Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Clinical Research Article
  • Published:

Experiences and opinions towards baby-led weaning by healthcare professionals. A qualitative study

Pediatric Research volume 94, pages 1784–1788 (2023)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Baby-led weaning (BLW) is an alternative method to spoon-feeding to introduce solid foods. This study aimed to describe and understand the experiences and opinions of pediatricians and pediatric nurse specialists of the implementation of the BLW approach.

Methods

An interpretive descriptive qualitative research was carried out. A focus group with 7 participants and 13 face-to-face interviews were conducted between February and May 2022 (17 females and 3 males). All were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed with the supported by Atlas.Ti qualitative data analysis software.

Results

From the data, two themes developed: (1) BLW as an ideal method of introducing solid food, with the subthemes: “a natural method of introducing complementary feeding” and “BLW is a safe method”; (2) Perceived barriers to the uptake of the BLW method, with the subthemes: “a lack of BLW training prevents the best practice” and “the influence of family and social context on parents.”

Conclusions

Healthcare professionals perceive BLW to be a safe and natural weaning approach. The lack of training of healthcare professionals and the influence of family social context on parents may limit the implementation of BLW.

Impact

  • Baby-led weaning is perceived by healthcare professionals as a safe complementary feeding method that promotes chewing, improves growth, and the development of fine motor skills. However, lack of training of healthcare professionals and the family social context of the parents hinders the uptake of baby-led weaning.

  • The views of the family and parents’ social context about baby-led weaning may restrict their willingness to use the method.

  • Family education delivered by healthcare professionals may avoid risks and allay parental anxieties about safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization. UNICEF Global Strategy on Infant and Young Child Feeding (World Health Organization, 2002).

  2. World Health Organization. Infant and Young Child Feeding. Model Chapter for Textbooks for Medical Students and Allied Health Professionals (World Health Organization, 2009).

  3. Rowan, H., Lee, M. & Brown, A. Differences in dietary composition between infants introduced to complementary foods using baby-led weaning and traditional spoon feeding. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 32, 11–20 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rapley, G. Baby-led weaning. in Maternal and Infant Nutrition and Nurture: Controversies and Challenges (eds V. Hall Moran, V. & Dykes, F.) 275–298 (Quay Books, 2005).

  5. Rapley, G. Baby-led weaning: transitioning to solid foods at the baby’s own pace. Community Pract. 84, 20–23 (2011).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rapley, G. Baby-led weaning: where are we now? Nutr. Bull. 43, 262–268 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vieira, V. L. & Rapley, G. Baby-led weaning, an overview of the new approach to food introduction: integrative literature review. Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 40, e2020507 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gomez, M. S., Toneto Novaes, A. P., Paulino da Silva, J., Miranda Guerra, L. & Possobon, R. D. F. Baby-led weaning, an overview of the new approach to food introduction: integrative literature review. Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 38, e2018084 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Boswell, N. Complementary feeding methods-a review of the benefits and risks. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, 7165 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Morison, B. J. et al. How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6-8 months. BMJ Open 6, e010665 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown, A., Jones, S. W. & Rowan, H. Baby-led weaning: the evidence to date. Curr. Nutr. Rep. 6, 148–156 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. D’Auria, E. et al. Baby-led weaning: what a systematic review of the literature adds on. Ital. J. Pediatr. 44, 1–11 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Osuna, E., Pérez-Carrión, A., Pérez-Cárceles, M. D. & Machado, F. Perceptions of health professionals about the quality of communication and deliberation with the patient and its impact on the health decision making process. J. Public Health Res. 7, 1445 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Dogan, E. et al. Baby-led complementary feeding: randomized controlled study. Pediatr. Int. 60, 1073–1080 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cameron, S. L., Heath, A. L. & Taylor, R. W. Healthcare professionals’ and mothers’ knowledge of, attitudes to and experiences with baby-led weaning: a content analysis study. BMJ Open 2, e001542 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. San Mauro Martín, I., Garicano Vilar, E., Porro Guerra, G. & Camina Martín, M. A. Knowledge and attitudes towards baby-led-weaning by health professionals and parents: a cross-sectional study. Enferm. Clin. (Engl. Ed.) 32, S64–S72 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Arias-Ramos, N., Andina-Díaz, E., Granado-Soto, M., Álvarez Rodríguez, R. & Liébana-Presa, C. Baby-led weaning: Health professionals ‘knowledge and attitudes and parents’ experiences from Spain. A mixed methods approach. Health Soc. Care Community 30, e1352–e1363 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Neves, F. S. et al. Brazilian health professionals’ perception about the baby-led weaning (BLW) method for complementary feeding: an exploratory study. Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 40, e2020321 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Thompson Burdine, J., Thorne, S. & Sandhu, G. Interpretive description: a flexible qualitative methodology for medical education research. Med. Educ. 55, 336–343 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tong, A., Sainsbury, P. & Craig, J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 19, 349–357 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Martínez Rubio, A., Cantarero Vallejo, M. D., Espín & Jaime, B. ¿Cómo orientan los pediatras de Atención Primaria la alimentación complementaria?. Rev. Pediatr. Aten. Primaria 20, 35–44 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Williams Erickson, L. et al. Impact of a modified version of baby-led weaning on infant food and nutrient intakes: the BLISS randomized controlled trial. Nutrients 10, 740 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Cichero, J. A. Y. Introducing solid foods using baby-led weaning vs. spoon-feeding: a focus on oral development, nutrient intake and quality of research to bring balance to the debate. Nutr. Bull. 41, 72–77 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Daniels, L. et al. Impact of a modified version of baby-led weaning on iron intake and status: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 8, 1–10 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Utami, A. F. & Wanda, D. Is the baby-led weaning approach an effective choice for introducing first foods? A literature review. Enferm. Clin. 29, 87–95 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Alpers, B., Blackwell, V. & Clegg, M. E. Standard v. baby-led complementary feeding: a comparison of food and nutrient intakes in 6-12-month-old infants in the UK. Public Health Nutr. 22, 2813–2822 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. World Health Organization. Estrategia Mundial Para la Alimentación del Lactante y del Niño Pequeño (Organización Mundial de La Salud, 2003).

  28. D’Andrea, E., Jenkins, K., Mathews, M. & Roebothan, B. Baby-led weaning: a preliminary investigation. Can. J. Diet. Pract. Res. 77, 72–77 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fu, X. X. et al. Food fussiness and early feeding characteristics of infants following baby-led weaning and traditional spoon-feeding in New Zealand: an internet survey. Appetite 130, 110–116 (2018). 29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Garcia, A. L., Looby, S., McLean-Guthrie, K. & Parrett, A. An exploration of complementary feeding practices, information needs and sources. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 16, 4311 (2019).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all the healthcare professionals who participated in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Medicine, University of Almería, Almería, Spain

    Isabel María Fernández-Medina, María Dolores Ruíz-Fernández & María Isabel Ventura-Miranda

  2. Quirón Health Hospital, Almería, Spain

    Rita Rocío Márquez-Díaz

  3. Torrecárdenas Maternity and Infant Hospital, Andalusian Health Service, Almería, Spain

    Marina Arcas-Rueda

  4. Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Providencia, Chile

    María Dolores Ruíz-Fernández

  5. Department of Psychology, University of Almería, Almería, Spain

    Rocío Ortíz-Amo

Authors
  1. Isabel María Fernández-Medina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rita Rocío Márquez-Díaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marina Arcas-Rueda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. María Dolores Ruíz-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rocío Ortíz-Amo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. María Isabel Ventura-Miranda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Data collection and analysis were performed by M.A.R. and M.D.R.-F. The first draft of the manuscript was written by I.M.F.-M., M.I.V.-M., and R.R.M.-D. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to María Dolores Ruíz-Fernández.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Participants received written information and signed an informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fernández-Medina, I.M., Márquez-Díaz, R.R., Arcas-Rueda, M. et al. Experiences and opinions towards baby-led weaning by healthcare professionals. A qualitative study. Pediatr Res 94, 1784–1788 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-023-02694-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-023-02694-z

Search

Advanced search

Quick links