4.5 Article

Potential economic impacts from improving breastfeeding rates in the UK

Journal

ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD
Volume 100, Issue 4, Pages 334-340

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2014-306701

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Unicef UK

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rationale Studies suggest that increased breastfeeding rates can provide substantial financial savings, but the scale of such savings in the UK is not known. Objective To calculate potential cost savings attributable to increases in breastfeeding rates from the National Health Service perspective. Design and settings Cost savings focussed on where evidence of health benefit is strongest: reductions in gastrointestinal and lower respiratory tract infections, acute otitis media in infants, necrotising enterocolitis in preterm babies and breast cancer (BC) in women. Savings were estimated using a seven-step framework in which an incidence-based disease model determined the number of cases that could have been avoided if breastfeeding rates were increased. Point estimates of cost savings were subject to a deterministic sensitivity analysis. Results Treating the four acute diseases in children costs the UK at least 89 pound million annually. The 20092010 value of lifetime costs of treating maternal BC is estimated at 959 pound million. Supporting mothers who are exclusively breast feeding at 1 week to continue breast feeding until 4 months can be expected to reduce the incidence of three childhood infectious diseases and save at least 11 pound million annually. Doubling the proportion of mothers currently breast feeding for 7-18 months in their lifetime is likely to reduce the incidence of maternal BC and save at least 31 pound million at 2009-2010 value. Conclusions The economic impact of low breastfeeding rates is substantial. Investing in services that support women who want to breast feed for longer is potentially cost saving.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available