David Tipene-Leach1,2, Sally A Baddock3, Sheila M Williams4, Angeline Tangiora1, Raymond Jones1, Caroline McElnay5, Barry J Taylor1. 1. Department of Women's and Children's Health, and, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. 2. Faculty of Education, Humanities and Health Sciences, Eastern Institute of Technology, Napier, New Zealand. 3. School of Midwifery, Otago Polytechnic, Dunedin, New Zealand. 4. Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. 5. Population Health, Hawke's Bay District Health Board, Hastings, New Zealand.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to identify the potential risks and benefits of sleeping infants in a Pēpi-Pod distributed to families with high risk of sudden unexpected death in infancy compared to a bassinet. METHODS: Forty-five mostly indigenous Māori mothers who were referred by local health providers to receive a Pēpi-Pod were surveyed at recruitment, 1 and 3 months. A sleep study at 1 month included infrared video, oximetry and temperature measures. RESULTS: When compared with 89 historical bassinet controls, an intention-to-treat analysis of questionnaires showed no increase in direct bed sharing but demonstrated significantly less sharing of the maternal bedroom at both interviews, with the majority of those not sleeping in the maternal bedroom, actually sleeping in the living room. The 1 month 'as-used' analysis showed poorer maternal sleep quality. The 'as-used' analysis of video data (24 Pēpi-Pod and 113 bassinet infants) also showed no increase in direct bed sharing, head covering or prone/side sleep position. Differences in oxygen saturation were not significant, but heart rate was higher in the Pēpi-Pod infants by 8.37 bpm (95% confidence interval 4.40, 12.14). Time in the thermal comfort zone was not different between groups despite Pēpi-Pod infants being situated in significantly warmer rooms. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that most differences in infant risk behaviours in a Pēpi-Pod compared to a bassinet were small, with confidence intervals excluding meaningful differences. We noted poorer maternal sleep quality at 1 month. Higher infant heart rates in the Pēpi-Pod group may be related to higher room temperatures. The Pēpi-Pod appears physiologically safe but is associated with lower reported maternal sleep quality.
AIM: The aim of this study was to identify the potential risks and benefits of sleeping infants in a Pēpi-Pod distributed to families with high risk of sudden unexpected death in infancy compared to a bassinet. METHODS: Forty-five mostly indigenous Māori mothers who were referred by local health providers to receive a Pēpi-Pod were surveyed at recruitment, 1 and 3 months. A sleep study at 1 month included infrared video, oximetry and temperature measures. RESULTS: When compared with 89 historical bassinet controls, an intention-to-treat analysis of questionnaires showed no increase in direct bed sharing but demonstrated significantly less sharing of the maternal bedroom at both interviews, with the majority of those not sleeping in the maternal bedroom, actually sleeping in the living room. The 1 month 'as-used' analysis showed poorer maternal sleep quality. The 'as-used' analysis of video data (24 Pēpi-Pod and 113 bassinet infants) also showed no increase in direct bed sharing, head covering or prone/side sleep position. Differences in oxygen saturation were not significant, but heart rate was higher in the Pēpi-Pod infants by 8.37 bpm (95% confidence interval 4.40, 12.14). Time in the thermal comfort zone was not different between groups despite Pēpi-Pod infants being situated in significantly warmer rooms. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that most differences in infant risk behaviours in a Pēpi-Pod compared to a bassinet were small, with confidence intervals excluding meaningful differences. We noted poorer maternal sleep quality at 1 month. Higher infant heart rates in the Pēpi-Pod group may be related to higher room temperatures. The Pēpi-Pod appears physiologically safe but is associated with lower reported maternal sleep quality.
Authors: Wendy Middlemiss; Naomi C Brownstein; Miranda Leddy; Scott Nelson; Srikant Manchiraju; Joseph G Grzywacz Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 2.792