A Pediatrician's Nightmare: Frequency of Use and Parental Perceived Efficacy of Non-Approved Infant Sleep Products

• Published in: Pediatrics (Evanston) 2019-08, Vol.144 (2_MeetingAbstract), p.1
• Main Authors: Milanaik, Ruth, Fruitman, Kate, Teperman, Carly, Sidhu, Sharnendra
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Demographics; Demography; Infants; Parents & parenting; Pediatrics; Polls & surveys; Sleep
• ISSN: 0031-4005; 1098-4275
• DOI: 10.1542/peds.144.2MA1.00k

Purpose: There is a wide variety of tools that parents have used to help their infants attain better sleep habits. Some of these tools, such as soothing music and pacifiers, are recommended by pediatricians. However, other devices, such as wedges and positioners, are not recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) as they do not meet safe-sleep guidelines.This study examines parental usage of sleep tools and assigns them to three categories: AAP recommended (AR), AAP not recommended (ANR), and AAP not reviewed (ANRV). Each device is then assessed for frequency of use, parental perceived efficacy, and helpfulness of pediatrician when consulted about this device. Methods: Sleep tool options were identified using those most recommended by popular baby websites, parenting blogs/magazines, and the AAP. An anonymous online survey was distributed via Amazon Mechanical Turk to parents of children aged 0-11 months (n=384). In addition to a demographics section, the questionnaire consisted of two parts. Part 1 had parents indicate their frequency of sleep tool usage (Never, Seldom, Sometimes, Most Times), perceived sleep tool efficacy, and location of sleep tool purchase. In Part 3, parents specified whether they discussed sleep tools with their child's pediatrician as well as indicated the level of his/her helpfulness. Results: Of the 384 survey participants, 376 responded to all questions. The mean age of our child sample was 6.4 months (SD = 2.8), with 80% of participants identifying as White and 10% identifying as Black. Table 1 identifies the frequency with which each tool was used and the parental perceived efficacy following use. There was no significant difference in the efficacy of AR and ANR products (chi square= .5915; p=.44). Of the tools investigated, music was the most utilized by participants (66.0%) and pacifiers were perceived to be efficacious by 92.82% of those who used them. Notably, 18.1% used ANR sleep positioners. In addition, 25.8% reported discussing sleep aids with their pediatrician, with 97% stating they were at least moderately helpful. Table 2 reports the locations where parents purchased their infant sleep products. Conclusion: Despite AAP recommendations for infant sleep aid devices, a worrying number of parents are using ANR or ANRV products. Given the lack of efficacy differences between ANR and AR devices, as well as potential safety concerns, pediatricians should discuss the use of AAP-approved sleep aid devices.