Objective To test the impact of two levels of intervention on communication frequency, quality, success, and ease between nurses and intubated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Design Quasi-experimental, 3-phase sequential cohort study: (1) usual care, (2) basic communication skills training (BCST) for nurses, (3) additional training in augmentative and alternative communication devices and speech language pathologist consultation (AAC + SLP). Trained observers rated four 3-min video-recordings for each nurseepatient dyad for communication frequency, quality and success. Patients self-rated communication ease. Setting Two ICUs in a university-affiliated medical center. Participants 89 intubated patients awake, responsive and unable to speak and 30 ICU nurses. Main results Communication frequency (mean number of communication acts within a communication exchange) and positive nurse communication behaviors increased significantly in one ICU only. Percentage of successful communication exchanges about pain were greater for the two intervention groups than the usual care/control group across both ICUs (p = .03) with more successful sessions about pain and other symptoms in the AAC + SLP group (p = .07). Patients in the AAC SLP intervention group used significantly more AAC methods (p = .002) and rated communication at high difficulty less often (p < .01). Conclusions This study provides support for the feasibility, utility and efficacy of a multi-level communication skills training, materials and SLP consultation intervention in the ICU.

Background: Although late preterm infants (LPIs), at 34 0/7 -36 6/7 weeks of gestation, are reported to have suboptimal rates of breastfeeding, there is a lack of quantitative evidence describing this trend. This study examined the prevalence of breastfeeding initiation and factors associated with breastfeeding non-initiation within a Pennsylvania population-based cohort of late preterm mother-infant dyads. Subjects and Methods: Descriptive statistics and odds ratios were used to assess and compare breastfeeding initiation rates in 2003-2009 among LPI mothers (n = 62,451) and their infants (n = 68,886) with moderately preterm (n = 17,325) and term (n = 870,034) infants. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the association of system/provider, sociodemographic, and medical factors with breastfeeding non-initiation in late preterm mother-infant dyads for the year 2009 (n = 7,012). Results: Although LPI breastfeeding initiation in Pennsylvania increased significantly from 2003 (54%) to 2009 (61.8%) ( p < 0.001), the 2009 prevalence remained well below rates in term infant populations and national standards. The regression model indicated that interactions involving sociodemographic variables, including marital status, age, race/ethnicity, education, parity, Women, Infants and Children Program participation, and smoking status were among the most significant factors associated with LPI breastfeeding non-initiation ( p < 0.05). The univariate results were similar to those reported in preterm and term populations. Conclusions: Our data suggest that certain, unexpected demographic groups in the late preterm population be prioritized for further analysis and possibly greater breastfeeding support. More research is indicated to understand the effect of modifiable psychosocial factors on LPI breastfeeding initiation.

Background Despite evidence of low transfer of methadone into breast milk and the potential physical and psychological benefits that breastfeeding offers for methadone-exposed mothers and infants, the rate of breastfeeding initiation in this population is about half that reported nationally. This study describes the perceptions surrounding breastfeeding decisions and management among pregnant and postpartum women taking methadone. Methods Seven pregnant women and four postpartum women enrolled in methadone maintenance programs participated in semi-structured, audio-taped interviews and focus groups, respectively, about their breastfeeding experiences. Transcripts were analyzed and coded using qualitative content analysis. Results Three major content categories were indentified: (1) fears, barriers and misconceptions about breastfeeding while taking methadone; (2) motivation and perceived benefits of breastfeeding; and (3) sources of information, support, and anxiety about general breastfeeding management and breastfeeding while taking methadone. Lack of support from the healthcare community and misinformation about the dangers of combining breastfeeding and methadone therapy represented significant, yet modifiable, barriers to breastfeeding success in methadone-exposed women. Conclusions Interventions to increase the prevalence of breastfeeding among women taking methadone should address identified logistical, educational, and psychological barriers and consider inclusion of women themselves, partners, peers, and clinicians. In particular, clinicians who care for methadone-exposed mothers and infants should be educated on therapeutic communication, up-to-date breastfeeding contraindications, and the health benefits of breastfeeding in this population.

Antenatal milk expression (AME) involves maternal hand‐expression, collection, and storage of breast milk during pregnancy for the purposes of reducing the early formula use in breastfed infants. AME is not widely practiced in the United States, despite its growing popularity elsewhere. In this study, we examined the experiences of first‐time mothers recruited from a U.S. midwife practice who engaged in AME within the context of a pilot randomized controlled trial. The AME intervention involved demonstration and practice of AME with a lactation consultant beginning at 37 weeks of gestation, reinforcement at weekly study visits until delivery, and daily home practice. Nineteen women participated in a semistructured interview at 1–2 weeks postpartum regarding their study experiences. Major themes included (1) perceived benefits and impact of AME, (b) AME implementation, and (c) use of AME milk. Women perceived multiple benefits of AME, most notably that it increased their confidence that they would be able to make milk and breastfeed successfully postpartum. Women expressed some concern that no/little milk expressed could be indicative of postpartum milk production problems. Regarding implementation, women found that the AME protocol fit well into their daily routine. There was mixed feedback regarding comfort with practicing AME in the presence of partners. Reasons for postpartum use of AME milk varied; barriers to provision included inadequate milk storage options at the birth hospital and unsupportive hospital providers/staff. With few caveats, AME appears to be an acceptable breastfeeding support intervention among a sociodemographically homogeneous group of first‐time mothers in the United States.