Staton Sally, Marriott Annette, Pattinson Cassandra, Smith Simon, Sinclair Dominique, Thorpe Karen
Centre for Children's Health Research, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, QLD, Australia.
School of Psychology and Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, QLD, Australia.
Sleep Health. 2016 Mar;2(1):30-34. doi: 10.1016/j.sleh.2015.12.005. Epub 2016 Jan 18.
The aim was to investigate whether the sleep practices in early childhood education (ECE) settings align with current evidence on optimal practice to support sleep.
Internationally, scheduled sleep times are a common feature of daily schedules in ECE settings, yet little is known about the degree to which care practices in these settings align with the evidence regarding appropriate support of sleep.
Observations were conducted in 130 Australian ECE rooms attended by preschool children (Mean=4.9years). Of these rooms, 118 had daily scheduled sleep times. Observed practices were scored against an optimality index, the Sleep Environment and Practices Optimality Score, developed with reference to current evidence regarding sleep scheduling, routines, environmental stimuli, and emotional climate. Cluster analysis was applied to identify patterns and prevalence of care practices in the sleep time.
Three sleep practices types were identified. Supportive rooms (36%) engaged in practices that maintained regular schedules, promoted routine, reduced environmental stimulation, and maintained positive emotional climate. The majority of ECE rooms (64%), although offering opportunity for sleep, did not engage in supportive practices: Ambivalent rooms (45%) were emotionally positive but did not support sleep; Unsupportive rooms (19%) were both emotionally negative and unsupportive in their practices.
Although ECE rooms schedule sleep time, many do not adopt practices that are supportive of sleep. Our results underscore the need for education about sleep supporting practice and research to ascertain the impact of sleep practices in ECE settings on children's sleep health and broader well-being.
本研究旨在调查幼儿教育（ECE）机构中的睡眠安排是否符合当前关于支持睡眠的最佳实践证据。
在国际上，固定睡眠时间是幼儿教育机构日常安排的一个常见特征，但对于这些机构中的护理实践与关于适当支持睡眠的证据相符程度，人们了解甚少。
对130间有学龄前儿童（平均年龄4.9岁）的澳大利亚幼儿教育教室进行了观察。在这些教室中，118间有每日固定睡眠时间。根据一个最优指数——睡眠环境与实践最优得分，对观察到的实践进行评分，该指数是参照当前关于睡眠安排、日常作息、环境刺激和情感氛围的证据制定的。应用聚类分析来确定睡眠时间护理实践的模式和普遍性。
确定了三种睡眠实践类型。支持性教室（36%）采取的实践包括保持固定时间表、促进日常作息、减少环境刺激以及保持积极的情感氛围。大多数幼儿教育教室（64%）虽然提供了睡眠机会，但没有采取支持性实践：矛盾型教室（45%）情感氛围积极，但不支持睡眠；非支持性教室（19%）情感氛围消极且实践上也不支持睡眠。
尽管幼儿教育教室安排了睡眠时间，但许多教室并未采取支持睡眠的实践。我们的研究结果强调了开展关于支持睡眠实践的教育以及进行研究以确定幼儿教育机构中的睡眠实践对儿童睡眠健康和更广泛幸福的影响的必要性。
