ArticleJournal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN2020
Clinician Opinions and Approaches to Manage Risk Related to Safe Sleep During Skin-to-Skin Care.
Article in Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of a Risk Management Framework to Parent Sleep During Skin-to-Skin Care in the NICU.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2022Article
- A clinical-academic partnership to develop a family management intervention for parents of preterm infants.Journal of clinical nursing · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo understand the opinions of clinicians about the risks, benefits, barriers, and facilitators to the practice of parent sleep during skin-to-skin care in hospital settings.
designCross-sectional survey.
settingOnline survey.
participantsClinicians who self-identified as infant care providers, that is, neonatal clinicians (N = 158).
methodsWe sent an online survey invitation to neonatal clinicians through neonatal websites, conferences, and social media sites in the United States and used snowball recruitment. We used a risk management framework to analyze qualitative data. We used descriptive statistics and the chi-square and Fisher's exact tests to determine if opinions differed based on clinician and organizational characteristics.
resultsRespondents' support of parent sleep during skin-to-skin care (yes/no) did not differ on the basis of whether the clinician had taken a formal course on skin-to-skin care, facilitated skin-to-skin care more than 100 times, or frequently promoted skin-to-skin care in current practice. Respondents who supported parent sleep (n = 93, 59% of respondents) reported greater implementation of risk control strategies than nonsupporters (n = 53 [57%] vs. n = 3 [5%]; p < .001), such as frequent monitoring of vital signs (n = 33 [35%] vs. n = 2 [3%]; p < .001), use of devices to support skin-to-skin care (n = 49 [53%] vs. n = 19 [29%]; p = .003), and proper positioning (n = 20 [22%] vs. n = 0 [0%]; p < .001). Nonsupporters more frequently reported that parent sleep during skin-to-skin care violates safe sleep recommendations, is habit forming for home, poses a fall risk, and jeopardizes the infant's airway.
conclusionMost respondents supported parent sleep during skin-to-skin care, but concerns regarding safety for the infant remained a barrier. The use of a risk management framework may help facilitate a systematic approach to improve the implementation of safe skin-to-skin practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.