Evaluation of a community-based mobile video breastfeeding intervention in Khayelitsha, South Africa: The Philani MOVIE cluster-randomized controlled trial

Maya Adam, Jamie Johnston, Nophiwe Job, Mithilesh Dronavalli, Ingrid Le Roux, Nokwanele Mbewu, Neliswa Mkunqwana, Mark Tomlinson, Shannon A McMahon, Amnesty E LeFevre, Alain Vandormael, Kira-Leigh Kuhnert, Pooja Suri, Jennifer Gates, Bongekile Mabaso, Aarti Porwal, Charles Prober, Till Bärnighausen, Maya Adam, Jamie Johnston, Nophiwe Job, Mithilesh Dronavalli, Ingrid Le Roux, Nokwanele Mbewu, Neliswa Mkunqwana, Mark Tomlinson, Shannon A McMahon, Amnesty E LeFevre, Alain Vandormael, Kira-Leigh Kuhnert, Pooja Suri, Jennifer Gates, Bongekile Mabaso, Aarti Porwal, Charles Prober, Till Bärnighausen

Abstract

Background: In South Africa, breastfeeding promotion is a national health priority. Regular perinatal home visits by community health workers (CHWs) have helped promote exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) in underresourced settings. Innovative, digital approaches including mobile video content have also shown promise, especially as access to mobile technology increases among CHWs. We measured the effects of an animated, mobile video series, the Philani MObile Video Intervention for Exclusive breastfeeding (MOVIE), delivered by a cadre of CHWs ("mentor mothers").

Methods and findings: We conducted a stratified, cluster-randomized controlled trial from November 2018 to March 2020 in Khayelitsha, South Africa. The trial was conducted in collaboration with the Philani Maternal Child Health and Nutrition Trust, a nongovernmental community health organization. We quantified the effect of the MOVIE intervention on EBF at 1 and 5 months (primary outcomes), and on other infant feeding practices and maternal knowledge (secondary outcomes). We randomized 1,502 pregnant women in 84 clusters 1:1 to 2 study arms. Participants' median age was 26 years, 36.9% had completed secondary school, and 18.3% were employed. Mentor mothers in the video intervention arm provided standard-of-care counseling plus the MOVIE intervention; mentor mothers in the control arm provided standard of care only. Within the causal impact evaluation, we nested a mixed-methods performance evaluation measuring mentor mothers' time use and eliciting their subjective experiences through in-depth interviews. At both points of follow-up, we observed no statistically significant differences between the video intervention and the control arm with regard to EBF rates and other infant feeding practices [EBF in the last 24 hours at 1 month: RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.01, P = 0.091); EBF in the last 24 hours at 5 months: RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.04, P = 0.152)]. We observed a small, but significant improvement in maternal knowledge at the 1-month follow-up, but not at the 5-month follow-up. The interpretation of the results from this causal impact evaluation changes when we consider the results of the nested mixed-methods performance evaluation. The mean time spent per home visit was similar across study arms, but the intervention group spent approximately 40% of their visit time viewing videos. The absence of difference in effects on primary and secondary endpoints implies that, for the same time investment, the video intervention was as effective as face-to-face counseling with a mentor mother. The videos were also highly valued by mentor mothers and participants. Study limitations include a high loss to follow-up at 5 months after premature termination of the trial due to the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in mentor mother service demarcations.

Conclusions: This trial measured the effect of a video-based, mobile health (mHealth) intervention, delivered by CHWs during home visits in an underresourced setting. The videos replaced about two-fifths of CHWs' direct engagement time with participants in the intervention arm. The similar outcomes in the 2 study arms thus suggest that the videos were as effective as face-to-face counselling, when CHWs used them to replace a portion of that counselling. Where CHWs are scarce, mHealth video interventions could be a feasible and practical solution, supporting the delivery and scaling of community health promotion services.

Trial registration: The study and its outcomes were registered at clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT03688217) on September 27, 2018.

Conflict of interest statement

I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: MT is a member of PLOS Medicine’s Editorial Board. The other co-authors have declared no competing interests.

Figures

Fig 1. Philani MOVIE study setting.
Fig 1. Philani MOVIE study setting.
Left panel: map of the Western Cape Province, South Africa, (illustration by Sufian Ahmed). Right panel A: a Philani mentor mother walking between home visits. Right panel B: collage of homes and shops in Khayelitsha, South Africa. Right panel C: Bird’s eye view of Khayelitsha, a sprawing informal settlement (photos by Maya Adam). MOVIE, MObile Video Intervention for Exclusive breastfeeding.
Fig 2. Participant flow diagram for the…
Fig 2. Participant flow diagram for the Philani MOVIE study.
LTFU, loss to follow-up; MM, mentor mother; MOVIE, MObile Video Intervention for Exclusive breastfeeding.
Fig 3. Philani MOVIE video topics and…
Fig 3. Philani MOVIE video topics and duration.
Links to the videos used in the intervention can be found in the supporting information section (S1 File) at the end of this manuscript. MOVIE, MObile Video Intervention for Exclusive breastfeeding.
Fig 4. Theory of change.
Fig 4. Theory of change.
EBF, exclusive breastfeeding; eELM, extended ELM; ELM, Elaboration Likelihood Model.
Fig 5. Infant feeding results at 1…
Fig 5. Infant feeding results at 1 month and 5 months.
MOVIE, MObile Video Intervention for Exclusive breastfeeding; RR, risk ratio.
Fig 6. Per-visit time tracking and video…
Fig 6. Per-visit time tracking and video viewing by arm.
This figure illustrates the total mean time mentor mothers spent counseling participants as well as the mean proportion of that time spent watching videos versus face-to-face counseling in both groups.

References

    1. Victora CG, Bahl R, Barros AJ, França GV, Horton S, Krasevec J, et al.. Breastfeeding in the 21st century: epidemiology, mechanisms, and lifelong effect. Lancet. 2016;387(10017):475–90. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01024-7
    1. Chowdhury R, Sinha B, Sankar MJ, Taneja S, Bhandari N, Rollins N, et al.. Breastfeeding and maternal health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Paediatr. 2015;104:96–113. doi: 10.1111/apa.13102
    1. Doherty T, Sanders D, Jackson D, Swanevelder S, Lombard C, Zembe W, et al.. Early cessation of breastfeeding amongst women in South Africa: an area needing urgent attention to improve child health. BMC Pediatr. 2012;12(1):105. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-12-105
    1. National Department of Health (NDoH), Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC), and ICF. South Africa Demographic and Health Survey 2016. Pretoria, South Africa, and Rockville, Maryland, USA: NDoH, Stats SA, SAMRC, and ICF; 2019.
    1. Du Plessis L, Peer N, English R, Honikman S. Breastfeeding in South Africa: are we making progress? S Afr Health Rev. 2016;2016(1):109–23.
    1. Cohen RJ, Brown KH, Dewey K, Canahuati J, Rivera LL. Effects of age of introduction of complementary foods on infant breast milk intake, total energy intake, and growth: a randomised intervention study in Honduras. Lancet. 1994;344(8918):288–93. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)91337-4
    1. Kimmons JE, Dewey KG, Haque E, Chakraborty J, Osendarp SJ, Brown KH. Low nutrient intakes among infants in rural Bangladesh are attributable to low intake and micronutrient density of complementary foods. J Nutr. 2005;135(3):444–51. doi: 10.1093/jn/135.3.444
    1. Rollins NC, Bhandari N, Hajeebhoy N, Horton S, Lutter CK, Martines JC, et al.. Why invest, and what it will take to improve breastfeeding practices? Lancet. 2016;387(10017):491–504. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01044-2
    1. Haroon S, Das JK, Salam RA, Imdad A, Bhutta ZA. Breastfeeding promotion interventions and breastfeeding practices: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(3):S20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-S3-S20
    1. Sinha B, Chowdhury R, Upadhyay RP, Taneja S, Martines J, Bahl R, et al.. Integrated interventions delivered in health systems, home, and community have the highest impact on breastfeeding outcomes in low-and middle-income countries. J Nutr. 2017;147(11):2179S–87S. doi: 10.3945/jn.116.242321
    1. Tomlinson M, Rotheram-Borus MJ, Le Roux IM, Youssef M, Nelson SH, Scheffler A, et al.. Thirty-six-month outcomes of a generalist paraprofessional perinatal home visiting intervention in South Africa on maternal health and child health and development. Prev Sci. 2016;17(8):937–48. doi: 10.1007/s11121-016-0676-x
    1. Le Roux IM, Tomlinson M, Harwood JM, O’CONNOR MJ, Worthman CM, Mbewu N, et al.. Outcomes of home visits for pregnant mothers and their infants: a cluster randomised controlled trial. AIDS. 2013;27(9):1461.
    1. Lund C, Schneider M, Garman EC, Davies T, Munodawafa M, Honikman S, et al.. Task-sharing of psychological treatment for antenatal depression in Khayelitsha, South Africa: Effects on antenatal and postnatal outcomes in an individual randomised controlled trial. Behav Res Ther. 2020;130:103466. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2019.103466
    1. Rotheram-Borus MJ, Tomlinson M, Le Roux IM, Harwood JM, Comulada S, O’Connor MJ, et al.. A cluster randomised controlled effectiveness trial evaluating perinatal home visiting among South African mothers/infants. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(10):e105934. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105934
    1. Coetzee B, Kohrman H, Tomlinson M, Mbewu N, Le Roux I, Adam M. Community health workers’ experiences of using video teaching tools during home visits—A pilot study. Health Soc Care Community. 2018;26(2):167–75. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12488
    1. Mosavel M, Simon C, Van Stade D, Buchbinder M. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) in South Africa: engaging multiple constituents to shape the research question. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(12):2577–87. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.04.041
    1. Slater MD. Entertainment education and the persuasive impact of narratives. In: Green M, Strange JJ, Brock TC, editors. Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2002. p. 157–81.
    1. Hinyard LJ, Kreuter MW. Using narrative communication as a tool for health behavior change: a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical overview. Health Educ Behav. 2007;34(5):777–92. doi: 10.1177/1090198106291963
    1. Rogers EM, Vaughan PW, Swalehe R, Rao N, Svenkerud P, Sood S. Effects of an entertainment-education radio soap opera on family planning behavior in Tanzania. Stud Fam Plann. 1999;30(3):193–211. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.1999.00193.x
    1. Shen F, Han J. Effectiveness of entertainment education in communicating health information: A systematic review. Asian J Commun. 2014;24(6):605–16.
    1. Slater MD, Rouner D. Entertainment—education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Comm Theory. 2002;12(2):173–91.
    1. Aranda-Jan CB, Mohutsiwa-Dibe N, Loukanova S. Systematic review on what works, what does not work and why of implementation of mobile health (mHealth) projects in Africa. BMC Public Health. 2014;14(1):188.
    1. Gurman TA, Rubin SE, Roess AA. Effectiveness of mHealth behavior change communication interventions in developing countries: a systematic review of the literature. J Health Commun. 2012;17(sup1):82–104. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.649160
    1. Sondaal SFV, Browne JL, Amoakoh-Coleman M, Borgstein A, Miltenburg AS, Verwijs M, et al.. Assessing the effect of mHealth interventions in improving maternal and neonatal care in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(5):e0154664. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154664
    1. World Health Organization (WHO). mHealth: New horizons for health through mobile technologies: second global survey on eHealth. Geneva: WHO; 2011.
    1. Labrique AB, Vasudevan L, Kochi E, Fabricant R, Mehl G. mHealth innovations as health system strengthening tools: 12 common applications and a visual framework. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2013;1(2):160–71. doi: 10.9745/GHSP-D-13-00031
    1. Källander K, Tibenderana JK, Akpogheneta OJ, Strachan DL, Hill Z, ten Asbroek AH, et al.. Mobile health (mHealth) approaches and lessons for increased performance and retention of community health workers in low-and middle-income countries: a review. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(1). doi: 10.2196/jmir.2130
    1. Poushter J. Smartphone ownership and internet usage continues to climb in emerging economies. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2016.
    1. Diamond L. In search of democracy. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge; 2015.
    1. Kakihara M. Grasping a global view of smartphone diffusion: An analysis from a global smartphone study. 2014 International Conference on Mobile Business; 2014.
    1. Kreutzer T. Generation Mobile: Online and Digital Media Usage on Mobile Phones among Low-Income Urban Youth in South Africa. Digital camera. 38(11):25.
    1. Barron P, Pillay Y, Fernandes A, Sebidi J, Allen R. The MomConnect mHealth initiative in South Africa: Early impact on the supply side of MCH services. J Public Health Policy. 2016;37(2):201–12. doi: 10.1057/s41271-016-0015-2
    1. Seebregts C, Barron P, Tanna G, Benjamin P, Fogwill T. MomConnect: an exemplar implementation of the health normative standards framework in South Africa. S Afr Health Rev. 2016;2016(1):125–35.
    1. Ford I, Norrie J. Pragmatic trials. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(5):454–63. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1510059
    1. Kaplan SR, Oosthuizen C, Stinson K, Little F, Euvrard J, Schomaker M, et al.. Contemporary disengagement from antiretroviral therapy in Khayelitsha, South Africa: A cohort study. PLoS Med. 2017;14(11):e1002407. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002407
    1. Adam M, Tomlinson M, Le Roux I, LeFevre AE, McMahon SA, Johnston J, et al.. The Philani MOVIE study: a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mobile video entertainment-education intervention to promote exclusive breastfeeding in South Africa. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):211. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4000-x
    1. Rotheram-Borus MJ, Le Roux IM, Tomlinson M, Mbewu N, Comulada WS, Le Roux K, et al.. Philani Plus (+): a Mentor Mother community health worker home visiting program to improve maternal and infants’ outcomes. Prev Sci. 2011;12(4):372–88. doi: 10.1007/s11121-011-0238-1
    1. Bai Y, Middlestadt SE, Peng C-YJ, Fly AD. Predictors of continuation of exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life. J Hum Lact. 2010;26(1):26–34. doi: 10.1177/0890334409350168
    1. Barennes H, Empis G, Quang TD, Sengkhamyong K, Phasavath P, Harimanana A, et al.. Breast-milk substitutes: a new old-threat for breastfeeding policy in developing countries. A case study in a traditionally high breastfeeding country. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(2):e30634. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030634
    1. Dennis C-L. Breastfeeding initiation and duration: a 1990–2000 literature review. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2002;31(1):12–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2002.tb00019.x
    1. Kitano N, Nomura K, Kido M, Murakami K, Ohkubo T, Ueno M, et al.. Combined effects of maternal age and parity on successful initiation of exclusive breastfeeding. Prev Med Rep. 2016;3:121–6. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2015.12.010
    1. McCann MF, Liskin L, Piotrow PT, Rinehart W, Fox G. Breast-feeding fertility and family planning. Popul Rep J. 1981;24:1–51.
    1. Goga AE, Doherty T, Jackson DJ, Sanders D, Colvin M, Chopra M, et al.. Infant feeding practices at routine PMTCT sites, South Africa: results of a prospective observational study amongst HIV exposed and unexposed infants-birth to 9 months. Int Breastfeed J. 2012;7(1):4. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-7-4
    1. Meedya S, Fahy K, Kable A. Factors that positively influence breastfeeding duration to 6 months: a literature review. Women Birth. 2010;23(4):135–45. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2010.02.002
    1. Mogre V, Dery M, Gaa PK. Knowledge, attitudes and determinants of exclusive breastfeeding practice among Ghanaian rural lactating mothers. Int Breastfeed J. 2016;11(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s13006-016-0071-z
    1. Hemming K, Girling AJ, Sitch AJ, Marsh J, Lilford RJ. Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):102.
    1. Du Plessis LM. Commitment and capacity for the support of breastfeeding in South Africa: A paediatric food-based dietary guideline. South Afr J Clin Nutr. 2013;26(3):S120–S8.
    1. Siziba L, Jerling J, Hanekom S, Wentzel-Viljoen E. Low rates of exclusive breastfeeding are still evident in four South African provinces. South Afr J Clin Nutr 2015;28(4):170–9.
    1. Adam M. 100% Breastfed Trailer 2018 [10.18.18]. Available from: .
    1. World Health Organization (WHO). Indicators for assessing infant and young child feeding practices. Part I: definitions. Geneva: WHO; 2008.
    1. Greiner T. Exclusive breastfeeding: measurement and indicators. Int Breastfeed J. 2014;9(1):18. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-9-18
    1. Mahmood I, Jamal M, Khan N. Effect of mother-infant early skin-to-skin contact on breastfeeding status: a randomized controlled trial. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2011;21(10):601–5. doi: 10.2011/JCPSP.601605
    1. Moore ER, Anderson GC. Randomized controlled trial of very early mother–infant skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding status. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2007;52(2):116–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2006.12.002
    1. Noel-Weiss J, Taljaard M, Kujawa-Myles S. Breastfeeding and lactation research: exploring a tool to measure infant feeding patterns. Int Breastfeed J. 2014;9(1):5. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-9-5
    1. Tylleskär T, Jackson D, Meda N, Engebretsen IMS, Chopra M, Diallo AH, et al.. Exclusive breastfeeding promotion by peer counsellors in sub-Saharan Africa (PROMISE-EBF): a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9789):420–7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60738-1
    1. LeFevre AE, Scott K, Mohan D, Shah N, Bhatnagar A, Labrique A, et al.. Development of a phone survey tool to measure respectful maternity care during pregnancy and childbirth in India: study protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2019;8 (4):e12173. doi: 10.2196/12173
    1. Akinyinka MR, Olatona FA, Oluwole EO. Breastfeeding Knowledge and Practices among Mothers of Children under 2 Years of Age Living in a Military Barrack in Southwest Nigeria. International Journal of MCH and AIDS. 2016;5(1):1.
    1. Mbada CE, Olowookere AE, Faronbi JO, Oyinlola-Aromolaran FC, Faremi FA, Ogundele AO, et al.. Knowledge, attitude and techniques of breastfeeding among Nigerian mothers from a semi-urban community. BMC Res Notes. 2013;6(1):552. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-6-552
    1. Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159(7):702–6. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwh090
    1. Bell ML, Kenward MG, Fairclough DL, Horton NJ. Differential dropout and bias in randomised controlled trials: when it matters and when it may not. BMJ. 2013;346.
    1. Von Hippel PT. How many imputations do you need? A two-stage calculation using a quadratic rule. Sociol Methods Res. 2020;49(3):699–718.
    1. Creswell JW, Clark VLP. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 2017.
    1. Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 1990.
    1. Bowen GA. Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note. Qual Res. 2008;8(1):137–52.
    1. Tuckett AG. Qualitative research sampling: the very real complexities. Nurse Res. 2004;12(1):47–61. doi: 10.7748/nr2004.07.12.1.47.c5930
    1. McMahon SA, Winch PJ. Systematic debriefing after qualitative encounters: an essential analysis step in applied qualitative research. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3(5):e000837. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000837
    1. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. Communication and persuasion. New York: Springer; 1986.
    1. Moyer-Gusé E. Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Comm Theory. 2008;18(3):407–25.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir