This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moon, R. Y.
Right arrow Articles by Biliter, W. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moon, R. Y.
Right arrow Articles by Biliter, W. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Premature & Newborn

PEDIATRICS Vol. 106 No. 3 September 2000, pp. 576-580

Infant Sleep Position Policies in Licensed Child Care Centers After Back to Sleep Campaign

Received Sep 21, 1999; accepted Dec 24, 1999.

Rachel Y. Moon*, Dagger and Wendy M. Biliter*, Dagger

From the * Department of General Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Children's National Medical Center and the Dagger  Department of Pediatrics, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC.

Background.  Since the Back to Sleep (BTS) campaign was initiated in 1994, the rate of prone sleeping has decreased to approximately 20%. However, child care centers may have an increased rate of prone sleeping in infants. In 1996, a study of licensed child care centers demonstrated that 43% were unaware of the association between sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and prone sleeping and that 49% positioned infants prone.

Objective.  To determine effectiveness of a mailing from the BTS campaign to licensed child care centers by assessing the following: 1) child care center awareness of the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics regarding infant sleep position and 2) implementation of the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics in child care center practice.

Design.  A descriptive, cross-sectional survey of licensed child care centers in the metropolitan Washington, DC, region. All licensed child care centers caring for infants <6 months old in Washington, DC, and Montgomery, Prince Georges, Howard, Anne Arundel, Frederick, and Charles Counties in Maryland were recruited for the study.

Results.  Out of 236 eligible centers, 172 completed the survey. Seventy-five percent (129) of the centers were aware of recommendations regarding infant sleep position. Infants were placed prone in 27.9% of centers, although only 2.9% placed infants exclusively in the prone position. The most common reasons for avoiding prone position entirely were SIDS risk reduction and licensing regulations. Half of the centers had a written policy regarding sleep position. Twenty centers who were aware of the dangers of prone sleeping continued to placed infants prone at least some of the time, largely because of parental request. Only 56.9% of centers had heard of the BTS campaign despite the mass mailing. The mailing resulted in policy change for 14 centers.

Conclusions.  Since 1996, the percentage of licensed child care centers in the greater Washington, DC, area that are aware of the association between SIDS and infant sleep position has increased from 57% to 75%. In addition, the rate of placing infants prone in these centers has declined from 49% in 1996 to 27.9% in this study. When child care centers are aware of the risk of prone sleeping, the most likely reason for continued prone placement is parental request. Although media and mailings have been largely effective in communicating BTS information to many child care centers, nonprone positioning is not universal among child care providers. Additional educational efforts toward child care providers and parents remain necessary.  Key words:  prone position, sleep position, sudden infant death syndrome, child care, intervention.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. Y. Moon, L. Kotch, and L. Aird
State Child Care Regulations Regarding Infant Sleep Environment Since the Healthy Child Care America-Back to Sleep Campaign
Pediatrics, July 1, 2006; 118(1): 73 - 83.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
Task Force on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
The Changing Concept of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Diagnostic Coding Shifts, Controversies Regarding the Sleeping Environment, and New Variables to Consider in Reducing Risk
Pediatrics, November 1, 2005; 116(5): 1245 - 1255.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. Y. Moon, B. M. Sprague, and K. M. Patel
Stable Prevalence but Changing Risk Factors for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in Child Care Settings in 2001
Pediatrics, October 1, 2005; 116(4): 972 - 977.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
Z.-C. Luo, W. J Kierans, R. Wilkins, R. M Liston, S.-H. Uh, M. S Kramer, and for the British Columbia Vital Statistics Agency
Infant mortality among First Nations versus non-First Nations in British Columbia: temporal trends in rural versus urban areas, 1981-2000
Int. J. Epidemiol., December 1, 2004; 33(6): 1252 - 1259.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. Y. Moon and R. P. Oden
Back to Sleep: Can We Influence Child Care Providers?
Pediatrics, October 1, 2003; 112(4): 878 - 882.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. Y. Moon, D. E. Weese-Mayer, and J. M. Silvestri
Nighttime Child Care: Inadequate Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Risk Factor Knowledge, Practice, and Policies
Pediatrics, April 1, 2003; 111(4): 795 - 799.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. Y. Moon, W. M. Biliter, and S. E. Croskell
Examination of State Regulations Regarding Infants and Sleep in Licensed Child Care Centers and Family Child Care Settings
Pediatrics, May 1, 2001; 107(5): 1029 - 1036.
[Abstract] [Full Text]