In a message dated 9/20/00 5:25:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< "I am a little concerned that, if we go only by birth
 rate without taking into account the breastfeeding start up rate, we

 will end up penalizing the lactation programs with the best numbers
 because, of course, it is alot more work to deal with 800
 breastfeeders
 per year (an 80% start-up in a 1000 birth hospital) that it is to
 deal
 with 400 (a 40% start-up rate at the same hospital.)" >>
Not sure I see how the difference in nitiation rates is so impotant.  If we
have time to see all the breastfeeding moms. then next we get to work on the
non-breastfeeding ones, L&D Staff to help increase that initiation rate -
there's still plenty of work!  Putting together an informed consent about the
risks of AIM and reviewing it with those electing not to breastfeed will
ultimately change some of those initiation rates.  As well as informal staff
education. The help is needed based on birth rate it seems to me.  Initiation
rates is one of the ways we measure our effectiveness.  At least that's how
I've always viewed it.

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html