International Trends in Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and Other Sudden Unexpected Deaths in Infancy: Need for Better Diagnostic Standardization (original) (raw)
Related papers
2008
Avon SIDS epidemiology paper 18/11/2008 1 draft Acknowledgement. Abstract 249 words (limit 250 words) Background: Recent case-control studies suggest the epidemiology of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) may have changed since the 1991 'Back to Sleep' campaign and subsequent fall in rates. A unique collection of longitudinal data is used to measure these potential changes. Methods: Population-based data from home visits have been collected for 369 consecutive unexpected infant deaths (300 SIDS and 69 explained deaths) in Avon over a 20 -year period (1984-2003). Data collected between 1993-6 from 1300 control infants with a chosen sleep prior to interview has also been used for reference. Findings: Social deprivation was increasingly more common amongst SIDS families; the proportion of social class IV,V & unemployed families rose from 47% to 74% (p<0.003), 86% of the mothers smoke, 40% are now single, and 16% are aged less than 20. Although many SIDS infants come from large families, first-born infants are now the most common group. The proportion of co-sleeping SIDS deaths increased from 12% to 50% (p<0.0001), but the actual number of SIDS deaths in the parental bed fell significantly (p=0.01). This rise in proportion is due partly to the limited effect of the "Back to Sleep" campaign on factors in this sleeping environment and partly to a rise in the number of bedsharing deaths on sofas. Infants who die as SIDS whilst bedsharing are now 4-5 weeks younger at death than in the 1980's. Interpretation: Changes in the epidemiology of SIDS have implications both in the interpretation of causal mechanisms and how we should conduct future studies. Avon SIDS epidemiology paper 18/11/2008 3 draft 1 Daltveit AK, Oyen N, Skjaerven R, Irgens. The epidemic of SIDS in Norway 1967-93: changing effects of risk factors.
The Lancet, 2006
Avon SIDS epidemiology paper 18/11/2008 1 draft Acknowledgement. Abstract 249 words (limit 250 words) Background: Recent case-control studies suggest the epidemiology of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) may have changed since the 1991 'Back to Sleep' campaign and subsequent fall in rates. A unique collection of longitudinal data is used to measure these potential changes. Methods: Population-based data from home visits have been collected for 369 consecutive unexpected infant deaths (300 SIDS and 69 explained deaths) in Avon over a 20 -year period (1984-2003). Data collected between 1993-6 from 1300 control infants with a chosen sleep prior to interview has also been used for reference. Findings: Social deprivation was increasingly more common amongst SIDS families; the proportion of social class IV,V & unemployed families rose from 47% to 74% (p<0.003), 86% of the mothers smoke, 40% are now single, and 16% are aged less than 20. Although many SIDS infants come from large families, first-born infants are now the most common group. The proportion of co-sleeping SIDS deaths increased from 12% to 50% (p<0.0001), but the actual number of SIDS deaths in the parental bed fell significantly (p=0.01). This rise in proportion is due partly to the limited effect of the "Back to Sleep" campaign on factors in this sleeping environment and partly to a rise in the number of bedsharing deaths on sofas. Infants who die as SIDS whilst bedsharing are now 4-5 weeks younger at death than in the 1980's. Interpretation: Changes in the epidemiology of SIDS have implications both in the interpretation of causal mechanisms and how we should conduct future studies. Avon SIDS epidemiology paper 18/11/2008 3 draft 1 Daltveit AK, Oyen N, Skjaerven R, Irgens. The epidemic of SIDS in Norway 1967-93: changing effects of risk factors.
Epidemiology of SIDS and Explained Sudden Infant Deaths
2009
ABSTRACT. Objectives. To establish whether epide- miologic characteristics for sudden infant death syn- drome (SIDS) have changed since the decrease in death rate after the “Back to Sleep” campaign in 1991, and to compare these characteristics with sudden and unex- pected deaths in infancy (SUDI) from explained causes. Design. Three-year, population-based, case-control study. Parental interviews were conducted soon after the
Identification of Risk Factors and the Preventive Measures for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)
https://www.ijrrjournal.com/IJRR\_Vol.5\_Issue.11\_Nov2018/Abstract\_IJRR0016.html, 2018
Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) also known as crib death is a diagnosis that is made when an apparently healthy baby dies unexpectedly and for no clear reason. Deaths that remain unexplained even after thorough investigation, autopsy, and clinical history are classified as SIDS. An average of 133 babies have died each year over the past five years in cases where co-sleeping is a factor, according to Department for Education data. It revealed 141 children died while co-sleeping in 2017, compared with 131 in 2016, 121 in 2015, 141 in 2014 and 131 in 2013. Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) occurs less frequently in the first month of life, peaks between 2 and 4 months of age, and decreases thereafter. Prone sleeping (placing an infant to sleep on his/her stomach), bed sharing, parents not sleeping in the same room as the infant, an infant not using a pacifier during sleep, overheating, and maternal smoking during pregnancy have been suggested as contributing factors for SIDS. There is no guaranteed way to prevent SIDS, but you can help your baby sleep more safely by following certain preventive measures. In this article we focus on the identification of risk factors for SIDS based on triple risk model and prevention of risk factors for SIDS. Mothers and family members should be aware of the prevention methods for SIDS. This review is beneficial to all medical practitioners as well as mothers and family members with a newborn.
Classification of sleep‐related sudden unexpected death in infancy: A national survey
Acta Paediatrica, 2020
To identify how British Child Death Overview Panels (CDOP) and paediatric pathologists classify cause of death for sleep-related Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI). To determine compliance with national requirements for SUDI investigation. Methods Electronic survey of CDOPs and pathologists using three vignettes of SUDI cases illustrating: accidental asphyxia, typical Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and SIDS with co-sleeping. Results 38(41%) of 92 CDOPs returned questionnaires, 32 were complete. 13(14%) of 90 pathologists returned complete questionnaires. 31(97%) CDOPs and 7(53%) pathologists agreed with the cause of death in the accidental asphyxia case; 24(75%) CDOPs and 9(69%) pathologists in the typical SIDS case; and 11(34%) CDOPs and 1(8%) pathologist in the co-sleeping SIDS case. Pathologists used the terms SUDI or unascertained as the cause of death for the accidental asphyxia case (46%) and the co-sleeping SIDS case (77%). These terms were used by CDOPs for the typical SIDS case (25%) and the co-sleeping SIDS case (41%). 17(46%) CDOPs reported compliance with guidelines for investigation in more than 75% of cases. Conclusion There is wide variation in classification of deaths, with only limited agreement between CDOPs and pathologists. The terms SIDS and accidental asphyxia are underused, even in typical cases. (199 words) CDOP Child Death Overview Panels SIDS Sudden Infant Death Syndrome SUDI Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy Key Notes Child Death Overview Panels and paediatric pathologists differ widely in their classification of causes of death in Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy. Child Death Overview Panels are more likely to classify deaths are due to accidental asphyxia than paediatric pathologists. Less than half of Child Death Overview Panels reported that local investigation of unexpected infant deaths was compliant with national guidance.
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Risk Factors and Newer Risk Reduction Strategies
Cureus
Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) continues to be one of the top causes of infant death in the U.S. Despite significant public health initiatives focused on high-risk populations to enhance sleep environments and techniques. The SIDS rate has remained stable in recent years. Risk factors and newer risk reduction strategies for SIDS are the focus of this review article. We conducted a comprehensive literature search on Medline, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar until July 2022. The following search strings and Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms were used: "SIDS," "Sudden Infant Death" and "SUID". We explored the literature on SIDS for its epidemiology, pathophysiology, the role of various etiologies and their influence, associated complications leading to SIDS, and preventive and treatment modalities. Despite a more than 50% drop-in rates since the start of the "Back to Sleep" campaign in 1994, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) continues to be the top cause of post-neonatal mortality in the United States, despite continued educational initiatives that support safe sleep and other risk reduction strategies. The new American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines for lowering the risk of SIDS include a lot of emphasis on sleeping habits, bedding, and environment but also include elements that are frequently ignored (i.e., prenatal care, smoking, alcohol and drug use, and childhood vaccinations). This study highlights these less-frequently discussed aspects and identifies treatments that have produced beneficial behavioral shifts that benefit newborns as well as their mothers' health and wellbeing.
Pediatrics, 2005
There has been a major decrease in the incidence of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) since the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) released its recommendation in 1992 that infants be placed down for sleep in a nonprone position. Although the SIDS rate continues to fall, some of the recent decrease of the last several years may be a result of coding shifts to other causes of unexpected infant deaths. Since the AAP published its last statement on SIDS in 2000, several issues have become relevant, including the significant risk of side sleeping position; the AAP no longer recognizes side sleeping as a reasonable alternative to fully supine sleeping. The AAP also stresses the need to avoid redundant soft bedding and soft objects in the infant's sleeping environment, the hazards of adults sleeping with an infant in the same bed, the SIDS risk reduction associated with having infants sleep in the same room as adults and with using pacifiers at the time of sleep, the importance of ...