Systematic review evaluates Torbangun's impact on breastfeeding outcomes, suggesting benefits for lactating mothers.
Introduction Torbangun ( Coleus amboinicus ) has traditionally been used by lactating mothers in Indonesia to increase breast milk production; however, the scientific evidence substantiating its effectiveness remains inconsistent. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Torbangun in promoting breastfeeding success through a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Method A comprehensive literature search was conducted in Google Scholar, PubMed, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, and JSTOR. Eligible studies were original human research articles published within the last 10 years that investigated the effects of Torbangun supplementation on breastfeeding outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. Meta‐analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 for comparable outcomes, and funnel plots were constructed to assess potential publication bias. Results Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, including cohort studies, quasi‐experimental studies, and one randomized controlled trial. Sample sizes ranged from 20 to 226 participants. Torbangun was administered in various dosage forms and compared with a placebo or no intervention. The meta‐analysis showed that infants in the Torbangun group experienced significantly greater weight gain than those in the control group (WMD = 0.11, 95% CI 0.07–0.16). Breast milk volume also increased significantly in the Torbangun group (WMD = 39.37, 95% CI 1.22–77.57). Substantial heterogeneity was observed among studies, and adverse events were rarely reported. Sensitivity analyses indicated that most pooled estimates were robust, except for infant weight gain in comparisons with no intervention. Conclusion Torbangun supplementation may support breastfeeding success, particularly by increasing breast milk volume. However, its effect on infant weight gain remains uncertain. The current evidence is limited by heterogeneity among studies, variability in dosage forms, and insufficient safety reporting. Further well‐designed studies are needed to confirm its efficacy and safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sayuti et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: