The Contribution of Changes in the Prevalence of Prone Sleeping Position to the Decline in Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in Tasmania
To determine the independent contribution of changes in infant sleep position to the recent decline in sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) rate in Tasmania.
(1) A comparison of the whole population incidence of SIDS before and after an intervention to reduce the prevalence of prone sleeping position. (2) A within-cohort analysis of the contribution of sleep position and other exposures to the decline in SIDS after the intervention.
(1) All SIDS cases from 1975 through 1992. (2) A sample of one in five infants born in Tasmania who at perinatal assessment were scored to be at higher risk for SIDS since January 1988. Of 5534 infants included in the study, 39 later died of SIDS.
Multiple public health activities to reduce the prevalence of the prone infant sleeping position in Tasmania and verbal information on the association between prone position and SIDS to cohort participants from May 1, 1991.
Sudden infant death syndrome incidence.
The Tasmanian SIDS rate decreased (P < .01) from 3.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.5 to 4.2) deaths per 1000 live births from 1975 through 1990 to a rate of 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.2) deaths per 1000 live births in 1991 through 1992. The SIDS mortality rate in the cohort by period of birth was 7.6 (95% CI, 4.9 to 10.3) deaths per 1000 live births for those born from May 1, 1988, through April 30, 1991, and 4.1 (95% CI, 1.3 to 7.0) deaths per 1000 infants for those born from May 1, 1991, through October 31, 1992. The prevalence of usual prone sleeping position at 1 month of age was 29.9% and 4.3% in these two cohorts, respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.13). Logistic regression demonstrated that 70% of the SIDS rate reduction in the cohort could be accounted for by the decreased prevalence of the prone sleeping position. Other factors examined individually contributed to less than 10% of the SIDS rate reduction.
The major contributing factor to the recent SIDS rate decline in Tasmania has been the reduction in the proportion of infants usually sleeping prone.
Available from: Tomasina Stacey
- "In the late 1980s several studies demonstrated an increased risk of SIDS when infants slept prone [29-31]. Subsequently, mothers were advised to place their babies “Back to Sleep” which resulted in a dramatic reduction in SIDS [32-35]. Similar principles may be applicable to late stillbirth; certainly any effect in stillbirth is likely to require evaluation in similar population-based intervention studies to see an effect on perinatal mortality. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The United Kingdom has one of the highest rates of stillbirth in Europe, resulting in approximately 4,000 stillbirths every year. Potentially modifiable risk factors for late stillbirths are maternal age, obesity and smoking, but the population attributable risk associated with these risk factors is small.
Recently the Auckland Stillbirth Study reported that maternal sleep position was associated with late stillbirth. Women who did not sleep on their left side on the night before the death of the baby had double the risk compared with sleeping on other positions. The population attributable risk was 37%. This novel observation needs to be replicated or refuted.
Case control study of late singleton stillbirths without congenital abnormality. Controls are women with an ongoing singleton pregnancy, who are randomly selected from participating maternity units booking list of pregnant women, they are allocated a gestation for interview based on the distribution of gestations of stillbirths from the previous 4 years for the unit. The number of controls selected is proportional to the number of stillbirths that occurred at the hospital over the previous 4 years.
Data collection: Interviewer administered questionnaire and data extracted from medical records. Sample size: 415 cases and 830 controls. This takes into account a 30% non-participation rate, and will detect an OR of 1.5 with a significance level of 0.05 and power of 80% for variables with a prevalence of 57%, such as non-left sleeping position.
Statistical analysis: Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios and unconditional logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders.
The hypotheses to be tested here are important, biologically plausible and amenable to a public health intervention. Although this case–control study cannot prove causation, there is a striking parallel with research relating to sudden infant death syndrome, where case–control studies identified prone sleeping position as a major modifiable risk factor. Subsequently mothers were advised to sleep babies prone (“Back to Sleep” campaign), which resulted in a dramatic drop in SIDS. This study will provide robust evidence to help determine whether such a public health intervention should be considered.
Trial registration number
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 05/2014; 14(1):171. DOI:10.1186/1471-2393-14-171 · 2.19 Impact Factor
Available from: PubMed Central
- "This public health campaign encourages parents to place infants in a supine rather than prone sleeping position. Early studies investigating the effects of supine sleeping revealed significantly reduced SIDS rates , but smoking among mothers, which was not targeted as the primary intervention, remained unchanged. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Parental smoking and prone sleep positioning are recognized causal features of Sudden Infant Death. This study quantifies the relationship between prenatal smoking and infant death over the time period of the Back to Sleep campaign in the United States, which encouraged parents to use a supine sleeping position for infants.
This retrospective cohort study utilized the Colorado Birth Registry. All singleton, normal birth weight infants born from 1989 to 1998 were identified and linked to the Colorado Infant Death registry. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the relationship between outcomes of interest and prenatal maternal cigarette use. Potential confounders analyzed included infant gender, gestational age, and birth year as well as maternal marital status, ethnicity, pregnancy interval, age, education, and alcohol use.
We analyzed 488,918 birth records after excluding 5835 records with missing smoking status. Smokers were more likely to be single, non-Hispanic, less educated, and to report alcohol use while pregnant (p < 0.001). The study included 598 SIDS cases of which 172 occurred in smoke-exposed infants. Smoke exposed infants were 1.9 times (95% CI 1.6 to 2.3) more likely to die of SIDS. The attributed risk associating smoking and SIDS increased during the study period from approximately 50% to 80%. During the entire study period 59% (101/172) of SIDS deaths in smoke-exposed infants were attributed to maternal smoking.
Due to a decreased overall rate of SIDS likely due to changing infant sleep position, the attributed risk associating maternal smoking and SIDS has increased following the Back to Sleep campaign. Mothers should be informed of the 2-fold increased rate of SIDS associated with maternal cigarette consumption.
BMC Medicine 01/2005; 3(1):4. DOI:10.1186/1741-7015-3-4 · 7.25 Impact Factor
Available from: fmrp.usp.br
- "sos no inverno do que no verão. A raça negra parece ser mais suscetível do que a raça branca, seguida pelos hispânicos . Os asiáticos têm a menor taxa de incidência de SIDS (30) . A taxa de recorrência da SIDS na mesma família , segundo estudos publicados por GUNTHEROTH et al. (1990) (31) , é de treze (13) por mil (1.000) nascidos vivos. IRGENS et al. (1995) (32) apresentam taxa de recorrência de cinco (5) por mil (1.000) nascidos vivos. Em trabalho realizado em Adelaide, Austrália, a taxa de SIDS em gemelares que haviam perdido anteriormente o irmão por SIDS foi de 9,1/1.000 crianças gemelares, nascidas vivas (33) ."
12/1998; 31(4). DOI:10.11606/issn.2176-7262.v31i4p584-594
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.