Authors: Suchitra Jain Anand Jain Amit K Singh Divya Goswami Amar N Upadhyay Neha Negi
Publish Date: 2013/07/25
Volume: 81, Issue: 2, Pages: 227-227
Abstract
Regarding the gestational age at which it was started as mentioned clearly Material and Methods line 1 it was applied post natally and not during gestation Otherwise also during gestation it is never advised for fear of inducing uterine contractions and/or premature labourRegarding the frequency and duration of intervention it has been mentioned Material and Methods line 9–11 that sucking was done till nipple became protruded at least for the time being to enable sucking by the baby It was every time before putting the baby at breast frequency Once it was successful ie on day 3 in 52 day 7 in 88 and day 14 in 94 it was no more required and duration is self explanatoryOn initial days after parturition no husband is going to suck at nipple as a foreplay and since the groups A and B were not advised for sucking at nipple by husbands as a medical intervention its chances are zero/negligible Thus the groups are truly comparableFor times immortal sucking has been a part of foreplay never resulting in trauma to the nipple since the act is very delicate and both the participants are intimately attached to each other mentally It is the excess negative pressure responsible for trauma but here the negative pressure ie sucking force was immediately reduced on expression of pain unlike in syringe method and practically trauma was never seen Still the risk if any far outweighs the benefitsWe have already accepted that societies where it is not acceptable it should not be advised Still looking at immense benefits of the procedure already mentioned we did intensive efforts on counselling satisfying all the queries of the patients We stressed that there is nothing wrong in it and huge benefits counselled both the participants singly and then together We feel that with full hearted and laborious efforts we got 797 acceptability Questionnaire method as applied by Babu et al perhaps lacked personal touch and prevented the most valuable whole hearted and sternous personal efforts in singly and then in together counselling resulting in 132 acceptability
Keywords: