1000/1000
Hot
Most Recent
Inconsistent conclusions from infant sleep and feeding studies may influence parents feeding-related decisions. Exclusively breastfed infants (≤6 months-of-age) had a greater number of night wakings, but most studies reported no difference in night-time and 24 h sleep duration compared to formula-fed infants. However, after 6 months-of-age, most studies reported breastfed infants to sleep less in the night-time and over 24 h compared to formula-fed infants. Furthermore, studies reported no association between the timing of introduction to complementary foods and infant sleep duration (<12 months-of-age).
24 h Sleep Duration | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Author, Year | Infant Age at Assessment/Assessment Frequency | ≤6 Months | >6 Months | 0–12 Months | Statistics 1 | Quality Rating 2 | |
EBF vs FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | ||||
Berger et al., 2017 [32] |
16 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SE (h) 12.95 ± 0.51 vs. 11.43 ± 0.53, p = 0.047 |
t-test | 6 | |||
Butte et al., 1992 [41] |
17 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 13.2 ± 2.3 vs.13.3 ± 0.9, p > 0.05 |
t-test Regression |
5 | |||
Figueiredo et al., 2017 [28] |
2, 13, 26 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 13.43 ± 2.34 vs. 12.29 ± 2.27, p > 0.05 13 weeks 13.05 ± 1.87 vs. 12.87 ± 2.44, p > 0.05 26 weeks 12.37 ± 1.76 vs. 12.79 ± 1.05, p > 0.05 |
BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 12.18 ± 3.02 vs. 12.29 ± 2.27, p > 0.05 13 weeks 12.41 ± 2.21 vs. 12.87 ± 2.44, p > 0.05 26 weeks 12.73 ± 1.48 vs. 12.79 ± 1.05, p > 0.05 |
Multivariate Analyses of Chi MANCOVA 3 | 5 | ||
Kaley et al., 2012 [26] |
4–10 weeks | BF vs. FF Total sleep not assoc. with feeding, p > 0.05 |
Correlation ANOVA |
4 | |||
Lee et al., 2000 [29] |
2–17 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (min) 902.4 ± 119.1 vs. 854.8 ± 130.7, p < 0.01 |
Unpaired t-test | 4 | |||
Quillin et al., 2004 [35] |
4 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 13.1 ± 1.4 vs. 14.4 ± 1.1, p = 0.006 |
t-test | 4 | |||
Tikotzky et al., 2011 [39] |
26 weeks | EBF vs. FF No assoc. between total sleep and EBF (r = 0.15, p > 0.05) |
Spearman rho correlations | 6 | |||
Nevarez et al., 2010 [23] |
26, 52 weeks 4 | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food Bivariate 26 weeks β = 0.05 (95%CI: −0.14 to 0.24), p > 0.05 Multivariate 26 weeks β = −0.15 (95%CI: −0.37 to 0.07), p > 0.05 |
BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food Bivariate 52 weeks β = 0.02 (95%CI: −0.17 to 0.20), p > 0.05 Multivariate 52 weeks is β = −0.17 (95%CI: −0.37 to 0.03), p > 0.05 |
Bivariate Multivariate linear regression 5 |
5 | ||
Heinig et al., 1993 [42] |
39 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food 24 h sleep at 39 weeks greater in FF compared to BF grps, p < 0.05 |
t-test | 4 | |||
Morgan et al., 2004 [30] |
39 weeks 4 | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food mean ± SE (h) 11.2 ± 0.1 vs. 11.4 ± 0.6, p = 0.01 6 |
ANCOVA 7 | 5 | |||
Huang et al., 2016 [36] |
0–34 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF 2.1% lower (30 min less) 24 h sleep % than FF, p = 0.0009 |
Multilevel mixed models | 4 | |||
Total Night-Time Sleep | |||||||
Author, Year | Infant Age at Assessment/Assessment Frequency | ≤6 Months | >6 Months | 0–12 Months | Statistics 1 | Quality Rating 2 | |
EBF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | ||||
Berger et al., 2017 [32] |
16 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SE (h) 9.50 ± 0.38 vs. 7.33 ± 0.39, p < 0.0001 |
t-test | 6 | |||
Butte et al., 1992 [41] |
17 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 8.2 ± 1.6 vs. 9.9 ± 1.4, p < 0.04 |
t-test Regression |
5 | |||
Figueiredo et al., 2017 [28] |
2, 13, 26 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 7.08 ± 1.33 vs. 6.34 ± 1.21, p > 0.05 13 weeks 8.06 ± 1.30 vs. 8.27 ± 1.35, p > 0.05 26 weeks 8.29 ± 1.36 vs. 8.29 ± 1.07, p > 0.05 |
BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 6.77 ± 1.55 vs. 6.34 ± 1.21, p > 0.05 13 weeks 8.12 ± 1.22 vs. 8.27 ± 1.35, p > 0.05 26 weeks 8.93 ± 1.21 vs. 8.29 ± 1.07, p > 0.05 |
Multivariate Analyses of Chi MANCOVA 3 | 5 | ||
Kaley et al., 2012 [26] |
4–10 weeks | BF vs. FF NTS duration not assoc. with feeding, p > 0.05 |
Correlation ANOVA |
4 | |||
Quillin et al., 1997 [34] |
4 weeks | BF vs. FF BF infants slept less at night than FF infants. F(1,39) = 4.925, p < 0.05 |
ANOVA-two-way analysis of variance | 3 | |||
Quillin et al., 2004 [35] |
4 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 6.4 ±1.0 vs. 6.4 ± 0.8, p > 0.05 |
t-test | 4 | |||
Rudzik et al., 2018 [38] |
4,6,8,10,12,14,16, 18 weeks | EBF vs. FF Actigraph report No difference between grps for NTS at 2, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 weeks, p > 0.05 |
t-test | 3 | |||
Yoshida et al., 2015 [33] |
13, 17 weeks | EBF vs. FF STN (6 h criterion): 33% vs. 67% |
Multiple linear regression | 5 | |||
Pennestri et al., 2018 [40] |
26, 52 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF infants less likely to STN at 26 weeks (χ2 = 26.67, p < 0.0001) using 6 h criterion BF infants less likely to STN at 6 months (χ2 = 31.19, p < 0.0001) using 8 h criterion |
BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF infants less likely to STN at 52 weeks (χ2 = 34.96, p < 0.0001) using 6 h criterion BF infants less likely to STN at 12 months (χ2 = 25.24, p < 0.0001) using 8 h criterion |
Chi-squared | 4 | ||
DeLeon et al., 2007 [25] |
39 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF −ve correlated with total NTS (r = −0.42, p < 0.01) | Pearson’s correlation coefficient | 4 | |||
Huang et al., 2016 [36] |
0–34 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food No assoc. between NTS %, p > 0.05 |
Multilevel mixed models | 4 | |||
Mindell et al., 2012 [17] |
13–52 weeks 4 | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food mean ± SD (h) 10.70 ± 1.03 vs. 10.30 ± 1.31, p = 0.146 |
MANCOVA | 6 | |||
Night-Waking Frequency | |||||||
Author, Year | Infant Age at Assessment/Assessment Frequency | ≤6 Months | >6 Months | 0–12 Months | Statistics 1 | Quality Rating 2 | |
EBF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | ||||
Berger et al., 2017 [32] |
16 weeks | BF vs. FF No difference in no. of NW, p > 0.05 |
t-test | 6 | |||
Butte et al., 1992 [41] |
17 weeks | BF vs. FF mean ± SD (no.) 2.9 ± 1.8 vs. 2.7 ± 2.0, p > 0.05 |
t-test Regression |
5 | |||
Figueiredo et al., 2017 [28] |
2, 13, 26 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (no.) 2 weeks 3.02 ± 0.83 vs. 2.96 ± 0.88, p > 0.05 13 weeks 2.19 ± 1.07 vs. 1.65 ± 1.17, p > 0.05 26 weeks 2.22 ± 1.01 vs. 1.53 ± 0.90, p < 0.01 |
BF vs. FF mean ± SD (no.) 2 weeks 2.63 ± 0.67 vs. 2.96 ± 0.88, p > 0.05 13 weeks 2.18 ± 1.36 vs. 1.65 ± 1.17, p > 0.05 26 weeks 1.73 ± 0.94 vs. 1.53 ± 0.90, p > 0.05 |
Multivariate Analyses of Chi MANCOVA 3 | 5 | ||
Kaley et al., 2012 [26] |
4–10 weeks | BF vs. FF BF woke more freq. than FF, p < 0.05 |
Correlation ANOVA |
4 | |||
Quillin et al., 1997 [34] |
4 weeks | BF vs. FF BF infants had more awakenings F(1,39) = 12.231, p < 0.01 |
ANOVA-two-way analysis of variance | 3 | |||
Quillin et al., 2004 [35] |
4 weeks | BF vs. FF Mean ± SD (no.) 8 2.2 ± 0.8 vs. 2.0 ± 0.9, p > 0.05 |
t-test | 4 | |||
Rudzik et al., 2018 [38] |
4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 weeks | EBF vs. FF Actigraphy report EBF has 2.1 less NW at 16 weeks, p = 0.05 No difference between grps for number of NW at 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18 weeks |
t-test | 3 | |||
Tikotzky et al., 2011 [39] |
26 weeks | EBF vs. FF EBF assoc. with more NW (Actigraph) (r = 0.32, p < 0.05) |
Spearman rho correlations | 6 | |||
Tikotzky et al., 2015 [37] |
26 weeks | EBF vs. FF Mean ± SD (no.) 9 2.53 ± 1.08 vs. 1.48 ± 0.96, p < 0.05 |
Spearman CC | 5 | |||
Wailoo et al., 1990 [31] |
13–17 weeks | BF vs. FF No difference in no. of NW, p > 0.05 |
t-test | 2 | |||
Brown et al., 2015 [19] |
26–52 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food No difference in total NW F(1711) = 0.931, p = 0.335 |
MANOVA 10 | 5 | |||
DeLeon et al., 2007 [25] |
39 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF +ve correlated with NW frequency (r = 0.48, p < 0.01) |
Pearson’s correlation coefficient | 4 | |||
Huang et al., 2016 [36] |
0–34 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF no diff as compared to FF for NW, p = 0.0700 |
Multilevel mixed models | 4 | |||
Mindell et al., 2012 [17] |
13–52 weeks 4 | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food mean ± SD (no.) 1.63 ± 1.24 vs. 0.94 ± 0.87, p = 0.003 |
MANCOVA | 6 | |||
Sun et al., 2018 [27] |
8–52 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food Freq. NW assoc. with BF (v = 0.18, p = 0.002) |
Chi-squared t-test |
||||
Duration of Night Wakings | |||||||
Author, Year | Infant Age at Assessment/ Assessment Frequency | ≤6 Months | >6 Months | 0–12 Months | Statistics 1 | Quality Rating 2 | |
EBF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | ||||
Figueiredo et al., 2017 [28] |
2, 13, 26 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 3.87 ± 1.13 vs. 4.38 ± 1.18, p > 0.05 13 weeks 3.03 ± 1.16 vs. 3.05 ± 1.20, p > 0.05 26 weeks 2.86 ± 1.01 vs. 2.87 ± 1.12, p > 0.05 |
BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 4.00 ± 1.11 vs. 4.38 ± 1.18, p > 0.05 13 weeks 3.00 ± 1.16 vs. 3.05 ± 1.20, p > 0.05 26 weeks 2.14 ± 0.90 vs. 2.87 ± 1.12, p > 0.05 |
Multivariate analyses of Chi MANCOVA 3 | 5 | ||
Yoshida et al., 2015 [33] |
13, 17 weeks | EBF vs. FF EBF +ve correlated with wake time at night, p < 0.01 |
Multiple linear regression | 5 | |||
DeLeon et al., 2007 [25] |
39 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food BF +ve correlated with duration of NW (r = 0.33, p < 0.05) |
Pearson’s correlation coefficient | 4 | |||
Longest Sleep Period | |||||||
Author, Year | Infant Age at Assessment/ Assessment Frequency | ≤6 Months | >6 Months | 0–12 Months | Statistics 1 | Quality Rating 2 | |
EBF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | ||||
Figueiredo et al., 2017 [28] | 2, 13, 26 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 3.04 ± 1.00 vs. 2.82 ± 0.90, p > 0.05 13 weeks 5.26 ± 2.15 vs. 6.50 ± 2.44, p < 0.05 26 weeks 5.38 ± 2.45 vs. 6.76 ± 1.96, p < 0.05 |
BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 3.38 ± 1.12 vs. 2.82 ± 0.90, p > 0.05 13 weeks 5.74 ± 2.31 vs. 6.50 ± 2.44, p > 0.05 26 weeks 6.98 ± 2.58 vs. 6.76 ± 1.96, p > 0.05 |
Multivariate analyses of Chi MANCOVA 3 | 5 | ||
Lee et al., 2000 [29] |
2–17 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (min) 11 239.9 ± 102.7 vs. 274.1 ± 105.3, p < 0.01 |
Unpaired t-test | 4 | |||
Rudzik et al., 2018 [38] |
4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 weeks | EBF vs. FF Actigraph report EBF has 55 min-longer LSP at 18 weeks, p = 0.04 No difference between grps for LSP at 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 weeks |
t-test | 3 | |||
Wailoo et al., 1990 [31] |
13–17 weeks | BF vs. FF BF infants more likely to disturb parents within 4 h (χ2 = 5.9, DF 3, p < 0.01) |
t-test | 2 | |||
Huang et al., 2016 [36] |
0–34 weeks | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food No assoc. between LSP p > 0.05 |
Multilevel mixed models | 4 | |||
Mindell et al., 2012 [17] |
13–52 weeks 4 | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food mean ± SD (h) 7.06 ± 2.73 vs. 7.85 ± 2.75, p = 0.249 |
MANCOVA | 6 | |||
Sleep Onset Latency | |||||||
Author, Year | Infant Age at Assessment/Assessment Frequency | ≤6 Months | >6 Months | 0–12 Months | Statistics 1 | Quality Rating 2 | |
EBF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | BF vs. FF 1 | ||||
Butte et al., 1992 [41] |
17 weeks | BF vs. FF EEG: mean ± SD (min) 34.3 ± 41.6 vs. 4.0 ± 12.6, p < 0.05 |
t-test Regression |
5 | |||
Figueiredo et al., 2017 [28] |
2, 13, 26 weeks | EBF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 0.33 ± 0.31 vs. 0.48 ± 0.40, p > 0.05 13 weeks 0.42 ± 0.45 vs. 0.42 ± 0.52, p > 0.05 26 weeks 0.39 ± 0.35 vs. 0.57 ± 0.72, p > 0.05 |
BF vs. FF mean ± SD (h) 2 weeks 0.56 ± 0.75 vs. 0.48 ± 0.40, p > 0.05 13 weeks 0.44 ± 0.41 vs. 0.42 ± 0.52, p > 0.05 26 weeks 0.51 ± 0.31 vs. 0.57 ± 0.72, p > 0.05 |
Multivariate analyses of Chi MANCOVA 3 | 5 | ||
Tikotzky et al., 2011 [39] |
26 weeks | EBF vs. FF EBF assoc. with later sleep onset (r = 0.32, p < 0.05) |
Spearman rho correlations | 6 | |||
Mindell et al., 2012 [17] |
13–52 weeks 4 | BF +/− food vs. FF +/− food mean ± SD (h) 0.23 ± 0.15 vs. 0.30 ± 0.53, p = 0.427 |
MANCOVA | 6 |