Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Formula-fed infants may be at greater risk for overfeeding and rapid weight gain. Different size bottles are used for feeding infants, although little is known about whether bottle size is related to weight gain in bottle-fed infants. METHODS: Data from the Greenlight Intervention Study, a cluster randomized trial to prevent childhood obesity at 4 pediatric resident clinics, were used to analyze the exposure to regular (<6 oz) or large (>/=6 oz) bottle size at the 2-month visit on changes in weight, weight-for-age z score (WAZ), and weight-for-length z score (WLZ) at the 6-month visit. Using multivariable regression, we adjusted for potential confounders (birth weight, gender, age, weight measures at 2 months, parent race/ethnicity, education, household income and size, time between 2- and 6-month visits, and first child status). RESULTS: Forty-five percent (n = 386; 41% black, 35% Hispanic, 23% white, 2% other) of infants at the 2-month visit were exclusively formula-fed, and 44% used large (>/=6 oz) bottles. Infants whose parents fed with large bottles had 0.21 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05 to 0.37) more weight change, 0.24 U (95% CI: 0.07 to 0.41) more change in WAZ, and 0.31 U (95% CI: 0.08 to 0.54) more change in WLZ during this period than infants fed with regular bottles. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large bottle in early infancy independently contributed to greater weight gain and change in WLZ at the 6-month visit. Although growth in infancy is complex, bottle size may be a modifiable risk factor for rapid infant weight gain and later obesity among exclusively formula-fed infants.

BACKGROUND: Parent feeding practices affect risk of obesity in children. Latino children are at higher risk of obesity than the general population, yet valid measure of feeding practices, one of which is the Infant Feeding Styles Questionnaire (IFSQ), have not been formally validated in Spanish. OBJECTIVE: To validate the IFSQ among Latino families, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis of pressuring, restrictive, and responsive feeding constructs from the IFSQ. DESIGN/METHODS: The IFSQ was administered at the 12-month visit in the Greenlight study, a multi-center cluster randomized trial to prevent obesity. Parents were included if they were of Latino origin (n = 303) and completed an English or Spanish language modified IFSQ (without the indulgence construct). Scores from nine sub-constructs of the IFSQ were compared between English and Spanish language versions. We tested reliability with Cronbach's alpha coefficients and performed confirmatory factor analysis to examine factor loadings and goodness of fit characteristics, modifying constructs to achieve best fit. RESULTS: Of 303 parents completing the IFSQ, 84% were born outside the US, and 74% completed the IFSQ in Spanish. Reliability coefficients ranged from 0.28 to 0.61 for the laissez-faire sub-constructs and from 0.58 to 0.83 for the pressuring, restrictive, and responsive sub-constructs. Results for all coefficients were similar between participants responding to an English and Spanish version of the IFSQ. Goodness of fit indices ranged from CFI 0.82-1 and RMSEA 0.00-0.31, and the model performed best in pressuring-soothing (CFI 1.0, RMSEA 0.00) and restrictive-amount (CFI 0.98, RMSEA 0.1) sub-constructs. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of Latino families, pressuring, restrictive, and responsive constructs performed well. The modified IFSQ in both English and Spanish-speaking Latino families may be used to assess parenting behaviors related to early obesity risk in this at-risk population.

OBJECTIVE: To determine range of bottle sizes used and examine the relationship between bottle size and total daily consumption of infant formula. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data collected as part of Greenlight, a cluster randomized trial to prevent childhood obesity at 4 pediatric resident clinics. The Greenlight study included healthy, term infants. For our analysis, parents of exclusively formula-fed infants reported volume per feed, number of feeds per day, and bottle size, which was dichotomized into small (<6 oz) or large (>/=6 oz). We identified determinants of bottle size, and then examined relationships between bottle size and volume fed with log-transformed ordinary least squares regression, adjusting for infant age, sex, birth weight, current weight, race/ethnicity, and enrollment in Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. RESULTS: Of 865 participants in the Greenlight study, 44% (n = 378; 21.8% white, 40.6% black, 35.3% Hispanic, 2.4% other) of infants were exclusively formula fed at 2 months. Median volume per day was 30 oz (interquartile range 12), and 46.0% of infants were fed with large bottles. Adjusted for covariates, parents using larger bottles reported feeding 4 oz more formula per day (34.2 oz, 95% confidence interval 33.5-34.9 vs 29.7 oz, 95% confidence interval 29.2-30.3, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Among exclusively formula-fed infants, use of a larger bottle is associated with parental report of more formula intake compared to infants fed with smaller bottles. If infants fed with larger bottles receive more formula, these infants may be overfed and consequently at risk for obesity.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The use of written asthma action plans (WAAPs) has been associated with reduced asthma-related morbidity, but there are concerns about their complexity. We developed a health literacy-informed, pictogram- and photograph-based WAAP and examined whether providers who used it, with no training, would have better asthma counseling quality compared with those who used a standard plan. METHODS: Physicians at 2 academic centers randomized to use a low-literacy or standard action plan (American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology) to counsel the hypothetical parent of child with moderate persistent asthma (regimen: Flovent 110 mug 2 puffs twice daily, Singulair 5 mg daily, Albuterol 2 puffs every 4 hours as needed). Two blinded raters independently reviewed counseling transcriptions. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: medication instructions presented with times of day (eg, morning and night vs number of times per day) and inhaler color; spacer use recommended; need for everyday medications, even when sick, addressed; and explicit symptoms used. RESULTS: 119 providers were randomly assigned (61 low literacy, 58 standard). Providers who used the low-literacy plan were more likely to use times of day (eg, Flovent morning and night, 96.7% vs 51.7%, P < .001; odds ratio [OR] = 27.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.1-123.4), recommend spacer use (eg, Albuterol, 83.6% vs 43.1%, P < .001; OR = 6.7; 95% CI, 2.9-15.8), address need for daily medications when sick (93.4% vs 34.5%, P < .001; OR = 27.1; 95% CI, 8.6-85.4), use explicit symptoms (eg, "ribs show when breathing," 54.1% vs 3.4%, P < .001; OR = 33.0; 95% CI, 7.4-147.5). Few mentioned inhaler color. Mean (SD) counseling time was similar (3.9 [2.5] vs 3.8 [2.6] minutes, P = .8). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a low-literacy WAAP improves the quality of asthma counseling by helping providers target key issues by using recommended clear communication principles.

We have previously proposed that by identifying a set of Educationally Sensitive Patient Outcomes (ESPOs), medical education outcomes research becomes more feasible and likely to provide meaningful guidance for medical education policy and practice. ESPOs are proximal outcomes that are sensitive to provider education, measurable, and linked to more distal health outcomes. Our previous model included Patient Activation and Clinical Microsystem Activation as ESPOs. In this paper, we discuss how Health Literacy, defined as "the degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions," is another important ESPO. Between one-third and one-half of all US adults have limited health literacy skills. Providers can be trained to adopt a "universal precautions approach" to addressing patient health literacy, through the acquisition of specific skills (e.g., teachback, "chunking" information, use of plain language written materials) and by learning how to take action to improve the "health literacy environment." While there are several ways to measure health literacy, identifying which measurement tools are most sensitive to provider education is important, but challenging and complex. Further research is needed to test this model and identify additional ESPOs.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the relationship between parental acculturation and infant feeding style in a sample of Latino parents. METHODS:A post hoc analysis was performed using data from an ongoing four-site randomized controlled trial to promote early childhood obesity prevention. Cross-sectional data of parent-child dyads at the 12-month well-child visit who self-reported their Latino ethnicity were analyzed. The Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (SASH) and a subset of the Infant Feeding Style Questionnaire (IFSQ) that assessed four primary feeding styles were administered. SASH level (low vs. high) with each feeding style was compared by analyses. RESULTS:Complete SASH data were available for 398 of 431 Latino dyads. Median SASH score was 1.8 (IQR 1.4-2.7); 82% of participants had low acculturation (score < 3). Of the nine outcome variables, four were significantly associated with SASH: "Laissez-Faire/attention" (AOR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.06-5.13; P = 0.004), "Laissez-Faire/diet quality" (AOR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.7-8.75; P = 0.005), "Pressuring as soothing" (AOR: 3.6; 95% CI:1.63-8.05; P = 0.007), and "Restrictive/diet quality" (AOR: 0.4; 95% CI: 0.19-0.94; P = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS:Latino parents with lower acculturation were more likely than those with higher acculturation to endorse feeding styles that are associated with child obesity. Further research is needed to determine why acculturation and feeding style relate.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adopting the milliliter as the preferred unit of measurement has been suggested as a strategy to improve the clarity of medication instructions; teaspoon and tablespoon units may inadvertently endorse nonstandard kitchen spoon use. We examined the association between unit used and parent medication errors and whether nonstandard instruments mediate this relationship.METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a larger study of provider communication and medication errors. English- or Spanish-speaking parents (n = 287) whose children were prescribed liquid medications in 2 emergency departments were enrolled. Medication error defined as: error in knowledge of prescribed dose, error in observed dose measurement (compared to intended or prescribed dose); >20% deviation threshold for error. Multiple logistic regression performed adjusting for parent age, language, country, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, education, health literacy (Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults); child age, chronic disease; site.RESULTS: Medication errors were common: 39.4% of parents made an error in measurement of the intended dose, 41.1% made an error in the prescribed dose. Furthermore, 16.7% used a nonstandard instrument. Compared with parents who used milliliter-only, parents who used teaspoon or tablespoon units had twice the odds of making an error with the intended (42.5% vs 27.6%, P = .02; adjusted odds ratio=2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.4) and prescribed (45.1% vs 31.4%, P = .04; adjusted odds ratio=1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.5) dose; associations greater for parents with low health literacy and non-English speakers. Nonstandard instrument use partially mediated teaspoon and tablespoon-associated measurement errors.CONCLUSIONS: Findings support a milliliter-only standard to reduce medication errors.