Abstract
Background:
With the advancement of antiretroviral therapy scale-up, it is possible for women living with HIV to breastfeed safely. However, this practice has not been adopted in Malaysia. Instead, infants are provided with subsidized human milk substitutes for their first 2 years of life.
Research Aim:
This study describes the infant feeding experiences of women living with HIV in Malaysia.
Methods:
From August to October 2021, a nationwide, community-based qualitative study was conducted among women living with HIV and who received care from the Malaysian Ministry of Health. Using purposive sampling, participants who met the inclusion criteria were recruited. Interview and focus group transcripts were coded based on a secondary thematic analysis.
Results:
Six in-depth interviews and five focus group discussions were conducted among 32 participants. Study participants were mostly Malay secondary school graduates in their 30s and 40s. Due to the fear of vertical transmission, which was explained by healthcare providers to the participants, none of the women breastfed their infants. The three primary themes that emerged from analyzing the women’s infant feeding experiences were (1) a human milk substitute was the only option and was encouraged; (2) feeding infants with a human milk substitute made the women feel incomplete as mothers; and (3) the women encountered difficulties in obtaining the subsidized human milk substitute.
Conclusion:
Women living with HIV in Malaysia have been advised to provide human milk substitutes to their infants in fear of HIV transmission.
Keywords
Background
In 2010, the World Health Organization (WHO) released its first recommendation on the use of antiretroviral drugs to prevent transmission through breastfeeding (WHO, 2010. The guidelines stated that infants of women living with HIV (WLHIV) should exclusively be given human milk for the first 6 months, with complementary foods only being introduced afterward. Thereafter, once “a nutritionally adequate and safe diet without breast milk can be provided,” all breastfeeding practices should cease gradually within the span of 1 month (WHO, 2010, p. 31). In 2016, the WHO updated the guidelines on breastfeeding practices, which stated that the duration of breastfeeding for infants of WLHIV may be up to 24 months or longer. However, breastfeeding can only be practiced safely if the WLHIV are on suppressive triple antiretroviral therapy (ART; WHO & United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF], 2016; WHO, 2021). WLHIV who are on ART treatment may not be able to fully adhere to the guidelines and can only afford to undertake mixed feeding practices; nevertheless, shorter breastfeeding duration should still be encouraged and is preferred compared to infants receiving no human milk at all (WHO & UNICEF, 2016; WHO, 2021).
In support of the revised WHO guidelines, a recent single-center study of breastfeeding outcomes for a cohort of infants born to WLHIV in the United States demonstrated no vertical transmission with breastfeeding. All 10 infants who were exclusively breastfed for a mean duration of 4.4 months (IQR = 1.0, 8.6) months had negative HIV RNA PCRs at a median age of 16 months (Yusuf et al., 2022). WLHIV in other high-income countries also expressed their longing to experience the closeness and bonding that breastfeeding can bring, as well as to obtain the health benefits of breastfeeding (Tuthill et al., 2019; Yudin et al., 2016). Living in a “Breast is Best” world heightened WLHIV’s concerns about the consequences of not breastfeeding on their identity as a mother, together with the feeling of loss and self-blame for being unable to practice “good mothering” (Greene et al., 2015). Despite their intention to breastfeed their children, WLHIV in South Africa acknowledged their responsibility to prioritize their child’s health and refrain from breastfeeding due to fear of transmitting HIV to their infants (West et al., 2019). However, it is not clear whether these sentiments are shared by WLHIV in Malaysia, as there has been no attempt to investigate the matter in Malaysia.
Following the validation exercise by the WHO in 2018 (Sulaiman et al., 2022), the Global Validation Advisory Committee (GVAC) made a recommendation to conduct an independent assessment of current policies in Malaysia on sexual and reproductive health, including the rights of WLHIV in preventing mother-to-child transmission. After this, in 2018, the Ministry of Health in Malaysia updated their infant feeding policy. Particular emphasis was placed on the adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) for WLHIV who insisted on feeding their infants human milk (Ministry of Health Malaysia [MOH], 2021). Three of the five points discussed in the guidelines regarding infant feeding recommended the use of infant formula; for example, one point recommended the use of lactation suppression therapy, and another mentioned that breastfeeding should only occur if the WLHIV insisted on it (MOH, 2021).
These statements suggest that the validation exercise did not change the guidelines and rationales on the risk of vertical transmission of HIV significantly. They continue to pose a barrier for WLHIV who would like to breastfeed. After the validation exercise was complete and the new policies, care standards, and practices were in place, GVAC called for independent researchers to evaluate the perspectives of WLHIV to ensure that they were aware of possible infant feeding options. In response to this call, our study describes the infant feeding experiences of WLHIV in Malaysia from 2018 onwards.
Methods
Research Design
A secondary thematic analysis was performed on a country-wide, community-based qualitative dataset. Purposive sampling was used to allow for a broad set of voices to be heard. The study received ethical approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM/JEPeM/21070517), and the Medical Research and Ethics Committee, Ministry of Health Malaysia (NMRR21-1583-60936 IIR).
Key Messages
With the advancement of antiretroviral therapy scale-up, it is possible for women living with HIV to breastfeed safely. However, currently, this recommendation has not been fully adopted in Malaysia.
Most existing qualitative studies on women living with HIV and breastfeeding focus on the decisions being made about infant feeding methods.
Malaysian participants with HIV described consistently receiving advice during prenatal and/or postpartum care from their healthcare providers to use only human milk substitutes to feed their babies.
Setting and Relevant Context
Malaysia is a multicultural country and, geographically, is divided into five regions: Central, North, South, East Peninsular Malaysia, and East Malaysia (the island of Borneo). According to the findings in the third national survey, the overall prevalence of ever-breastfed infants was 98.1%, while early initiation within 1 hr of birth was 65.3% (Institute for Public Health [IPH], 2016). The most recent data on estimated exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) in the first 6 months of life was 47.1% (Institute for Public Health [IPH], 2016).
Breastfeeding is not a formal practice among WLHIV in Malaysia. Thus, no data regarding the breastfeeding rate among WLHIV is available. Instead, the government subsidizes the supply of human milk substitutes (HMS) for the first 2 years of an infant’s life. The Ministry of Health also provides a free supply of first-line ART to all WLHIV from antenatal to postnatal care. Recently, Malaysia met the WHO’s HIV and syphilis eradication target in 2017 when the vertical transmission rate fell below 2% for the first time, and preventative coverage remained above 95% for at least 2 years. This achievement resulted in the WHO certifying Malaysia as the first country in the Western Pacific Region to eradicate the vertical transmission of HIV and congenital syphilis in 2018 (MOH, 2019).
Sample
All postnatal WLHIV who obtained care from the Ministry of Health Malaysia’s facilities between January 2018 (after the WHO validation exercise) and July 2021 were eligible to participate in the study. The recruitment of potential participants was carried out by community research supporters and health service providers using purposive sampling (Gill, 2020). For inclusion, respondents had to have internet access, had to be a Malaysian citizen 18 years of age or older, and speak fluently in Bahasa Malaysian or English. Participants were recruited from all states and regions of Malaysia to capture a broad perspective from diverse sociodemographic backgrounds, races, and ethnicities. Women who obtained care from the private healthcare system were not included as we did not have access to their data and were unable to approach them. There were 73 original participants who were interviewed either via one of six in-depth interviews or one of five focus group discussions. Saturation can influence the number of samples used in qualitative research. Thirty-two of the original participants were postnatal WLHIV, had experiences regarding infant feeding, and were included in this analysis. The research group concluded that no new data had emerged at the end of the analysis, and saturation had been reached.
Data Collection
Data collection took place from August to October 2021, using either in-depth interviews or focus group discussions, depending on the women’s preferences and the convenience of scheduling the sessions. Participation in the study was entirely voluntary and participants were informed that they could leave the study at any time without penalty. Informed consent was obtained before the data collection started. On the day of data collection, researchers reiterated that they were not affiliated with the Ministry of Health Malaysia and the participants gave verbal informed consent to participate in the interview or focus group discussion. Participants were solely identified by pseudonyms, and, in quotes, by their original participant number and the session in which they took part. Counseling was available in the event that participants became distressed as a result of an interview, although this was not needed during the course of the study.
All data collection sessions were conducted online, and only one session was scheduled per day. All focus group discussions were moderated by the corresponding author, while the interview was conducted by the second author. In all sessions, one community research supporter was present and helped to give the opening and closing remarks. Questions were rephrased if a participant did not understand them. No remarks or gestures were made by the researchers, as doing so could influence the responses of the participants. Sessions were recorded with the consent of all participants. In-depth interviews took approximately an hour, and focus group discussions, approximately 2 hours. Each participant received an honorarium as well as a personalized thank you e-card. Following each session, the moderator of the session led a discussion with members of the research team to reach a consensus on the general findings. Based on the question guide, a summary of responses was produced for each session. Any issues that arose were also noted so that they could be addressed in the next session.
Due to the pandemic and movement restrictions, all data collection sessions were conducted using an online meeting application. Community research supporters or the AIDS officers at each study site provided technological support to participants who did not have a smartphone or who required assistance to use the online meeting application. This new interface approach was advantageous to the participants as they could choose not to expose their identities by turning off the video and using pseudonyms to display their names and introduce themselves.
This community-based research model was built on an equal partnership between researchers and community members to validate evidence-based findings that were relevant to them (Dave et al., 2019). The community research supporters assisted with the recruitment of study participants, co-moderated data collection sessions, and provided their perspectives in analytical discussions. They were leaders of community-based organizations, providing peer counseling in the community to deliver and spread information about intervention and treatment programs by serving as liaisons between healthcare providers (HCP) and individuals living with HIV. The USM team was made up of experienced qualitative researchers. Community research supporters attended three workshops on qualitative research techniques conducted by the USM team. The methodology for this revalidation study has been fully described by Sulaiman et al. (2022) in their report on the assessment of the patient perspective on reproductive and sexual health and rights of WLHIV.
Study Tool
The interview and focus group guide (see the online Supplemental Material) was pilot tested in a focus group discussion involving five participants. The guide for interviews and focus group sessions consisted of the same open-ended primary and probing questions. Although the interview guide covered the participants’ postnatal experiences, this study focused solely on the challenges faced during participants’ infant feeding experiences. Questions on past experiences were necessary to foster a deeper discourse and understanding. The interview started with general inquiries, including “How did you find feeding your baby?” and “What was your experience with obtaining adequate information on how to feed your infant?” Based on the responses given by the participants, probing questions were asked to attain a deeper understanding, for instance, “What feeding options were available to feed your infant?” and “Were you provided with information, space, and time to consider your options for feeding?” Further probing questions were asked, if necessary, for example, “How do you feel about the support given to you in feeding your infant?”
The corresponding author is an International Board Certified Lactation Consultant (IBCLC) who is passionate and actively involved in advocating and promoting human milk. She found it regretful that women were not empowered to make decisions based on their understanding and preferences. However, as a qualitative researcher, she remained professional and ensured her preference did not influence the analysis by applying the bracketing technique, which is a qualitative research technique used to reduce the potential negative effects of assumptions on the research process (Tufford & Newman, 2012).
Data Analysis
The descriptive sociodemographic data for the 32 participants were tabulated using frequencies and percentages. The variables, namely age, race, year of HIV diagnosis, education level, occupation, marital status, and number of children, were categorized accordingly. All recordings from the sessions were transcribed verbatim by an experienced and dedicated transcriber. The transcripts were coded inductively and examined repeatedly through constant comparisons made independently by two research team members to identify appropriate themes. These themes were further reviewed by research team members who were experts in the field, to ensure credibility.
We performed a secondary analysis of the qualitative data, which is a process of reanalyzing previously gathered data (Chatfield, 2020). Thematic analysis was employed using Braun and Clarke’s guide through a six-phase process (Braun & Clarke, 2006). This process comprised (1) becoming familiar with the data by reading and re-reading transcripts to immerse ourselves and become intimately familiar with the content; (2) generating codes that identified important features of the data relevant to the research questions; (3) searching for themes by collating data relevant to each theme, working with the data, and reviewing the viability of each theme; (4) reviewing the themes and checking them against the dataset to determine if they answered the research questions; (5) defining and naming themes by using detailed analysis to come to a precise name for each theme; and (6) writing, to weave together the analytic narrative data extracts, and contextualizing them in relation to the existing literature. A discussion was then carried out with the research team to make sure that the data was properly interpreted before the team agreed on the general results. The data analysis structure is summarized in Table 1.
Data Analysis Structure Table.
Note. HMS = human-milk substitute; HCP = healthcare provider.
This study followed Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) constructs to ensure rigor and trustworthiness by addressing four criteria (credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability). We ensured credibility by (1) pilot testing the interview and focus group guide, (2) sending random transcripts of interviews to participants via email, and (3) research team triangulation through regular discussions during data analysis. The researchers read all transcripts, reached a consensus on the key findings, and took field notes for each session. We documented all aspects of the research process, including decisions made and the reasoning behind them. Sufficient fieldwork detail was provided to allow for transferability, and a thorough description of the methodology ensured dependability and duplicability. We additionally addressed validity and reliability through member checking, constant comparison, and having the coding checked by another team member.
Results
Characteristics of the Sample
The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 43 years. With the exception of one unmarried participant and one divorced participant, all other participants were married. Six participants (19%) had completed education higher than secondary school. Most women (75%, n = 24) were not employed outside of the home (data not shown). All participants had at least one child under the age of 2, with the youngest being 2 months old. The sociodemographic attributes of the study’s participants are presented in Table 2.
Characteristics of the Participants (n = 32).
Note. Education, missing = 7.
The three primary themes that emerged from studying the infant feeding experiences of postnatal WLHIV were: (i) human milk substitute (HMS) was the only option and was encouraged; (ii) feeding infants with HMS made the women feel incomplete as mothers; and (iii) WLHIV encountered difficulties in obtaining the subsidized HMS. Each primary theme comprised a few sub-themes.
Theme 1: Human Milk Substitute (HMS) Was the Only Option Offered and Was Encouraged
In general, infants can be fed with human milk, HMS, or a combination of both human milk and HMS. When discussing their current feeding methods, nearly all of the participants had been advised by the HCP to feed their infants with HMS. The HCP also explained to participants how to prepare HMS and the use of medication to prevent milk production.
Breast is bad
As early as during antenatal clinic follow-up visits, participants were counseled by the HCP to feed their infant with HMS. One participant said, “The specialist has already told me even since my pregnancy that I cannot breastfeed. . . . they have already explained everything” (Respondent 44, Session 14). We discovered that the explanations provided to the majority of participants were similar, and that the HCP thoroughly addressed the possible risk of viral transmission through human milk.
One narrative demonstrated how the possibility of viral transmission was a concern to the HCP. The participant said, “Yeah, [I] wasn’t allowed to breastfeed. . . . They [HCP] were afraid that if I were to breastfeed, the baby would get the infection” (Respondent 50, Session 16). Many women would only consider giving their child human milk if the doctor could confirm that there ws no risk of transmission. One participant stated, “If there truly are no risks, I would give human milk. If it’s 50/50, it’s better to give formula milk.” (Respondent 51, Session 16).
Unwillingly agreed to use HMS
The participants were reminded after they gave birth to only give HMS to their infants by the HCP. According to one respondent, “After delivering my child, they said again that [I] couldn’t breastfeed my child. . . . I couldn’t” (Respondent 60, Session 18). This reminder was emphasized to other participants, too. Another participant noted, “They’ve already said that I can’t breastfeed, I have to give formula milk. . . . They explained it after delivery; before delivery, too, they explained it as well” (Respondent 53, Session 16).
Not all participants accepted this advice. In many cases, the participants felt that they had no choice but to reluctantly agree, which made the participants feel disappointed. One participant said, “After that, I can’t breastfeed. At times, I felt quite sorrowful, because if I could, I wanted to breastfeed my child, you know” (Respondent 61, Session 19). One participant provided an interesting explanation for why human milk was discouraged in Malaysia, They said that Malaysia doesn’t approve of it, doesn’t approve of breastfeeding. [It is] not encouraged unless for countries with dirty water, like unsanitary water, like Africa, [where] even though the mother has HIV, it’s encouraged—encouraged to breastfeed. With this, yeah, with treatment that’s available, you know. If there’s compliance with all the medication, they allow it. But in Malaysia, it’s like not, not encouraged to breastfeed, and the government provides the formula milk. (Respondent 61, Session 19)
It is not so bad, after all, it’s quite convenient
Participants without any breastfeeding experience were more receptive to the idea of giving HMS to their infants. One participant stated, I’m not really picky between the two because the baby. . . . If I were to leave for work, it would be a bit tricky because it’s a bit tough to . . . leaving them is tough. If they are bottle-fed, when there is some work outside [for me], it would be easier like that. (Respondent 58, Session 17)
Another participant preferred to give mixed feedings, if allowed, as it would give her more flexibility when doing her chores. She said, “I would probably mix breastfeeding and formula; but, you know, for me, giving formulas is quite easy as well. So, like, I can sleep at night . . . so like alternating turns [care for the baby]” (Respondent 56, Session 17).
One participant was more receptive to the idea of providing HMS after she did her own reading. She was convinced that HMS was the best option for her infant, “because I did read and open some books about these things . . . so the doctor said . . . it’s okay, I said, rather than the baby being in pain, it’s better that I face it, I accept it” (Respondent 59, Session 17).
Suppression of lactation
In order to avoid breast engorgement after giving birth, lactation suppression medication was provided to many of the participants. One participant mentioned, “When in the ward after giving birth, they gave one pill . . . that pill was supposed to stop the production of human milk” (Respondent 43, Session 14). For many participants, two doses were sufficient to complete the suppression and prevent engorgement. However, not all postnatal participants were prescribed lactation suppression medication. There were a few instances where the participants needed to request lactation suppression medication because they experienced breast engorgement. One participant said, For the first birth, they automatically gave me medications to stop [milk production] after delivery. For the second delivery, I am not so sure if it was because of COVID or what, I believe they must already know, you know. . .. So when they didn’t give the medication . . . I requested it . . . because my breasts were already engorged at that time. It was very painful as I also did not get to prepare with a breast pump. (Respondent 5, Session P)
For those who were given the medication, not all of them found the medication effective. One respondent noted, “There was [when I had] my first child, I took it, and the milk didn’t come out. For this second [child], I took it, and the breasts became engorged. There really was a lot of milk that came out” (Respondent 51, Session 16). Some participants with previous birth experiences knew when they needed to express the milk. Such a situation occurred most frequently when participants did not receive the recommended dosage, and their breasts became engorged. According to one participant, It was supposed to be two tablets, but I said I only got it once . . . and now I did not get the second one. . . . So I told [them] that my breasts were already engorged and I was asking someone at home to send a breast pump . . . to express since using hands is not so effective . . . [it is] a bit hard to do, you know. (Respondent 5, Session P)
Explanation of the preparation of HMS
The HCP explained to the participants the correct technique to prepare HMS. The explanation took place before they were discharged, usually in the wards. The participants were satisfied with the explanation and thought the nurses were good at what they did. One of the participants stated, [They] taught [me] how to feed with formula milk, you know. . . . They demonstrated how to clean milk bottles, how to boil water, and so on. . . . The way they teach, they said that if you want to touch the baby, you have to first state your name to confirm it is the right baby. With my IC (identification card) and all they said. . . . Then, before touching the baby in the SCN ward, we wash our hands. It was an okay reception, all the services were good. . . . Yes, they insisted on hand washing before touching the baby . . . and each time after changing the baby’s diaper, I have to wash my hands again. . . . Don’t really want anything to . . . you know. (Respondent 70, Session 22)
Participants who had previous experiences were better prepared and brought feeding bottles to the hospital after learning that they would need to feed their babies with HMS. A respondent shared her conversation with an HCP, But I already brought a milk bottle. I already brought it. Oh, the bottle is in the ward. Oh, why didn’t you say so, go and take the milk bottle, it’s okay, I’ll teach you how to give the milk and all. (Respondent 71, Session 22)
Theme 2: Feeding Infants With HMS Made the Women Feel Incomplete as Mothers
We noticed that some participants had experience with breastfeeding their previous infants before they were diagnosed with HIV. However, some preferred HMS even before they were diagnosed with HIV.
Previous breastfeeding experience
There were participants who had experienced feeding human milk to their children before they were diagnosed with HIV. One of them said, “My first through seventh children were all breastfed before I had my eighth child” (Respondent 47, Session 15). If given a choice, those participants with previous breastfeeding experience would prefer to breastfeed their infants. One participant mentioned, “At the very least, human milk is beneficial to the baby, as well as to our own children” (Respondent 54, Session 16).
One participant was remorseful that she could no longer provide human milk for her infant; still, she tried to rationalize her situation, Because, after all, it’s human milk . . . a bit painful, but there are pros and cons. . . . I think one pro of bottle feeding is that when the baby is done, they throw it away and fall sleep hahaha [laughs] something like that. (Respondent 46 Session 14)
On the other hand, there was a case where a participant, unaware of her HIV status at the time, was upset that she had transmitted the virus to her child through breastfeeding. Moreover, she believed she could have avoided this if she did not breastfeed her child, After that, I can’t breastfeed. At the time, I was a bit upset, you know, because if we could, we want to . . . want to breastfeed our children. But umm, when I recalled my late child, I thought, perhaps his condition worsened because of the breastfeeding, you know. I only felt regret in that regard. The bonding between mother and child feels halted, but, as I said, if my fortune lies after this, it’s okay. For the sake of my child’s health, to prevent them from getting HIV, I understand why, you know, why I can’t breastfeed and all that. (Respondent 61, Session 19)
Expectation as a mother by society
Breastfeeding is a common practice in Malaysia. Generally, a woman is encouraged to initiate breastfeeding and maintain it as long as they are able to. A few participants had experienced being asked why they did not breastfeed their newborn. One respondent felt trapped and had to make up an excuse, “I was afraid to talk at first. I don’t know what to say, but I said I have asthma” (Respondent 52, Session 16). For others, they only gave a simple response, for instance, “Outsiders did ask why I don’t breastfeed. . . . I said I have no milk” (Respondent 50, Session 16). Most of the time, it was harder for the participants to explain it to their families or close friends. One respondent stated, There are some friends who are really close who like to ask things. They felt weird and asked why my breasts are not engorged? You don’t breastfeed? Then, when you say no, they looked as if they wanted to ask further, but they didn’t say it out [loud]. (Respondent 56, Session 17)
The same respondent was shocked when her sister-in-law suddenly took her infant and started to breastfeed when she said she had no milk, “I have a sister-in-law who offer her breast to my son. I’m angry. Why?” (Respondent 56 Session 17).
Provide human milk anyway
Participants were well aware of the benefits of breastfeeding for their infants. They found ways to ensure their infants got human milk even if they could not breastfeed their infants. In contrast to the priorly discussed experience, one participant’s husband asked her sister-in-law to feed her newborn. It was her husband’s wish that the newborn would get human milk. She said, My husband really hoped that our child can get human milk. But I said, I can’t breastfeed. We have to accept it. But then he asked my sister-in-law, she is the one who gives milk, she breastfeeds. Alhamdulillah [praise be to God], she is the wet nurse. (Respondent 65, Session 21)
Theme 3: The Difficulties Encountered in Obtaining the Subsidized HMS
The Ministry of Health Malaysia provides 2 years of HMS for babies born to WLHIV. The HMS supply must be collected at one of the designated healthcare facilities by the women. In the majority of cases, the supply is given on a monthly basis.
Difficulty in accessing HMS
In many cases, the participants had to claim the free supply at the healthcare facility nearest to their homes. One participant stated, “Since my child was discharged from the ward, until 6-month-old, [I] had to pick it up at the nursery, and then, after 6 months, they said [I have] to take it from a children’s clinic near a general hospital” (Respondent 43, Session 14). Similarly, another respondent said, The milk given by the hospital [is for]. . . 2 years. . . quite easy. . . . Every month they tell me to visit the health clinic. . . . They tell me to come and get [the formula milk]. When the milk runs out, just come over and take some. (Respondent 45, Session 14)
However, in certain circumstances, particularly owing to geographical restrictions, some women are required to travel long distances. This was not feasible for some participants. One participant mentioned, “They didn’t even give formula milk . . . because they said if I still wanted formula milk, I had to go to Tawau, and my child had to move to Tawau” (Respondent 2, Session P). Because the HMS product was occasionally out of stock, several participants had trouble obtaining it. However, with the assistance of a community organization member, the issue was resolved. One respondent revealed, I went, and they said the formula milk has not arrived yet. . . . When I went the next month, the milk still hasn’t arrived yet . . . so I said that for the next 3 to 4 months, we’d have to buy our own milk. . . . I called [a man], who is the person in charge of an NGO. He then called an HCP. They conversed, and, that evening, I immediately got my formula milk. (Respondent 50, Session 16)
Unsuitable HMS for infant
The provision of HMS is restricted to only a single brand (due to the contractual agreement of the service provider), with no substitute brands available if the babies suffer any ill effects. One participant stated, “My child now can’t drink that [formula brand] milk. So, I don’t take that milk because my child will get diarrhea” (Respondent 4, Session P). Another participant shared that her infant experienced very bad constipation that required medical assistance, My baby drank it, and his stool became very hard. He couldn’t defecate. And we had to, like, pick it out every day. After that, I brought my child to the hospital, stayed there for around 4 days, and they inserted some medication to remove all the stool. After that, I didn’t go to the health clinic to get any milk anymore. (Respondent 60, Session 18)
As a result, participants resorted to purchasing their own formula milk to be able to feed their babies.
If the participant needed another product or brand, they would have to purchase it. One participant said, My child was unsuitable at first [for this formula milk]. After that, I changed to [another brand], a bit more expensive, to give the child strength and higher calcium, so I changed milk. But the one that the clinic gave, I still give [to my child], alternatingly. (Respondent 42, Session 13)
Discussion
Our study found that all participants received similar advice from HCPs to provide HMS to their infants and young children due to fear of transmitting HIV through human milk. Some participants perceived that the ability to breastfeed was considerably more fulfilling, especially those who had previous breastfeeding experience before they were diagnosed with HIV. WLHIV reported feeling “incomplete as mothers” and guilty when feeding their children infant formula. These feelings indicated a desire to breastfeed, which can transform into a deep longing to fulfill their role as mothers. Although Ministry of Health Malaysia supplies HMS to all WLHIV’s offspring for the first 2 years, there were reports among our participants of difficulty in obtaining or accessing the HMS supply.
The majority of the respondents were on the ART given by their HCP in view of the safety of their infant, yet the reported HCP’s advice for WLHIV to provide HMS to their infants is not out of accordance with the policy of the Ministry of Health Malaysia (2017). The policy stresses that “breastfeeding is not recommended” due to the possibility of transmission being as high as 14% in some cases (MOH, 2017). None of the participants were aware that the policy on breastfeeding provides options for WLHIV. They trusted the HCP’s advice and did not question it openly, even if they did not completely agree with the advice to provide HMS to their children.
In South Africa, providing HMS was seen as a decision that benefited the child’s health and removed any risk of HIV vertical transmission (West et al., 2019). Since most countries practice EBF among WLHIV, previous qualitative studies have focused on factors that influenced decision-making in infant feeding. West et al. (2019) reported that WLHIV in South Africa were less likely to practice EBF due to the fear of vertical HIV transmission suggesting causes such as the inconsistent messages regarding infant feeding for WLHIV resulting from frequently changing guidelines, and the confusion around continued breastfeeding after the introduction of complementary foods at 6 months. Some WLHIV also had to create excuses to justify to family members why they were not breastfeeding, while those who chose to breastfeed cited the cost of formula as a driver for their decision (West et al., 2019). Despite receiving counseling and education on the low risk of HIV transmission through EBF, WLHIV still feared having to exclusively breastfeed as they did not trust the information they received from nurses (Modjadji et al., 2023). Our study supports the results described by Alvarenga et al. (2019), which explored the experience of WLHIV in replacing breastfeeding with infant formula. In the “social symbols of breastfeeding” theme, mothers viewed the inability to breastfeed as the most challenging aspect of caring for their HIV-exposed infants. Examining WLHIV’s opinions in Canada and the United Kingdom revealed similar experiences regarding their inability to breastfeed. The women felt as if they were not completing their responsibilities as mothers (Greene et al., 2015; Tariq et al., 2016).
In this study, participants who had previously breastfed another child spoke of the emotional effect of not being able to breastfeed. The belief that human milk is the best food for the baby and that breastfeeding “unites the mother more to the child” intensified the maternal suffering. In the “unavailability of the milk formula” theme, participants also spoke about the difficulty in acquiring the free milk supply and the need to buy infant formula due to the inaccessibility of the free supply. The purchase of infant formula represented a high financial cost and required the reallocation of the monthly family budget or the support of family members. In the “lack of support of health professionals” theme, WLHIV reported feeling helpless as the provision of free milk formula did not cater to children with lactose intolerance and that they were deprived of the resources to offer an alternative feeding due to the high cost. Similarly WLHIV in Brazil stated that they lacked professional counseling in the form of the preparation of milk formula (Alvarenga et al., 2019).
The 2010 WHO guidelines on HIV and infant feeding emphasized the importance of health services supporting WLHIV in their chosen feeding practices, even if these practices are inconsistent with nationally-mandated practices. This idea is still supported by the WHO and applies to the discussed new recommendations (WHO & UNICEF, 2016). Our study suggests that women living with HIV who would like to breastfeed would benefit from more comprehensive counseling on HIV treatment and adherence monitoring (in terms of EBF duration and weaning) and HIV treatment prophylaxis recommendations for infants (Sulaiman et al., 2022).
The study’s strengths, challenges, and biases
Online in-depth interviews and focus group discussions offered a distinct perspective and access to research participants, with both advantages and disadvantages. Using an online strategy, the study quickly recruited enough people from a large demographic and most participants were comfortable with this online format. This study’s participants had the option to be visible or stay anonymous during sessions by turning off their cameras, and this had benefits but also may have eliminated personal attention and body language clues that could help in evaluating data and responding to participants’ feelings. The researchers and participants were able to convene from the comfort of their own homes or other secure locations. This online approach to data collection saved the research team a substantial amount of energy, time, and money, while simultaneously engaging individuals from various geographic regions. The study team was able to address the limits of the COVID-19 pandemic without sacrificing the quality of research or the trustworthiness of the research findings, based on the comments of the participants (Sulaiman et al., 2022).
Limitations
This study was not able to gain the views of WLHIV who utilized private healthcare services which may differ from those of this study’s participants. The online format, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restricted movement orders, meant there were limitations to our ability to create rapport with the participants. To reduce this limitation, the community research supporters engaged with the participants and helped to build rapport.
The study employed an analytic expansion type of secondary qualitative research in which the researcher conducted a secondary interpretation of the existing data to answer new or extended questions. This meant that not all participants in the original study had information on the question being addressed. Those who did respond with information may have introduced response bias. Additionally, the researchers, being the study instrument may have caused bias in data interpretation.
Conclusion
While there have been changes in the written guidelines regarding infant feeding options from the Ministry of Health Malaysia, implementation of the updated guidelines is lagging behind the policies. WLHIV who wish to breastfeed are within their rights to do so, in line with the WHO guidelines. The discordance between the current practice and the evidence-based guidance negatively affects the stability of affected families. It would be of benefit to Malaysian families living with HIV to be able to breastfeed their infants safely with proper guidelines. The development of a module on how HCPs can effectively communicate information to WLHIV, particularly regarding infant feeding choices, would be beneficial. Pilot testing could be completed to assess the implementation and effect of the training sessions on the education given to WLHIV.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-jhl-10.1177_08903344231195580 – Supplemental material for Women’s Experiences of Infant Feeding Practices While Living With HIV in Malaysia: A Community-Based Qualitative Study
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-jhl-10.1177_08903344231195580 for Women’s Experiences of Infant Feeding Practices While Living With HIV in Malaysia: A Community-Based Qualitative Study by Sulaiman Z., Sukeri S., Hamid N. A. and Ibrahim S. A. in Journal of Human Lactation
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to everyone who took part in our interviews and offered their own experiences. The research team was helped by community research supporters, and Dr. Ye Yu Shwe (UNAIDS Regional Support Team, Asia and the Pacific) deserves special gratitude for his consistent technical assistance. Furthermore, we thank the Malaysian Ministry of Health’s cooperation and Universiti Sains Malaysia’s support in providing research facilities.
Authors’ Note
Due to participant confidentiality, the datasets collected and/or analyzed during the study are in Malay and are not publicly available; however, they are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.
Author Contributions
Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study has received financing and funding grant via the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (External Grant: 304 /PPSP /6150214 /T154).
Supplemental Material
Supplementary Material may be found in the “Supplemental Material” tab in the online version of this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
