scholarly journals Infant Sleep Positioning Practices and Sids in Israel

1999 ◽  
Vol 45 ◽  
pp. 38A-38A
Author(s):  
Janice Wasser ◽  
Adaya Barkay ◽  
Alex Leventhal
Author(s):  
Sunah S. Hwang ◽  
Suhong Tong ◽  
Laura Pyle ◽  
Catherine Battaglia ◽  
Beth McManus ◽  
...  

Objective Investigate whether safe infant sleep prioritization by states through the Title V Maternal and Child Block Grant in 2010 differentially impacted maternal report of supine sleep positioning (SSP) for Non-Hispanic White (NHW) and Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) U.S.-born infants. Methods We analyzed retrospective cross-sectional data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) from 2005 to 2015 from 4 states: WV and OK (Intervention) and AR and UT (Control). PRAMS is a population-based surveillance system of maternal perinatal experiences which is linked to infant birth certificates. Piece-wise survey linear regression models were used to estimate the difference in the change in slopes of SSP percents in the pre- (2005–2009) and post- (2011–2015) periods, controlling for maternal and infant characteristics. Models were also stratified by race/ethnicity. Results From 2005 to 2015, for NHW infants, SSP improved from 61.5% and 70.2% to 82.8% and 82.3% for intervention and control states, respectively. For NHB infants, SSP improved from 30.6% and 26.5% to 64.5% and 53.1% for intervention and control states, respectively. After adjustment for maternal characteristics, there was no difference in the rate of SSP change from the pre- to post- intervention periods for either NHW or NHB infants in intervention or control groups. Conclusions and relevance Compared with control states that did not prioritize safe infant sleep in their 2010 Title V Block Grant needs assessment, intervention states experienced no difference in SSP improvement rates for NHW and NHB infants. While SSP increased for all infants during the study period, there was no causal relationship between states' prioritization of safe infant sleep and SSP improvement. More targeted approaches may be needed to reduce the racial/ethnic disparity in SSP and reduce the risk for sleep-associated infant death. Key Points


2008 ◽  
Vol 153 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-198.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christy M. McKinney ◽  
Victoria L. Holt ◽  
Michael L. Cunningham ◽  
Brian G. Leroux ◽  
Jacqueline R. Starr

2004 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny F. Stastny ◽  
Travers Y. Ichinose ◽  
Sharon D. Thayer ◽  
Robert J. Olson ◽  
Thomas G. Keens

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-105
Author(s):  
Susan R. Orenstein

Having attended both National Institutes of Health (NIH) meetings on infant sleep position (March 30 through 31, 1992, and January 13 through 14, 1994), and having publically expressed a minority view that the advantages of supine position in the United States might be outweighed by the disadvantages,1,2 I have been queried about whether my views have changed since the second NIH meeting. Most recently, Dr John Kattwinkel, of the American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Sleep Positioning and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), was kind enough to request my response to the report of the second meeting.3 This response is as follows.


2005 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 9-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Levy Raydo ◽  
Christine Reu-Donlon

The American Academy of Pediatrics first recommended in 1992 that infants be placed on their backs for sleep to reduce the risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Since that time, there has been a national drop in the incidence of SIDS of more than 40 percent. Unfortunately, many parents and other caregivers are still receiving inconsistent information and observing varying practices regarding infant sleep position.This article emphasizes the role of the health care professional in both teaching and modeling these potentially lifesaving practices consistently and unambiguously. Available literature is reviewed regarding attitudes and beliefs about infant sleep positioning, and specific concerns are addressed in order to allow for better tailoring of educational programs.


1999 ◽  
Vol 45 (4, Part 2 of 2) ◽  
pp. 107A-107A
Author(s):  
Bharath Srivatsa ◽  
Alvin N Eden ◽  
Mohammad A Mir

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G. Smith ◽  
Ji-Hong Liu ◽  
Kristen H. Helms ◽  
Kristin L. Wilkerson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document