Positional preference is frequently observed (8.2%) in The Netherlands. It leads to referral, additional diagnostics and, if necessary, treatment of almost 1 of every 3 affected children. Extrapolated to the original population in 1995, 2.4% of all children would still have a restricted range of motion and/or flattening of the skull at the age of 2 to 3 years. The high prevalence of positional preference in infancy, the persistency of accompanying signs, the large number of children referred for further diagnostic and/or treatment, and the resulting high medical expenses strongly call for a primary preventive approach.positional preference, deformational plagiocephaly, asymmetry, infants, population-based study.

Three determinants were associated with an increased risk of deformational plagiocephaly at birth: male gender, first-born birth rank, and brachycephaly. Eight factors were associated with an increased risk of deformational plagiocephaly at 7 weeks of age: male gender, first-born birth rank, positional preference when sleeping, head to the same side on chest of drawers, only bottle feeding, positioning to the same side during bottle feeding, tummy time when awake < 3 times per day, and slow achievement of motor milestones. This study supports the hypothesis that specific nursing habits, as well as motor development and positional preference, are primarily associated with the development of deformational plagiocephaly. Earlier achievement of motor milestones probably protects the child from developing deformational plagiocephaly. Implementation of practices based on this new evidence of preventing and diminishing deformational plagiocephaly in child health care centers is very important.

Swaddling was an almost universal child-care practice before the 18th century. It is still tradition in certain parts of the Middle East and is gaining popularity in the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Netherlands to curb excessive crying. We have systematically reviewed all articles on swaddling to evaluate its possible benefits and disadvantages. In general, swaddled infants arouse less and sleep longer. Preterm infants have shown improved neuromuscular development, less physiologic distress, better motor organization, and more self-regulatory ability when they are swaddled. When compared with massage, excessively crying infants cried less when swaddled, and swaddling can soothe pain in infants. It is supportive in cases of neonatal abstinence syndrome and infants with neonatal cerebral lesions. It can be helpful in regulating temperature but can also cause hyperthermia when misapplied. Another possible adverse effect is an increased risk of the development of hip dysplasia, which is related to swaddling with the legs in extension and adduction. Although swaddling promotes the favorable supine position, the combination of swaddling with prone position increases the risk of sudden infant death syndrome, which makes it necessary to warn parents to stop swaddling if infants attempt to turn. There is some evidence that there is a higher risk of respiratory infections related to the tightness of swaddling. Furthermore, swaddling does not influence rickets onset or bone properties. Swaddling immediately after birth can cause delayed postnatal weight gain under certain conditions, but does not seem to influence breastfeeding parameters.www.pediatrics.org/cgi

isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN84132771.

Objective To determine the effectiveness of helmet therapy for positional skull deformation compared with the natural course of the condition in infants aged 5-6 months.Design Pragmatic, single blinded, randomised controlled trial (HEADS, HElmet therapy Assessment in Deformed Skulls) nested in a prospective cohort study.Setting 29 paediatric physiotherapy practices; helmet therapy was administered at four specialised centres.Participants 84 infants aged 5 to 6 months with moderate to severe skull deformation, who were born after 36 weeks of gestation and had no muscular torticollis, craniosynostosis, or dysmorphic features. Participants were randomly assigned to helmet therapy (n=42) or to natural course of the condition (n=42) according to a randomisation plan with blocks of eight.Interventions Six months of helmet therapy compared with the natural course of skull deformation. In both trial arms parents were asked to avoid any (additional) treatment for the skull deformation. Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was change in skull shape from baseline to 24 months of age assessed using plagiocephalometry (anthropometric measurement instrument). Change scores for plagiocephaly (oblique diameter difference index) and brachycephaly (cranioproportional index) were each included in an analysis of covariance, using baseline values as the covariate. Secondary outcomes were ear deviation, facial asymmetry, occipital lift, and motor development in the infant, quality of life (infant and parent measures), and parental satisfaction and anxiety. Baseline measurements were performed in infants aged between 5 and 6 months, with follow-up measurements at 8, 12, and 24 months. Primary outcome assessment at 24 months was blinded. ResultsThe change score for both plagiocephaly and brachycephaly was equal between the helmet therapy and natural course groups, with a mean difference of −0.2 (95% confidence interval −1.6 to 1.2, P=0.80) and 0.2 (−1.7 to 2.2, P=0.81), respectively. Full recovery was achieved in 10 of 39 (26%) participants in the helmet therapy group and 9 of 40 (23%) participants in the natural course group (odds ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.4 to 3.3, P=0.74). All parents reported one or more side effects.Conclusions Based on the equal effectiveness of helmet therapy and skull deformation following its natural course, high prevalence of side effects, and high costs associated with helmet therapy, we discourage the use of a helmet as a standard treatment for healthy infants with moderate to severe skull deformation.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18473161.