Breastfeeding benefits mothers and infants. Although immigration in many regions has increased in the last three decades, it is unknown whether immigrant women have better breastfeeding outcomes than non-immigrants. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether breastfeeding rates differ between immigrant and non-immigrant women. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Google Scholar, 1950 to 2016. We included peer-reviewed cross-sectional and cohort studies of women aged ≥16 years that assessed and compared breastfeeding rates in immigrant and non-immigrant women. Two independent reviewers extracted data using predefined standard procedures. The analysis included 29 studies representing 1,539,659 women from 14 countries. Immigrant women were more likely than non-immigrants to initiate any (exclusive or partial) breastfeeding (pooled adjusted prevalence ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07–1.19; 11 studies). Exclusive breastfeeding initiation was higher but borderline significant (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.20, 95% CI 1.00–1.45; 5 studies, p = 0.056). Immigrant women were more likely than non-immigrants to continue any breastfeeding between 12- and 24-week postpartum (pooled adjusted risk ratio 2.04, 95% CI 1.79–2.32; 3 studies) and > 24 weeks (adjusted risk ratio 1.33, 95% CI 1.02–1.73; 6 studies) but not exclusive breastfeeding. Immigrant women are more likely than non-immigrants to initiate and maintain any breastfeeding, but exclusive breastfeeding remains a challenge for both immigrants and non-immigrants. Social and cultural factors need to be considered to understand the extent to which immigrant status is an independent predictor of positive breastfeeding practices. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Immigrant non-immigrant breastfeeding Meta-analysis

controlled study female immigrant cohort analysis PsycINFO Review Embase cultural factor Medline prevalence systematic review Cinahl Breast Feeding meta analysis human adult human experiment