scholarly journals A Box to Put the Baby in: UK Parent Perceptions of Two Baby Box Programmes Promoted for Infant Sleep

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (21) ◽  
pp. 11473
Author(s):  
Helen L. Ball ◽  
Catherine E. Taylor ◽  
Cassandra M. Yuill
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Parent Perceptions ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Infant Sleep ◽  
New Mothers ◽  
Welfare Provision ◽  
Telephone Interviews ◽  
Box Scheme

Between 2016 and 2019, two different infant sleeping-box interventions were implemented in England: (1) shallow polypropylene baby boxes were distributed via a feasibility study to families with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) risk factors; and (2) a commercial–health system partnership scheme distributed cardboard baby boxes to new mothers in particular locations. We conducted parent evaluations of both interventions at the time of implementation. The views of 79 parents receiving polypropylene boxes and 77 parents receiving cardboard boxes were captured using online questionnaires and telephone interviews. Participants provided feedback on education received about using the box, their perception of the box design and materials, their experiences of using the box they received, and whether they would recommend it to others. Parents appreciated that both boxes provided a portable space to place their baby near them anywhere in the home, discouraging other riskier practices. The polypropylene box was rated more favourably regarding transparency, hygiene, and portability outside the home. A minority of parents found the idea of putting their baby in any box unappealing; however, younger mothers and smokers particularly appreciated the ability to safely co-sleep with their babies using the shallower box. Overall, the versatility of the polypropylene box scheme was more positively evaluated than the cardboard baby box scheme, which, stripped of its social value as part of a larger welfare provision, had minimal value for parents that received it.

Infant Sleep Position and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Risk: A Time For Change

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-107
Author(s):  
Carl E. Hunt
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Sleep Position ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Infant Sleep ◽  
Public Intervention ◽  
Infant Sleep Position ◽  
The Us ◽  
Epidemiological Risk ◽  
Health Objectives

I fully support a comprehensive professional and public intervention campaign in the US to establish supine as the standard sleep position. Although other preventive health objectives can be included, the emphasis needs to be clearly focused on sleep position. Achieving the lowest possible prone prevalence rate in the US is thus the first goal of this new campaign. The second and equally important goal of the new campaign should be to utilize this opportunity to maximum advantage to enhance our knowledge regarding the epidemiological risk factors causally related to SIDS and their interactions, and the interactions between epidemiological and biological risk factors. In addition to quantifying changes in infant mortality and in infant sleep position, we will also need to characterize both the supine and the persistent prone infant groups in regard to all of the putative epidemiological risk factors for SIDS. This campaign can thus enhance our understanding of the epidemiological risk factors for SIDS as long as a significant decrease in prone prevalence can be achieved.

scholarly journals An Approach to the Classification of Apparent Asphyxial Infant Deaths

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan W. Matshes ◽  
Emma O. Lew
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome ◽  
Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Death Certification ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Infant Deaths ◽  
Unexpected Infant Death

Recent evidence indicates that with thorough, high quality death investigations and autopsies, forensic pathologists have recognized that many unexpected infant deaths are, in fact, asphyxial in nature. With this recognition has come a commensurate decrease in, and in some cases, abolition of, the label “sudden infant death syndrome” (SIDS). Current controversies often pertain to how and why some infant deaths are determined to be asphyxial in nature and whether or not apparent asphyxial circumstances are risk factors for SIDS, or rather, harbingers of asphyxial deaths. In an effort to sidestep these controversies, some forensic pathologists elected to instead use the noncommittal label “sudden unexpected infant death” (SUID), leading to the unfortunate consequence of SUID – like SIDS – gaining notoriety as an actual disease that could be diagnosed, studied, and ultimately cured. Although it is not possible to provide death certification guidance for every conceivable type of unexpected infant death, we recognize and propose a simple classification system for overarching themes that cover the vast majority of cases where infants die suddenly and unexpectedly.

scholarly journals Infant—Parent Co-Sleeping in an Evolutionary Perspective: Implications for Understanding Infant Sleep Development and the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

SLEEP ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
James J. McKenna ◽  
Evelyn B. Thoman ◽  
Thomas F. Anders ◽  
Abraham Sadeh ◽  
Vicki L. Schechtman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome ◽  
Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Infant Sleep ◽  
Evolutionary Perspective

scholarly journals Genomic risk factors in sudden infant death syndrome

10.1186/gm207 ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (11) ◽  
pp. 86 ◽  
Author(s):  
David W Van Norstrand ◽  
Michael J Ackerman
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome ◽  
Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Genomic Risk

Risk Factors for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Following the Prevention Campaign in New Zealand: A Prospective Study

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 100 (5) ◽  
pp. 835-840 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. A. Mitchell ◽  
P. G. Tuohy ◽  
J. M. Brunt ◽  
J. M. D. Thompson ◽  
M. S. Clements ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome ◽  
Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Prevention Campaign ◽  
A Prospective Study

Sudden Unexpected Death of Two Infants in Baby Carriers

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Storz ◽  
Christof Dame ◽  
Anke Wendt ◽  
Alexander Gratopp ◽  
Christoph Bührer
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Infant Development ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Bottle Feeding ◽  
Sudden Unexpected Death ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Unexpected Death ◽  
Sleeping Position ◽  
Prone Sleeping Position

Sudden unexpected death in infancy (SUDI), previously termed sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), is the second leading cause of death in infants beyond the neonatal period in Germany, and a major cause of infant mortality in economically well developed countries (OECD Health Statistics, 2019). The risk of SUDI peaks at the age of 2–4 months and then decreases continuously till the end of the first year. A complex multifactorial cause, rather than a single characteristic factor, may cause SUDI within a critical period of infant development (Guntheroth WG et al., Pediatrics 2002; 110: e64–e64). Risk factors include prematurity, male gender, bottle-feeding, prone sleeping position, overheating, as well as exposure to smoke amongst others (Carpenter RG et al., Lancet 2004; 363: 185–191). Thus, health professionals consistently advise and educate parents about avoidable risk factors of SUDI at routine well-baby examinations. Since the advent of SUDI prevention strategies in the 1980s, the incidence has decreased 10fold, from 1,55/1.000 live births in 1991 to 0,15/1000 in 2015. This number seems to have reached a steady state (Statistisches Bundesamt Germany, 2015).

scholarly journals What risk factors for sudden infant death syndrome are preterm and term medically complex infants exposed to at home?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Mitchell ◽  
Daniel Y Wang ◽  
Christine Troskie ◽  
Lisa Loczy ◽  
Abby Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Respiratory Syncytial Virus ◽  
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome ◽  
Infant Death ◽  
Maternal Smoking ◽  
Sudden Infant Death ◽  
Sudden Infant ◽  
Term Infants ◽  
Medical Complexity ◽  
Syncytial Virus

Abstract Objectives Risk factors for sudden infant death syndrome include premature birth, maternal smoking, prone or side sleeping position, sleeping with blankets, sharing a sleeping surface with an adult, and sleeping without an adult in the room. In this study, we compare parents’ responses on sleep patterns in premature and term infants with medical complexity. Methods Parents of children enrolled in the Canadian Respiratory Syncytial Virus Evaluation Study of Palivizumab were phoned monthly regarding their child’s health status until the end of each respiratory syncytial virus season. Baseline data were obtained on patient demographics, medical history, and neonatal course. Responses on adherence to safe sleep recommendations were recorded as part of the assessment. Results A total of 2,526 preterms and 670 term infants with medical complexity were enrolled. Statistically significant differences were found in maternal smoking rates between the two groups: 13.3% (preterm); 9.3% (term) infants (χ 2=8.1, df=1, P=0.004) and with respect to toys in the crib: 12.3% (term) versus 5.8% preterms (χ 2=24.5, df=1, P<0.0005). Preterm infants were also significantly more likely to be placed prone to sleep (8.8%), compared with term infants (3.3%), (χ 2=18.1, df=1, P<0.0005). Conclusion All the infants in this study had frequent medical contacts. There is a greater prevalence of some risk factors for sudden infant death syndrome in preterm infants compared to term infants with medical complexity. Specific educational interventions for vulnerable infants may be necessary.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document