Parental Experience of Sleep-Disordered Breathing in Infants With Cleft Palate: Comparing Parental and Clinical Priorities

Does Sleep Position Influence Sleep-Disordered Breathing in Infants With Cleft Palate: A Feasibility Study?

OBJECTIVE

Cleft palate (CP) can affect breathing, leading to sleep-disordered breathing (SDB). Sleep position can affect SDB, but the optimum sleep position for infants with CP is unknown. We aimed to determine the design of a pragmatic study to investigate the effect of the 2 routinely advised sleep positions in infants with CP on oxygen saturations.

DESIGN

A multicentered observational cohort.

SETTING

Four UK-based cleft centers, 2 advising supine- and 2 side-lying sleep positions for infants with CP.

PARTICIPANTS

Infants with isolated CP born July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016. Of 48 eligible infants, 30 consented (17 side-lying; 13 supine).

INTERVENTIONS

Oxygen saturation (SpO2) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) home monitoring at age 1 and 3 months. Qualitative interviews of parents.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Willingness to participate, recruitment, retention, and acceptability/success (>90 minutes recording) of SpO2 and ETCO2 monitoring.

RESULTS

SpO2 recordings were obtained during 50 sleep sessions on 24 babies (13 side-lying) at 1 month (34 sessions >90 minutes) and 50 sessions on 19 babies (10 side-lying) at 3 months (27 sessions >90 minutes). The ETCO2 monitoring was only achieved in 12 sessions at 1 month and 6 at 3 months; only 1 was >90 minutes long. The ETCO2 monitoring was reported by the majority as unacceptable. Parents consistently reported the topic of sleep position in CP to be of importance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has demonstrated that it is feasible to perform domiciliary oxygen saturation studies in a research setting and has suggested that there may be a difference in the effects of sleep position that requires further investigation. We propose a study with randomization is indicated, comparing side-lying with supine-lying sleep position, representing an important step toward better understanding of SDB in infants with CP.

Study protocol for randomised clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of side-lying sleep positioning to back-lying at reducing oxygen desaturation resulting from obstructive sleep apnoea in infants with cleft palate (SLUMBRS2)

INTRODUCTION

The craniofacial abnormalities found in infants with cleft palate (CP) decrease their airway patency and increase their risk of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). We hypothesise that optimising sleep position in infants with CP may improve airway patency and offer a 'low-cost, high-impact' intervention to prevent the negative impacts of OSA. Because cleft centres give inconsistent advice about sleep position: some recommend back-lying and others side-lying, we will compare these in a randomised controlled trial.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The aim is to determine the clinical effectiveness of side-lying as compared with back-lying sleep positioning in terms of reducing oxygen desaturation resulting from OSA in 244 infants aged 3-5 weeks of age, diagnosed with an isolated CP in/by UK cleft centres. Primary outcome is the 4% Oxygen Desaturation Index measured using pulse oximetry during sleep.

RESEARCH PLAN

1. Multicentre randomised controlled trial of side-lying compared with back-lying sleep positioning in reducing oxygen desaturation resulting from OSA in infants with CP at one month of age. 2. Internal pilot questionnaire-based study to support parents and clinicians regarding study participation, seeking to identify and address any barriers to recruitment. Monitoring data from the internal pilot will be used in the final analysis. 3. Co-development of new UK recommendations with Cleft Lip and Palate Association (CLAPA) regarding sleep position for infants with CP.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has received the favourable opinion of the West Midlands-South Birmingham Research Ethics Committee. Study results will be published on affiliated webpages and in peer-reviewed publications and conference contributions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04478201.

Parental perceived child sleep problems: A concept analysis

PURPOSE

This paper aims to delineate a conceptual analysis of parental perceived child sleep problems.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Rodger's evolutionary approach to concept analysis was employed. A systematic literature search of PubMed, CINAHL, Medline, and PsycINFO was conducted from inception to June 2020. Peer-reviewed papers written in English focusing on parental perception of their children's sleep problems were included.

RESULTS

A total of 47 papers were included for analysis. Parental perceived child sleep problems can be defined as parental reliance on their observations and beliefs, and perceived locus of control to appraise an array of children's sleep-related signs and behaviors, which may contain bias but still reflects certain aspects of children's sleep health status. A wide range of physiological, psychosocial, familial, environmental, and cultural factors may contribute to parental perceived child sleep problems, which may further contribute to parent-child dyads' physical and mental health as well as the whole family's general wellness.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Defining the concept of parental perceived child sleep problems facilitate health professionals a foundation for consistent use, understanding, and evaluation of parent-reported child sleep outcome. Future research on the standard conceptual and operational definition of parental perceived child sleep problem, and its potential antecedents and consequences is warranted. The characteristic of parental perceived sleep problems, together with child sleep history and objective sleep measures should be integrated to evaluate child sleep health.

Outcome domains and outcome measures used in studies assessing the effectiveness of interventions to manage non-respiratory sleep disturbances in children with neurodisabilities: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether a core outcome set is required for studies evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for non-respiratory sleep disturbances in children with neurodisabilities.

DESIGN

Survey of outcome measures used in primary studies identified by a systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

ASSIA, CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, CINAHL, DARE, Embase, HMIC, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index, Social Care Online, Social Policy & Practice, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the UK Clinical Trials Gateway were searched up to February 2017.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies evaluating pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for children (≤18 years old) with a neurodisability and experiencing non-respiratory sleep disturbance.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Outcome measures were listed from each study and categorised into domains.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies assessed five core outcome areas: child sleep, other child outcomes, parent outcomes, adverse events and process measures. There were 54 different measures of child sleep across five domains: global measures; sleep initiation; maintenance; scheduling; and other outcomes. Fifteen non-pharmacological (58%) and four pharmacological studies (31%) reported child outcomes other than sleep using 29 different measures.One pharmacological and 14 non-pharmacological (54%) studies reported parent outcomes (17 different measures). Eleven melatonin studies (85%) recorded adverse events, with variation in how data were collected and reported. One non-pharmacological study reported an explicit method of collecting on adverse events. Several process measures were reported, related to adherence, feasibility of delivery, acceptability and experiences of receiving the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of consistency between studies in the outcome measures used to assess the effectiveness of interventions for non-respiratory sleep disturbances in children with neurodisabilities. A minimum core outcome set, with international consensus, should be developed in consultation with parents, children and young people, and those involved in supporting families.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016034067.