| Title |
Implementing a Statewide Safe to Sleep Hospital Initiative: Lessons Learned
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Community Health, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10900-018-0483-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Terri J. Miller, Trina C. Salm Ward, Marcie M. McClellan, Lisa Dawson, Kate Ford, Lauren Polatty, Rebecca L. Walcott, Phaedra S. Corso |
| Abstract |
Sleep-related infant deaths continue to be a major, largely preventable cause of infant mortality, especially in Georgia. The Georgia Department of Public Health (DPH), as part of a multi-pronged safe infant sleep campaign, implemented a hospital initiative to (1) provide accurate safe infant sleep information to hospital personnel; (2) support hospitals in implementing and modeling safe sleep practices; and (3) provide guidance on addressing caregiver safe sleep concerns. A process evaluation was conducted to determine progress toward four goals set out by DPH: (1) all birthing hospitals have a safe infant sleep policy; (2) all safe infant sleep policies reference the AAP 2011 recommendations; (3) all safe infant sleep policies specify the type and/or content of patient safe sleep education; and (4) all hospitals require regular staff training on safe sleep recommendations. Data were collected via structured interviews and document review of crib audit data and safe sleep policies. All 79 birthing hospitals in the state participated in the statewide campaign. Prior to the initiative, 44.3% of hospitals had a safe sleep policy in place; currently, 87.3% have a policy in place. The majority (91.4%) of hospitals have provided safe sleep training to their staff at this time. Important lessons include: (1) Engagement is vital to success; (2) A comprehensive implementation guide is critical; (3) Piloting the program provides opportunities for refinement; (4) Ongoing support addresses barriers; and (5) Senior leadership facilitates success. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 22% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 17% |
| Psychology | 7 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 15 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,493,741
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#875
of 1,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,127
of 330,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#17
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,228 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,329 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.