.Setting.: Two corporations with established lactation programs were used. One had approximately 100 births annually among 2400 female employees, and the other had approximately 30 births annually among 1200 female employees.Subjects.: A sample of 101 participants, 59 feeding breast milk and 42 using commercial formula, was composed of employees returning from maternity leave for a medically uncomplicated birth.Intervention.: The programs provided counseling by a lactation professional for all participants and facilities to collect and store breast milk.Measures.: Confidential participant diaries provided descriptive data on infant illnesses and related absenteeism that the lactation consultant verified with health care providers and through employer attendance records.Analysis.: Attribute counts of illnesses and absenteeism were reported as percentages. Single degree of freedom χ2tests were used to compare rates between nutrition groups.Results.: Approximately 28% of the infants in the study had no illnesses; 86% of these were breast-fed and 14% were formula-fed. When illnesses occurred, 25% of all 1-day maternal absences were among breast-fed babies and 75% were among the formula-fed group.Conclusions.: In this study fewer and less severe infant illnesses and less maternal absenteeism was found in the breast-feeding group. This was not an experimental study. Participants were self-selected, and a comparison group was used rather than a true control group. Corroboration of these findings from larger experimental studies is needed to generalize beyond these groups.

This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit: