Abstract
Background The increasing population of HIV-exposed-uninfected (HEU) infants are known to be at risk of poor nutritional status and suboptimal growth, with biological risk factors implicated, yet the cost to families of feeding infants is often overlooked.
Objective The study compared the infant feeding practices and costs and macronutrient intake of HEU vs HIV-unexposed-uninfected (HUU) six-month-old infants in the Gauteng Province of South Africa.
Methods A cross-sectional study investigated 46 HEU and 55 HUU infants aged six months and utilised a single quantified 24-hr recall and the FoodFinder™ program for meal analysis. The estimation of diet cost utilised supermarket food prices based on the 24-hr recall method.
Results Mothers of HEU infants had significantly lower income (p<0.01) and educational attainment (p=0.03). The infant feeding practices differed between HEU vs HUU infants (p=0.05): exclusive breastfeeding (50.0% vs 34.0%) and mixed breastfeeding (38.1% vs 64.2%). Common complementary foods for HEU versus HUU infants included commercial infant cereals (CIC) (48.7% vs 70.9%; p=0.04); fruits and vegetables (33.3% vs 15.7%; p=0.05) and maize meal porridge (25.6% vs 15.7%; p=0.24), respectively. The mean daily cost of diet of HEU vs HUU infants was 8.55±7.35ZAR ($0.68±0.59USD) vs 10.97±7.92ZAR($0.88±0.63 USD); (p=0.10). Regarding the complementary feeding, there were non-significant differences in protein, fat, and carbohydrate intakes (p>0.05) and their costs per daily intake (p>0.05) between the groups.
Conclusion There are no significant differences in cost, feeding and macronutrient intakes between HEU and HUU. Suboptimal breastfeeding practices remains an issue within the first six months. More sustained effort is required to support and promote exclusive breastfeeding.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The Collaborative Initiative for Paediatric HIV Education and Research (CIPHER) funded the research. The German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the National Research Foundation (NRF) supported with the personal maintenance cost.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the University of Pretoria Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences Research Ethics Committee and Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee. Further permissions were obtained from Kalafong Provincial Tertiary Hospital and Tshwane District Health Department. The process of data collection was voluntary and confidential. The study was conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines set in the 2013 Declaration of Helsinki.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
Data is available upon request
