F MacVane Phipps
698 mothers and babies, 38 390 nappy changes : what did we learn?
MacVane Phipps, F; Price, Alan; Ackers-Johnson, J; Cook, PA; Clarke-Cornwell, AM; Lythgoe, J
Authors
Dr Alan Price A.D.Price3@salford.ac.uk
Lecturer in Psychology (Biological)
J Ackers-Johnson
Prof Penny Cook P.A.Cook@salford.ac.uk
PVC Research & Enterprise
Dr Alex Clarke-Cornwell A.M.Clarke-Cornwell@salford.ac.uk
Associate Professor/Reader
Mrs Jeanne Lythgoe J.Lythgoe@salford.ac.uk
Senior Lecturer
Abstract
Background Several industry funded studies between 2001–2018 have compared the use of a single brand of baby wipes to cleansing with water and either cloth or cotton wool during nappy changes. All of these studies found that wipes were safe and effective from birth. Recommendations from these studies have included the need for brand or formula comparison but to date, no previous study has done this. Aims The ‘Baby skin integrity comparison survey’ (BaSICS) study was designed to compare three brands of baby wipes to determine if there was any difference in the incidence of irritant diaper dermatitis (IDD or nappy rash) during the first eight weeks of life. Methods Mothers who were allocated to a single brand of nappy but divided into three baby wipe allocation groups, collected and reported survey data on infant skin integrity during one nappy change daily with the use of a user-friendly smartphone application. Findings All brands of wipes were acceptable to mothers and safe and effective when cleaning during nappy changes. The brand containing the fewest ingredients showed a clinically significant advantage of fewer incidents of rash than the other two brands. Conclusion This study demonstrated that wipe formulation is a significant factor in prevention or reduction of IDD during the first eight weeks of life.
Citation
MacVane Phipps, F., Price, A., Ackers-Johnson, J., Cook, P., Clarke-Cornwell, A., & Lythgoe, J. (2021). 698 mothers and babies, 38 390 nappy changes : what did we learn?. British Journal of Midwifery, 29(3), 150-157. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2021.29.3.150
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Acceptance Date | Jan 13, 2021 |
Publication Date | Mar 2, 2021 |
Deposit Date | Mar 15, 2021 |
Publicly Available Date | Mar 15, 2021 |
Journal | British Journal of Midwifery |
Print ISSN | 0969-4900 |
Electronic ISSN | 2052-4307 |
Publisher | MA Healthcare |
Volume | 29 |
Issue | 3 |
Pages | 150-157 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2021.29.3.150 |
Publisher URL | https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2021.29.3.150 |
Related Public URLs | https://www.magonlinelibrary.com/loi/bjom |
Additional Information | Additional Information : ** From Crossref journal articles via Jisc Publications Router **Journal IDs: pissn 0969-4900; eissn 2052-4307 **History: issued 02-03-2021; published 02-03-2021 |
Files
bjom.2021.29.3.150.pdf
(1.2 Mb)
PDF
Licence
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Publisher Licence URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
You might also like
Downloadable Citations
About USIR
Administrator e-mail: library-research@salford.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search