H A Hein1, S F Pettit. 1. University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. herman-hein@uiowa.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In October 1998, when we surveyed nurses working in Iowa obstetric units about infant sleeping position in the hospital and recommendations for infant sleeping position at home, we learned that the side position was used frequently in the hospital and also was considered to be an acceptable alternative for sleeping position at home. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our present study was to determine why nurses continued to use and endorse the side sleeping position rather than the supine position. DESIGN: We surveyed all Iowa hospitals that had an obstetric service as of July 1999 to learn why the side position was used. RESULTS: All 94 hospitals with obstetric services responded to the survey and revealed that 2 major factors were considered when an infant was put to sleep on his/her side. The most frequent response was fear of aspiration (57 responses or 51.4%) and the second was adherence to a federal brochure that lists side sleeping as a reasonable alternative (38 responses or 34.2%). CONCLUSION: We conclude that the reasons reported for use of the side position in Iowa maternity hospitals do not justify its continuing use. We believe that information about the importance of placing an infant on his/her back to sleep and its superiority over placing an infant on his/her side to sleep is sufficient to warrant its availability in every maternity hospital. We speculate that if the infant sleeping position used in the hospital is not different from that taught to parents, there will be less parental confusion and greater adherence to infant positioning shown to reduce sudden infant death syndrome.
BACKGROUND: In October 1998, when we surveyed nurses working in Iowa obstetric units about infant sleeping position in the hospital and recommendations for infant sleeping position at home, we learned that the side position was used frequently in the hospital and also was considered to be an acceptable alternative for sleeping position at home. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our present study was to determine why nurses continued to use and endorse the side sleeping position rather than the supine position. DESIGN: We surveyed all Iowa hospitals that had an obstetric service as of July 1999 to learn why the side position was used. RESULTS: All 94 hospitals with obstetric services responded to the survey and revealed that 2 major factors were considered when an infant was put to sleep on his/her side. The most frequent response was fear of aspiration (57 responses or 51.4%) and the second was adherence to a federal brochure that lists side sleeping as a reasonable alternative (38 responses or 34.2%). CONCLUSION: We conclude that the reasons reported for use of the side position in Iowa maternity hospitals do not justify its continuing use. We believe that information about the importance of placing an infant on his/her back to sleep and its superiority over placing an infant on his/her side to sleep is sufficient to warrant its availability in every maternity hospital. We speculate that if the infant sleeping position used in the hospital is not different from that taught to parents, there will be less parental confusion and greater adherence to infant positioning shown to reduce sudden infant death syndrome.
Authors: Leo A van Vlimmeren; Paul J M Helders; Léon N A van Adrichem; Raoul H H Engelbert Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2004-02-17 Impact factor: 3.183