Releases Saturday 4 December 1999
No 7223 Volume 319

Please remember to credit the BMJ as source when publicising an
article and to tell your readers that they can read its full text on the
journal's web site (http://www.bmj.com).

If your story is posted on a website please include a link back to
the source BMJ article (URL's are given under titles).


(1) NEW QUESTIONNAIRE HELPS IDENTIFY EATING
DISORDERS IN WOMEN

(2) IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES PARENTS SHOULD
AVOID SHARING A BED WITH THEIR BABY

(3) LOW LEVELS OF RUBELLA IMMUNISATION
AMONG YOUNG CHILDREN MAY INCREASE THE
RISK OF CONGENITAL RUBELLA IN BABIES



(1) NEW QUESTIONNAIRE HELPS IDENTIFY EATING
DISORDERS IN WOMEN

(The SCOFF questionnaire: assessment of a new screening
tool for eating disorders)
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7223/1467

A team of researchers have designed a questionnaire to help
detect eating disorders in women. Dr John Morgan et al from
St George's Hospital Medical School report that the five
questions they have devised are simple, memorable and easy
to apply and they say that there is sufficient evidence to
suggest that it be used routinely in all patients considered at
risk of eating disorders.

The questions are:-

• Do you make yourself Sick because you feel uncomfortably full?
• Do you worry you have lost Control over how much you eat?
• Have you recently lost more than One stone in a three month period?
• Do you believe yourself to be Fat when others say you are too thin?
• Would you say that Food dominates your life?

The questionnaire was evaluated on 116 women aged 18-40
years who were confirmed as having either anorexia or
bulimia and also in 96 women who were confirmed as not
having an eating disorder. The authors say that all participants
found the questions and the term "SCOFF" acceptable.

Morgan et al suggest that two or more positive answers to all
five questions denote a possible case of an eating disorder.
They found that the questionnaire picked up 100 per cent of
the anorexia and bulimia cases, but also had a false positive
rate of 12.5 per cent, which the authors say is an acceptable
trade off for the very high sensitivity of the method.

They conclude that the SCOFF questionnaire seems to be
highly effective as a screening instrument for detecting eating
disorders and that it is designed to raise suspicion of a likely
case rather than to diagnose. They suggest that further work
is needed to validate it among a wider population, but none
the less there is sufficient evidence for it to be routinely used
in all patients at risk of eating disorders.

Contact:

Professor Hubert Lacey, Department of Psychiatry, St
George's Hospital Medical School, London
Email: jmorgan@sghms.ac.uk

(2) IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES PARENTS SHOULD
AVOID SHARING A BED WITH THEIR BABY

(Babies sleeping with parents: case-control study of factors
influencing the risk of the sudden infant death syndrome)
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7223/1457

(Commentary: Cot death–the story so far)
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7223/1457#resp1

While the benefits of babies sleeping on their backs are now
clear in relation to sudden infant death syndrome, there is
conflicting evidence on the effect of infants sharing a bed with
their parents. A study in this week's BMJ concludes that it is
not bed sharing per se that is hazardous, but rather the
particular circumstances in which bed sharing occurs.
However, commenting on these findings a paediatrician from
New Zealand argues that the greatest risk of all is when
mothers who smoke or smoked in pregnancy sleep in the
same bed as their infant and he says that "it is time to
recommend that mothers who smoke should not share a bed
with their babies."

Dr Peter Blair from the Royal Hospital for Children in Bristol,
along with colleagues from Leeds and Newcastle,
investigated the risks of sudden infant death syndrome and
the factors that might contribute to unsafe sleeping
environments. They studied a population of 17 million people,
which included 325 babies who died and 1,300 infants who
did not.

They found that sleeping with an infant on a sofa was
associated with a particularly high and previously
unrecognised risk of sudden infant death syndrome but that
sharing a room with parents was associated with a lower risk.
They also found that there was no increased risk associated
with bed sharing when an infant was placed back in his or her
cot for the remainder of their sleep.

They conclude that there is no evidence that bed sharing is
hazardous for infants of parents who do not smoke, however
among those infants who died and who had shared a bed
with parents (the majority of whom smoked), the risk seemed
to be associated with recent parental consumption of alcohol,
overcrowded housing conditions, extreme parental tiredness
and the infant being under a duvet.

In a commentary on Blair's paper Professor Ed Mitchell
from the University of Auckland in New Zealand says that
infants who suffer sudden infant death syndrome while sharing
a sofa with a parent account for only six per cent of cases in
contrast to the 23 per cent of deaths which occurred among
cosleeping infants of mothers who smoke.

He also notes that a recent review of studies found that
infants of mothers who smoked during pregnancy are at
almost a fivefold increased risk of the sudden infant death
syndrome compared with infants of non-smokers. This
review also found that when the mother did not smoke, but
the father did, the risk was increased 1.4-fold, says Mitchell.
"Now that few infants sleep prone [on their fronts], maternal
smoking is the major risk factor" for sudden infant death
syndrome, he says.

"The challenge is to develop effective strategies to reduce
smoking in pregnancy, as simply telling mothers that their
babies are at increased risk of the sudden infant death
syndrome is ineffective in changing behaviour," claims the
author and he concludes that "it is time to recommend that
mothers who smoke should not share a bed with their
babies."

Contact:

Professor Peter Fleming, Professor of Infant Health and
Developmental Physiology, Royal Hospital for Children,
Bristol
Email: peter.fleming@bris.ac.uk

Professor Ed Mitchell, Associate Professor in Paediatrics,
Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and Health
Sciences, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Email: ed.mitchell@auckland.ac.nz

(3) LOW LEVELS OF RUBELLA IMMUNISATION
AMONG YOUNG CHILDREN MAY INCREASE THE
RISK OF CONGENITAL RUBELLA IN BABIES

(Increase in congenital rubella occurrence after immunisation
in Greece: retrospective survey and systematic review)
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7223/1462

In 1993 a major rubella epidemic took place in Greece,
which was followed by the birth of a large number of babies
with congenital rubella. In this week's BMJ a team of
researchers from Athens suggest that this situation arose
because vaccination rates among young children were too
low.

Dr Takis Panagiotopoulos and colleagues from the Institute of
Child Health explain that vaccination of young children for
rubella interrupts viral transmission and elevates the age at
infection of the non-immunised, because they now have few
opportunities to acquire natural immunity. If vaccination
coverage is low, this can lead to an increase in the proportion
of young adults (including women of child-bearing age) who
are susceptible to rubella and thus to an increase in congenital
rubella occurrence.

In an accompanying science commentary, Dr Abi Berger
explains that in order to achieve 100 per cent protection
against a highly infectious disease such as measles in the UK,
the uptake of immunisation must be about 95 per cent. This is
the concept of "herd immunity" which means that not every
single person in a population has to be immunised in order to
protect everyone in that population " so long as a sufficient
number are immunised, protection will be conferred on
everybody " explains Berger.

Panagiotopoulos et al investigated the events leading to the
epidemic of congenital rubella syndrome. Their study of the
population of Greece found that during the late 1970s (the
rubella vaccine had been introduced in 1975) and the 1980s
vaccination coverage of children did not reach 50-60 per
cent until 1990.

Panagiotopoulos et al suggest that a vaccination programme
of young children that doesn't achieve high coverage may
increase the risk of congenital rubella syndrome. They
conclude that in Greece this was due to inconsistent
immunisation policies and that their findings emphasise the
need to attain and sustain high immunisation coverage if
vaccination of young children is introduced.

Contact:

Dr Takis Panagiotopoulos, Senior Researcher, Department
of Social Paediatrics, Institute of Child Health, Athens
Email: tpan@ath.forthnet.gr

Dr Abi Berger, General Practitioner, c/o BMJ Press Office


FOR ACCREDITED JOURNALISTS

Embargoed press releases and articles are available from:

Public Affairs Division
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JR
(contact Jill Shepherd;pressoffice@bma.org.uk)

and from:

the EurekAlert website, run by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science
(http://www.eurekalert.org)