Cargando…
Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers
OBJECTIVE: Compare mothers’ reports of injuries for infants and toddlers sleeping with crib-bumpers/mesh-liners/no-barriers and reasons for these sleep environment choices. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of mothers subscribing to a parenting magazine and using crib bumpers (n = 224), mesh liners...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6823298/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31250240 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10995-019-02803-7 |
_version_ | 1783464499003523072 |
---|---|
author | Scheers, N. J. Dayton, Chauncey Batcher, Mary Thach, Bradley T. |
author_facet | Scheers, N. J. Dayton, Chauncey Batcher, Mary Thach, Bradley T. |
author_sort | Scheers, N. J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Compare mothers’ reports of injuries for infants and toddlers sleeping with crib-bumpers/mesh-liners/no-barriers and reasons for these sleep environment choices. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of mothers subscribing to a parenting magazine and using crib bumpers (n = 224), mesh liners (n = 262), and no barriers (n = 842). Analyses of four possible injuries (face-covered, climb-out/fall, slat-entrapment, hit-head) including multivariate logistic regression adjusted for missing data/demographics and Chi squared analyses of reasons for mothers’ choices. RESULTS: Maternal reports of finding infants/toddlers with face covered had 3.5 times higher adjusted odds (aOR) for crib bumper versus mesh liner use. Breathing difficulties and wedgings were reported for infants/toddlers using crib bumpers but not mesh liners. Climb-outs/falls showed no significant difference in aORs for crib bumpers versus no-barriers and mesh liners versus no barriers. Reports of slat-entrapment were less likely for mothers using crib bumpers and mesh liners than using no barrier (aOR = .28 and .32). Reports of hit-heads were less likely for crib bumpers vs no barrier (aOR = .38) with no significant difference between mesh liners versus no barrier use. Mothers using crib bumpers and mesh liners felt their choice prevented slat-entrapment (89%, 91%); 93.5% of crib bumper users felt their choice prevented hit-heads. Significantly more mesh liner than crib bumper users chose them because “There is no suffocation risk” (64.1% vs. 40.6%), while 83.6% of no-barrier users chose them because “I was concerned about suffocation risk.” CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Mothers appeared to be more concerned about preventing minor risks than suffocation. Understanding reasons for mothers’ use of barriers/no-barriers is important in tailoring counseling for mothers with infants/toddlers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10995-019-02803-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6823298 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68232982019-11-06 Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers Scheers, N. J. Dayton, Chauncey Batcher, Mary Thach, Bradley T. Matern Child Health J Article OBJECTIVE: Compare mothers’ reports of injuries for infants and toddlers sleeping with crib-bumpers/mesh-liners/no-barriers and reasons for these sleep environment choices. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of mothers subscribing to a parenting magazine and using crib bumpers (n = 224), mesh liners (n = 262), and no barriers (n = 842). Analyses of four possible injuries (face-covered, climb-out/fall, slat-entrapment, hit-head) including multivariate logistic regression adjusted for missing data/demographics and Chi squared analyses of reasons for mothers’ choices. RESULTS: Maternal reports of finding infants/toddlers with face covered had 3.5 times higher adjusted odds (aOR) for crib bumper versus mesh liner use. Breathing difficulties and wedgings were reported for infants/toddlers using crib bumpers but not mesh liners. Climb-outs/falls showed no significant difference in aORs for crib bumpers versus no-barriers and mesh liners versus no barriers. Reports of slat-entrapment were less likely for mothers using crib bumpers and mesh liners than using no barrier (aOR = .28 and .32). Reports of hit-heads were less likely for crib bumpers vs no barrier (aOR = .38) with no significant difference between mesh liners versus no barrier use. Mothers using crib bumpers and mesh liners felt their choice prevented slat-entrapment (89%, 91%); 93.5% of crib bumper users felt their choice prevented hit-heads. Significantly more mesh liner than crib bumper users chose them because “There is no suffocation risk” (64.1% vs. 40.6%), while 83.6% of no-barrier users chose them because “I was concerned about suffocation risk.” CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Mothers appeared to be more concerned about preventing minor risks than suffocation. Understanding reasons for mothers’ use of barriers/no-barriers is important in tailoring counseling for mothers with infants/toddlers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10995-019-02803-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2019-06-27 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6823298/ /pubmed/31250240 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10995-019-02803-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Article Scheers, N. J. Dayton, Chauncey Batcher, Mary Thach, Bradley T. Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers |
title | Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers |
title_full | Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers |
title_fullStr | Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers |
title_full_unstemmed | Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers |
title_short | Reports of Injury Risks and Reasons for Choice of Sleep Environments for Infants and Toddlers |
title_sort | reports of injury risks and reasons for choice of sleep environments for infants and toddlers |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6823298/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31250240 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10995-019-02803-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT scheersnj reportsofinjuryrisksandreasonsforchoiceofsleepenvironmentsforinfantsandtoddlers AT daytonchauncey reportsofinjuryrisksandreasonsforchoiceofsleepenvironmentsforinfantsandtoddlers AT batchermary reportsofinjuryrisksandreasonsforchoiceofsleepenvironmentsforinfantsandtoddlers AT thachbradleyt reportsofinjuryrisksandreasonsforchoiceofsleepenvironmentsforinfantsandtoddlers |