PEDIATRICS Vol. 99 No. 5 May 1997,
p. e12
Copyright ©1997 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
ELECTRONIC ARTICLE:
Infant Sleep Position Instruction and Parental Practice:
Comparison of a Private Pediatric Office and an Inner-city Clinic
Brenda J. Ray*,
Sharon C. Metcalf*,
Sofia M. Franco*, and
Charlene K. Mitchell*,
From the * Children and Youth Project, Department of Pediatrics,
University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky; and the
Department
of Internal Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ABBREVIATIONS
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
Objective. To determine infant sleep
instructions that hospital personnel in our community were giving to
parents and actual positions practiced after the April 15, 1992 American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation for nonprone positioning.
Design. Survey of mothers of infants
4 months of age
from November 1993 to March 1994 with follow-up survey of selected
birth hospitals.
Setting. A private practice (PP) serving predominantly
white middle- and upper-income children and a pediatric clinic (CY) serving inner-city predominantly African-American low-income children in Louisville, Kentucky.
Patients. Fifty infants from each practice site.
Outcome Measure. The sleep instructions given and
practiced, and other risk factors for sudden infant death syndrome
(SIDS).
Results. Nonprone sleeping instructions were received by
72% of the PP and only 48% of the CY parents, with 72% of the PP and
54% of the CY following the nonprone recommendations. Infants were
more likely to be in smoking households (60% vs 12%) from the CY
practice than the PP practice.
Conclusions. Our study showed that, despite having a
higher prevalence of SIDS risk factors, there was a greater delay in discontinuing prone positioning instructions in the hospital serving the CY infants. The evidence suggests that this population is as likely
as the PP group to follow medical advice given. infant sleep position, SIDS, sleep instruction.
INTRODUCTION
The sleep position of infants was most often viewed in the past as
a trivial aspect of infant care. It has recently received serious
attention because of the reported association of the prone sleeping
position with sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). In the United States
in the early 1990s, the prone position was most commonly used when
placing an infant down for sleep.1 However, as early
as 1985,2 the prone position has been challenged as "unsafe." In subsequent foreign studies, sleep position was
implicated as a risk factor for SIDS.3 Publicity that
discouraged the prone sleeping position in Australia, the Netherlands,
New Zealand, and Great Britain was associated with a decrease in the
incidence of SIDS ranging from 20% to >50%.4,9
The evidence of these reports was so persuasive that in 1992 the
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended the use of either the
supine or the lateral position for placing healthy infants down to
sleep.1 Two years after such a recommendation, the AAP Task
Force on Infant Positioning and SIDS noted that "although pediatricians have heard the recommendations, many children's physicians and allied health care workers are not actively recommending nonprone sleeping for their patients."17
In addition to the prone position, several studies have reported the
association of SIDS with infant hyperthermia,18
swaddling,23 and suffocation.23,24
Bedsharing25 and exposure to tobacco smoke26,27
have also been reported to increase the risk for SIDS. Our study was
undertaken primarily to determine the sleep positioning instructions
given by hospital personnel in our community and the actual positions
practiced by parents. Specifically we wanted to determine whether there
were differences in instructions and sleep habits between private
practice patients and the hospitals serving them, and our inner-city
indigent patients and their primary hospitals. We also wanted to screen
for the prevalence of other reported risk factors associated with SIDS.
METHODS
The study was conducted from November 1993 to March 1994 at two
sites: the Children and Youth Project (CY), a university-affiliated, inner-city pediatric clinic serving predominantly African-American low-income children, and a private pediatric office (PP) serving predominantly white children in the middle- and upper-economic strata.
Approval was obtained from the University of Louisville Human Studies
Committee, and informed consent was obtained from each parent. Healthy
infants
4 months of age at the time of their initial well-baby visits
were selected by convenience sampling to participate in the study.
Infants diagnosed with upper respiratory anomalies and gastroesophageal
reflux and those born prematurely with a history of respiratory
distress were excluded from the study. Parents were asked to complete a
sleep-habit survey developed by the investigators (Table
1) that consisted of multiple-choice questions and short
answers.
As follow-up to the data obtained at completion of the study, one of
the authors (S.C.M.) informally surveyed local area hospitals where the
majority of the study infants were born. The nursing supervisors for
the nursery areas were asked what instructions for sleep position were
given to parents before nursery discharge and what specific
recommendations were given regarding the use of blankets when placing
infants to sleep. Sleep recommendations were categorized as appropriate
instructions if the baby was to be placed on either the back or side;
as wrong or inappropriate if the prone position was included in the
instructions; or as having received no instructions.
2 analysis or Fisher's exact one-tailed test were
used to determine differences between the two group practices.
Significance was defined as a P value < .05.
RESULTS
Fifty infants from each site entered the study. Infants from the
PP were on average 43.8 (SD, 34.3) days old and CY infants were 25.3 (SD, 21.7) days old at study entry (P = .00007).
There were two refusals from parents at the PP and three from CY
parents.
The type of sleep instruction reportedly given by practice group is
shown in Fig 1. The AAP-recommended instructions were reportedly received by 72% (36/50) of the PP parents, as opposed to
only 48% (24/50) of the CY parents (P = .01).
Of the parents who reported receiving the recommended sleep position
instructions, 72% (26/36) of the PP and 54% (13/24) of the CY parents
reported their infants were sleeping in the recommended positions
(P = .15). No instructions were reportedly given
to 22% (11/50) of the PP and 24% (12/50) of the CY parents. Infants
were placed in the AAP-recommended positions in 73% (8/11) of the PP
and 33% (4/12) of the CY groups who received no instructions
(P = .06). An additional 6% (3/50) of the PP
and 28% (14/50) of the CY groups actually received instructions for
prone positioning (P = .003). None (0/3) of the
PP and 7% (1/14) of the CY groups who received inappropriate
instructions were sleeping in the recommended positions. Overall, 74%
(29/39) of the PP parents and 68% (26/38) of the CY parents followed
the sleep advice given.
Fig. 1.
Sleep instructions reportedly given by hospital
personnel for each study site. *PP indicates patients from a
predominantly white middle/upper income private practice.
CY
indicates predominantly inner-city, African-American, low-income
children from the Children and Youth Project clinic.
P = .01; §P = .003.
[View Larger Version of this Image (21K GIF file)]
A subsequent survey was conducted for four of the six local birth
hospitals that accounted for 89% (84/94) of the study infants. One
respondent from the PP and four from the CY group failed to indicate
the birth hospital, and one CY respondent indicated birth at a nonlocal
facility. The AAP recommendations had not been adopted by the hospital
serving 73% (33/45) of infants from the inner-city CY group, and of
these, 79% (26/33) were being placed in the prone position for sleep.
In contrast, two local hospitals accounting for 80% (39/49) of infants
from the PP and 22% (10/45) from the CY groups reported providing
instructions consistent with the AAP recommendations. Parents from
these two hospitals reported using correct sleep positions for 67%
(26/39) of PP infants and 60% (6/10) of CY infants.
Infants slept in the parents' bed when they first arrived home from
the birth hospital in 10% (5/50) of the PP group and 50% (25/50) of
the CY group (P = .001). At entry into the study
during the time of their initial well-infant visit, 2% (1/50) and 38% (19/50) of the PP and CY infants, respectively, continued to share their parents' bed for sleeping (P = .001). The
use of a waterbed was reported by 6% of PP and 4% of CY parents.
The reported association of SIDS with infant swaddling led us to
question the parents on whether instructions were received from
hospital personnel on the use of blankets in placing their infants to
sleep. Over two-thirds of parents from each group reported no such
instructions were received. Wrapping infants snugly when placing them
to sleep was reported by 70% (35/50) of PP and 40% (20/50) of CY
parents (P = .002).
Infants in the CY group were five times more likely to be in a smoking
household than were PP infants, with 60% (30/50) of CY infants in a
household with at least one smoker compared with 12% (6/50) of the PP
infants (P < .001). Furthermore, mothers of CY
infants were five times more likely to be smokers themselves, with 30%
(15/50) self-reporting cigarette use as compared with 6% (3/50) of the
mothers from the PP group (P = .002).
DISCUSSION
The results of our study show evidence of poor compliance with AAP
recommendations on sleep position by both health personnel and parents.
Two years after the AAP recommendations were issued, only 60% of all
the parents surveyed in our study reported receiving instructions
consistent with AAP recommendations. Among the inner-city, low-income
parents, less than one-half (48%) reported receiving such instructions
whereas nearly three-quarters of the private practice patients had been
appropriately instructed.
A study in the Seattle, Washington area examined the incidence of SIDS
before and 8 months after an editorial appeared in a local newspaper in
August 1991.28 The editorial recommended the avoidance
of the prone sleeping position for normal infants. The results of that
study suggested that the information given to the general public had an
effect on the actual practice of infant sleep position, with a
subsequent 52% decrease observed in the local SIDS rate.28
Surprisingly, we found that 73% of parents from the PP, but only 33%
from the CY group, who reported receiving no instructions were actually
practicing the recommended positions. Although this trend did not reach
statistical significance, it suggests that PP parents may have selected
the recommended sleep position by personal preference or may have
received information on sleep position from alternative sources such as
the news media or other family members. This difference highlights the
need for health professionals to focus educational efforts on basic
concepts to parents from lower socioeconomic levels as they seem less
likely to acquire the information from nonmedical sources.
We found smoking was reported five times more frequently in the CY
group than the PP group. If parents were trying to complete the survey
in a fashion to please the surveyors, we believe the report of smoking
prevalence would have been lower in this group. However, no formal
mechanism was undertaken to confirm whether the actual practice
conformed with the practices reported on the surveys. Age at first
visit might also be expected to influence recall of instructions given
and responses on the survey. Although we found a statistically
significant difference in ages at first visit, averaging 6 weeks for
the PP and 3 weeks for the CY infants, we doubt significant clinical
impact on recall for such a small age difference.
We found that respondents in the PP group more often followed the AAP
recommendations when they were given, as compared with the CY group,
but this difference was not significant. When data were analyzed
separately for the hospitals which had births from both populations,
adherence to appropriate sleep positioning was even more similar
between groups. Our study was not designed to evaluate the degree of
compliance with new recommendations between these types of populations,
and we cannot rule out a
error with respect to compliance.
Our phone survey of the birth hospitals revealed that the primary birth
hospital of the CY group had not adopted the AAP recommendation. Death
rates from SIDS are higher among African-American
infants,26 and with tobacco exposure,26,27 and
perhaps with bedsharing.25 Although we identified more risk
factors for SIDS in the CY group, this vulnerable group less often
received instruction for the recommended sleep positions. The primary
hospital serving these patients was among the last, rather than the
first, to implement the AAP recommendations. Not surprisingly, these
infants were more likely to be placed in a prone position for sleep
than the PP infants. However, our results imply that if inner-city,
low-income mothers are advised of the proper sleep position, they are
as likely to properly place their infants for sleep as those from middle-income practices.
Overheating caused by overwrapping infants with blankets has also been
identified as a risk factor for SIDS. In our study, the majority of the
parents in both groups received no hospital instruction regarding the
use of blankets. The PP parents were more likely to wrap their infants
snugly with blankets. This finding suggests a need for instructions on
appropriate use of blankets to be included in routine newborn care.
Our results reveal the need for all health personnel to educate
parents, particularly of neonates in high-risk populations, on proper
sleep practices. Although there has been improvement in following the
"Back to Sleep" advice of supine or lateral positioning, the
recommendation has recently been changed to exclusive supine positioning.29 Of interest, only seven infants in this
study were exclusively being placed in the supine position. Routinely incorporating sleep position into infant care instructions and newborn
admission orders may increase proper sleep practices by hospital
personnel and parents alike. Providing the AAP recommendations and
rationale for the supine sleeping position during prenatal visits may
result in earlier and better informed decisions on how parents will
place their infants to sleep. Well-infant visits provide additional
opportunities to reinforce the recommended sleep position.
Parents and health personnel must realize that a change in sleep
position, once considered a trivial aspect of baby care, can
potentially save lives. Although parents of infants from our inner-city, indigent, predominantly African-American practice were less
well informed, they did not appear to be less responsive to educational
intervention. Health professionals who serve similar high-risk
populations need to be more aggressive in implementing these
potentially life-saving recommendations.
FOOTNOTES
Received for publication Sep 3, 1996; accepted Jan 13, 1997.
Reprint requests to (B.J.R.) Children and Youth Project,
Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY
40292.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to express our appreciation to Susan S. Buehner,
MSN, RN, CPNP and Virginia O. Hunt, MSN, RN, CPNP of East
Louisville Pediatrics, who graciously obtained for us the private
practice data. We thank the Nursing Department at the Children and
Youth Project for all their support of the study and we also thank
Regina Uhl for excellent secretarial assistance.
ABBREVIATIONS
SIDS, sudden infant death syndrome.
AAP, American
Academy of Pediatrics.
CY, Children and Youth Project.
PP, private
practice.
REFERENCES
-
Positioning and
SIDS.
Pediatrics.
1992;
89:1120-1126[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Davies DP
Cot death in Hong Kong: a rare problem?
Lancet.
1985;
2:1346-1349 [Medline][Medline]
-
de Jonge GA,
Engleberts AC,
Koomen-Liefting AJM,
Kostense PJ
Cot death
and prone sleeping position in The Netherlands.
Br Med
J.
1989;
298:722
-
Guntheroth WG,
Spiers PS
Sleeping prone and the risk of sudden infant
death syndrome.
JAMA.
1992;
267:2359-2362 [Medline][Abstract]
-
Nelson EAS,
Taylor BJ,
Weatherall IL
Sleeping position and infant
bedding may predispose to hyperthermia and the sudden infant death
syndrome.
Lancet.
1989;
1:199-200[Medline]
-
Mitchell EA,
Scragg R,
Stewart AW,
Results from the first year
of the New Zealand cot death study.
N Z Med J.
1991;
104:71-76 [Medline][Medline]
-
Dwyer T,
Ponsonby AL,
Newman NM,
Gibbons LE
Prospective cohort study
of prone sleeping position and sudden infant death syndrome.
Lancet.
1991;
337:1244-1247 [Medline][CrossRef][Medline]
-
McGlashan ND. Sleeping position and SIDS. Lancet.
1988;2:106. Letter
-
Beal SM. Sudden infant death syndrome: epidemiological comparisons
between South Australia and communities with a different incidence.
Aust Paediatr J. 1986;22(suppl):13-16
-
Beal SM. Sleeping position and sudden infant death syndrome. Med
J Aust. 1988;149:562. Letter
-
Engelberts AC,
de Jonge GA
Choice of sleeping position for infants:
possible association with cot death.
Arch Dis Child.
1990;
65:462-467 [Medline][Medline]
-
Wigfield RE,
Fleming PJ,
Berry PJ,
Rudd PT,
Golding J
Can the fall in
Avon's sudden infant death rate be explained by changes in sleeping
position?
Br Med J.
1992;
304:282-283
-
Buckley R
Reducing the risk.
Nursing Times.
1993;
89:28-30[Medline]
-
Taylor BJ
A review of epidemiological studies of sudden infant death
syndrome in Southern New Zealand.
J Paediatr Child Health.
1991;
27:344-348 [Medline][Medline]
-
Engleberts AC,
de Jonge GA,
Kostense PJ
An analysis of trends in
incidence of sudden infant death in The Netherlands 1969-89.
J
Paediatr Child Health.
1991;
27:329-333[Medline]
-
Mitchell EA
Cot death: should the prone sleeping position be
discouraged?
J Paediatr Child Health.
1991;
27:319-321 [Medline][Medline]
-
AAP Task Force on Infant Positioning and SIDS. AAP reaffirms nonprone
sleeping position endorsement. AAP News. February 1994;10:9
-
Ponsonby AL,
Dwyer T,
Gibbons LE,
Cochrane JA,
Jones ME,
McCall MJ
Thermal environment and sudden death syndrome: case-control study.
Br Med J.
1992;
304:277-283
-
Fleming PJ,
Gilbert R,
Azaz Y,
Interaction between bedding and
sleeping position in the sudden infant death syndrome: a population
based case-control study.
Br Med J.
1990;
301:85-89
-
Tuffnell CS,
Petersen SA,
Wailoo MP
Prone sleeping infants have a
reduced ability to lose heat.
Early Hum Dev.
1995;
43:109-116 [Medline][CrossRef][Medline]
-
Nelson EAS,
Taylor BJ,
Weatherall IL
Sleeping position and infant
bedding may predispose to hyperthermia and the sudden infant death
syndrome.
Lancet.
1989;
1:199-200
-
Beal S,
Porter C
Sudden infant death syndrome related to climate.
Acta Paediatr Scand.
1991;
80:278-287 [Medline][Medline]
-
Ponsonby AL,
Dwyer T,
Gibbons LE,
Cochrane JA,
Wang YG
Factors
potentiating the risk of sudden infant death syndrome associated with
the prone position.
N Engl J Med.
1993;
329:377-381 [Medline][Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kemp JS,
Thach BT
Sudden death in infants sleeping on
polystyrene-filled cushions.
N Engl J Med.
1991;
324:1858-1864 [Medline][Abstract]
-
Mitchell EA, Taylor BJ, Ford RPK, et al. Four modifiable and other
major risk factors for cot death: the New Zealand study. J
Pediatr Child Health. 1992;28(suppl 1):S3-S8
-
Hoffman HJ,
Hillman LS
Epidemiology of the sudden infant death
syndrome: maternal, neonatal and postneonatal risk factors.
Clin
Perinatol.
1992;
19:717-737 [Medline][Medline]
-
Blair PS,
Fleming PJ,
Bensley D,
Smoking and the sudden infant
death syndrome: results from 1993-5 case-control study for
confidential inquiry into stillbirths and deaths in infancy.
Br
Med J.
1996;
313:195-198[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Spiers PS,
Guntheroth WG
Recommendations to avoid the prone sleeping
position and recent statistics for sudden infant death syndrome in the
United States.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.
1994;
148:141-146 [Medline][Abstract]
-
Positioning and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS): update.
Pediatrics.
1996;
98:1216-1218
[Abstract/Free Full Text]