BackgroundIn 2011, South Africa committed to promoting exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for six months for all mothers, regardless of HIV status, in line with World Health Organization recommendations. This was a marked shift from earlier policies, and with it, average EBF rates increased from less than 10% in 2011 to 32% by 2016.ObjectivesThe aim of this mixed-methods systematic review was to describe EBF practices in South Africa and their multi-level influences over four policy periods.MethodsWe applied PRISMA guidelines according to a published protocol (Prospero: CRD42014010512). We searched seven databases [Africa-Wide, PubMed, Popline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Global Health, and The Cochrane Library] and conducted hand searches for eligible articles (all study designs, conducted in South Africa and published between 1980–2018). The quality of articles was assessed using published tools, as appropriate. Separate policy analysis was conducted to delineate four distinct policy periods. We compared EBF rates by these periods. Then, applying a three-level ecological framework, we analysed EBF influences concurrently by method. Finally, the findings were synthesized to compare breastfeeding influences by policy period, maintaining an ecological framework.ResultsFrom an initial sample of 20,226 articles, 72 unique articles were reviewed, three of which contributed to both quantitative and qualitative analysis. Despite the large sample, several provinces were poorly represented (if at all) and many studies were assessed as low to moderate quality. Despite these limitations, our historical lens enabled us to explore why South African progress on increasing EBF practices has been slow. The review reflects a context that increasingly supports EBF, but falls short in accounting for family, community, and workplace influences. The findings also highlight the unintended damage caused by rapidly adopting and introducing global guidelines to an unsupported health workforce.ConclusionsFrom a South African perspective, we identified geographic and methodological biases, as well as gaps in our understanding and potential explanations of inequities in EBF. Our recommendations relate to policy, programming, and research to inform changes that would be required to further improve EBF practice rates in South Africa. While our review is South Africa-specific, our findings have broader implications for investing in multi-level interventions and limiting how often infant feeding guidelines are changed.
Introduction Adequate and sustainable funding of national medicine regulatory agencies (NMRAs) is key for assurance of quality, safety and efficacy of medical products circulating in a market. The study aimed to determine factors affecting NMRAs funding in five East African Community (EAC) countries namely: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania (Mainland and Zanzibar) and Uganda. Methodology An exploratory, mixed method design using both qualitative and quantitative data, was employed. Data from six NMRAs was collected through a combination of semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, and checklists for the period 2011/12-2014/15 while 2010/11 data served as baseline. Interviews were conducted with heads of NMRAs and monitoring and evaluation experts of the respective agencies. NMRA's financing was assessed using six indicators namely, funding policy, financial autonomy, the total annual budget, actual funding per annum, funds received from various sources, and the NMRA expenditure. Results The average total annual budget for all the EAC countries during the study period 2011-2015 ranged from USD 824,328.67 to USD 10,724,536.50. The low budget in Zanzibar may be attributed to population and pharmaceutical market size. Uganda's attainment of 98.75% (USD 10,656,704) revenue from industry fees is a result of deliberate government policy change from 100% reliance on donor funding over a period of 10 years (1995-2015). On average, the proportion of revenue against budget per annum is 54.8% (USD 458,970.11),
Objective: To synthesise evidence on body size preferences for females living in Africa and the factors influencing these. Design: Mixed-methods systematic review including searches on Medline, CINHAL, ASSIA, Web of Science and PsycINFO (PROSPERO CRD42015020509). A sequential-explanatory approach was used to integrate quantitative and qualitative findings. Setting: Urban and rural Africa. Participants: Studies of both sexes providing data on body size preferences for adolescent girls and women aged ≥10 years. Results: 73 articles from 21 countries were included: 50 quantitative, 15 qualitative and eight mixed methods. Most studies reported a preference for normal or overweight body sizes. Some studies of adolescent girls/young women indicated a preference for underweight. Factors influencing preferences for large(r) body sizes included: socio-demographic (e.g. education, rural residency), health-related (e.g. current Body Mass Index, pubertal status), psycho-social (e.g. avoiding HIV stigma) and socio-cultural factors (e.g. spouse’s preference, social standing, cultural norms). Factors influencing preferences for slim(mer) body sizes included: socio-demographic (e.g. higher socioeconomic status, urban residency, younger age), health-related (e.g. health knowledge, being nulliparous), psycho-social (e.g. appearance, body size perception as overweight/obese), and socio-cultural factors (e.g. peer pressure, media). Conclusions: A preference for overweight (not obese) body sizes among some African females means that interventions need to account for the array of factors that maintain these preferences. The widespread preference for normal weight is positive in public health terms, but the valorisation of underweight in adolescent girls/young women may lead to an increase in body dissatisfaction. Emphasis needs to be placed on education to prevent all forms of malnutrition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.