or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Hospital uses iPads to connect mothers and newborns with 'BabyTime' initiative
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hospital uses iPads to connect mothers and newborns with 'BabyTime' initiative

post #1 of 34
Thread Starter 
Cedars-Sinai hospital announced last week a new program it's calling "BabyTime," which uses Apple's iPad to help mothers stay connected to their newborns, even if they aren't able to move after giving birth.

BabyTime, a play on Apple's FaceTime, leverages the video messaging service to create a remote presence link between a new mother's room and the hospital's Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, reports TUAW.

BabyTime
Source: Cedars-Sinai


As noted by Cedars-Sinai, the program allows moms who are non-ambulatory to "visit" the NICU, where babies are usually taken after a cesarean section is performed or other complications require strict monitoring.

According to chair of the Cedars-Sinai Department of Pediatrics and Ruth and Harry Roman Chair in Neonatology Charles F. Simmons Jr., MD, some 20 to 30 percent of mothers who undergo C-sections are not capable of traveling to the NICU during the first 24 to 48 hours after giving birth, an important time in mother-child bonding.

The system works by placing one iPad near a baby's incubator, while another is given to the mother. The portable video and audio platform grants a level of interaction never before possible in such an environment, and lets parents see and hear their newborn even though they are floors away.

Mothers can access BabyTime twice a day, remotely interacting with their baby and nurses over a secured internet connection.

"BabyTime will help bridge communication with the family and the baby's medical team and is an excellent use of technology to help new mothers bond with their babies, even when they cannot be physically at their babies' bedside," Simmons said. ?When doctors and nurses are treating a newborn in the NICU, mom can be right there asking questions and getting updates, even if she?s on a different floor.?

The Cedars-Sinai initiative is just one example of how the iPad is slowly integrating with the medical field. It was reported last year that some hospitals were using the Apple tablet as visitor and patient kiosks, while the U.S. Food and Drug Administration cleared the device and an iOS app for mobile diagnoses.
post #2 of 34
Why not just use a regular baby cam that can be accessed all the time.
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #3 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by city View Post

Why not just use a regular baby cam that can be accessed all the time.

Can u carry your cam around ?
post #4 of 34
How about you not irradiate the poor babies in the nursery or NICU with WiFi? I would sue if I was a parent for exposing the brains and bodies of newborns in intensive care with more stress on their bodies.
post #5 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetseater View Post

How about you not irradiate the poor babies in the nursery or NICU with WiFi? I would sue if I was a parent for exposing the brains and bodies of newborns in intensive care with more stress on their bodies.

You americans would sue if a peanut landed on your head...
post #6 of 34

It's good that hospitals are taking steps towards teaching young people early and by exposing them to iOS devices like the iPad from day one. After being exposed to an iPad, even a baby will be able to recognize and understand the vast differences between iPads and other so called tablets that everybody else offers, especially those featuring Android. Hell, even a fetus can probably tell the difference. And if you want to talk about closed VS open, then buying any other tablet besides Apple is really shooting yourself in the foot, because even though some people think that they're getting an "open" system when buying something like an Android tablet, they're actually closing themselves off to the huge Apple ecosystem, which at the end of the day is the only one that really matters and counts. But if people wish to gamble their money on a losing horse, then be my guest.

 

And I realize that all parents are proud of their new born babies, but not all babies are cute, that is a myth. Some are not exactly that attractive looking and the baby in that picture looks kind of weird, IMO. It looks more like a miniature old person than a baby, IMO.

post #7 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetseater View Post

How about you not irradiate the poor babies in the nursery or NICU with WiFi? I would sue if I was a parent for exposing the brains and bodies of newborns in intensive care with more stress on their bodies.

What do you think will happen? The frequencies for Wi-Fi are non-ionizing radiation so "irradiation" may not be the best term to use.
post #8 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Mothers can access BabyTime twice a day, remotely interacting with their baby and nurses over a secured internet connection.

WiFi, you mean. I sure hope for these mothers that there isn't an Internet connection available to their baby, otherwise you run the risk of the babies buying Angry Birds as an iPad can be used by people of any age.
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #9 of 34
A portable incubator would be better, just wheel the poor little tike in to see his mother.
post #10 of 34
This makes me uneasy.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #11 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

It's good that hospitals are taking steps towards teaching young people early and by exposing them to iOS devices like the iPad from day one. After being exposed to an iPad, even a baby will be able to recognize and understand the vast differences between iPads and other so called tablets that everybody else offers, especially those featuring Android.


"Mam, I love iOS moar."
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #12 of 34

Baby gangnam style!

post #13 of 34

Actually that's just what a mother with post-partum depression wants to see: another woman holding her baby.

post #14 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

DaHarder just got banned. Lets crack open the champagne.

Nice sig, didn't see it happening. Can we thump this up? Or perhaps sent in requests/nominees?
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #15 of 34
Originally Posted by sweets eater View Post
…irradiate… …WiFi?

 

Step 1. Coat the entire baby in tin foil.

Step 2. Coat the crib in tin foil.

Step 3. Coat the nursery in tin foil.

Step 4. Go bankrupt because that's a fair bit of tin foil.

 

Enough of the FUD.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #16 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

A portable incubator would be better, just wheel the poor little tike in to see his mother.

 

I agree. Unless your baby is a Tamagotchi, an iPad isn't the right mode of interaction.

post #17 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by glemmestad View Post

You americans would sue if a peanut landed on your head...

That's nuts. I'd sue if I have a peanut allergy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

A portable incubator would be better, just wheel the poor little tike in to see his mother.

How much do those things cost. Surely more expensive than two iPads. In addition, you don't want to take a baby out of NICU.
post #18 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by city View Post

Why not just use a regular baby cam that can be accessed all the time.

 

Because Facetime is two way.  My wife was non-ambulatory and our first was in the NICU so it would have been nice for her.  Obviously not as good as skin time but better than nothing.  

 

A portable incubator is a non-starter since a) they have those and b) if the baby could leave the NICU it wouldn't be in the NICU in the first place.

post #19 of 34
That baby will imprint on the iPad and call it mother. Way to start brand loyalty. Samsung hopes it can lure the infant into following its lookalike "mother".

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #20 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotScott View Post

Actually that's just what a mother with post-partum depression wants to see: another woman holding her baby.

On the other end, the mother is cradling a newborn iPad running FaceTime...

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #21 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetseater View Post

How about you not irradiate the poor babies in the nursery or NICU with WiFi? I would sue if I was a parent for exposing the brains and bodies of newborns in intensive care with more stress on their bodies.

The best way to start off a lifetime's worth of exposure to wifi. I mean, do you know how many freaking base stations my Mac can see right now? It's enough for Apple to triangulate my Mac's location precisely using a wifi database.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #22 of 34
The thing I'm really impressed with is the nursing app. Allows Mom to start nursing while the baby is in the NICU.
post #23 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 the baby in that picture looks kind of weird, IMO. It looks more like a miniature old person than a baby, IMO.

Babies born via C-Section don't  have their features (especially their noses) squished on the way out, so they tends to look a little less baby "like".

post #24 of 34
Why not use a regular camera on the babby instead of a IPad, have them all hooked to a IMac and run airplay from the IMac to the ipad(Can you do that?) and all of the babbys can be seen and it is less expensive.(I know you don't have to use airplay and espicially a IPad but a cheaper method would be airplay and a Apple TV.
post #25 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

Why not use a regular camera on the babby instead of a IPad, have them all hooked to a IMac and run airplay from the IMac to the ipad(Can you do that?) and all of the babbys can be seen and it is less expensive.(I know you don't have to use airplay and espicially a IPad but a cheaper method would be airplay and a Apple TV.

Two iPads are less expensive than a Mac + iPad. Plus why would a mom want to see other babies?
post #26 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


What do you think will happen? The frequencies for Wi-Fi are non-ionizing radiation so "irradiation" may not be the best term to use.

 

Irradiate is the right term. There are waves being sent from the iPad and from the WiFi router and they are hitting and moving through the baby and other humans. It means "to send rays, to heat, etc." Just because it is non-ionizing doesn't mean it isn't radiation, we just typically use the term to be nuclear. But, people need to know it isn't good for them, and it definitely isn't good for babies.

 

You can look at some of the research studies:

 

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp (scroll down to see WiFi)
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/rf/wifi.asp
 

A newborn, especially in NICU, has a very sensitive nervous system and the WiFi is a stressor to the body. Their condition is already fragile (and they need skin contact to regulate their heart rate--they can't do this on their own). Whatever the frequency, it impedes the ability for cells to engage in their various functions, including replication. They don't have the skull or tissue structure to defend or lessen the impact the way adults do. It also destroys the blood-brain barrier which they are trying to develop. I could go on and on.

 

The baby could feel the mom seeing the baby and that may help with some settling, but cables are MUCH MUCH better. Whatever they do, that WiFi should only be on for the few moments they are using this technology.

 

And the RF baby-tags need to go away also.

post #27 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetseater View Post

 

Irradiate is the right term. There are waves being sent from the iPad and from the WiFi router and they are hitting and moving through the baby and other humans. It means "to send rays, to heat, etc." Just because it is non-ionizing doesn't mean it isn't radiation, we just typically use the term to be nuclear. But, people need to know it isn't good for them, and it definitely isn't good for babies.

 

You can look at some of the research studies:

 

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp (scroll down to see WiFi)
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/rf/wifi.asp
 

A newborn, especially in NICU, has a very sensitive nervous system and the WiFi is a stressor to the body. Their condition is already fragile (and they need skin contact to regulate their heart rate--they can't do this on their own). Whatever the frequency, it impedes the ability for cells to engage in their various functions, including replication. They don't have the skull or tissue structure to defend or lessen the impact the way adults do. It also destroys the blood-brain barrier which they are trying to develop. I could go on and on.

 

The baby could feel the mom seeing the baby and that may help with some settling, but cables are MUCH MUCH better. Whatever they do, that WiFi should only be on for the few moments they are using this technology.

 

And the RF baby-tags need to go away also.

 

Seems like the results indicating no effects for infants:

 

2011 Sambucci, "Altogether our findings do not support the hypothesis that early post-natal life exposure to WiFi signals induces detrimental effects on the developing immune system."

 

2012 Poulletier de Gannes, "In the present study, no teratogenic effect of repeated exposures to the Wi-Fi wireless communication signal was demonstrated even at the highest level of 4 W/kg. The results from this screening study aimed at investigating Wi-Fi effects, strengthen the previous conclusions that teratology and development studies have not detected any noxious effects of exposures to mobile telephony-related RF fields at exposure levels below standard limits."

 

With only one result that vaguely supports your contention:

 

2012 Bellieni CV "On the contrary, the power supply induces strong intracorporal electric current densities in the fetus and in the adult subject, which are respectively 182-263% and 71-483% higher than ICNIRP 98 basic restriction recommended to prevent adverse health effects. Laptop is paradoxically an improper site for the use of a LTC, which consequently should be renamed to not induce customers towards an improper use."

 

That one isn't actually about WiFi but the EMF emissions in various laptops.  The laptop has to be "used at close contact with the woman's womb" to see these results.  I'm not entirely sure why some of these are grouped in the WiFi area.

 

There seems to be some support for the contention that WiFi is not necessarily good for your little swimmers.  Guys don't keep your iPhone in your jeans pockets or park your laptop on your boys while surfing the net.

 

 

 

post #28 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetseater View Post

Irradiate is the right term. There are waves being sent from the iPad and from the WiFi router and they are hitting and moving through the baby and other humans. It means "to send rays, to heat, etc." Just because it is non-ionizing doesn't mean it isn't radiation, we just typically use the term to be nuclear. But, people need to know it isn't good for them, and it definitely isn't good for babies.

You can look at some of the research studies:

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp (scroll down to see WiFi)
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/rf/wifi.asp

 
A newborn, especially in NICU, has a very sensitive nervous system and the WiFi is a stressor to the body. Their condition is already fragile (and they need skin contact to regulate their heart rate--they can't do this on their own). Whatever the frequency, it impedes the ability for cells to engage in their various functions, including replication. They don't have the skull or tissue structure to defend or lessen the impact the way adults do. It also destroys the blood-brain barrier which they are trying to develop. I could go on and on.

The baby could feel the mom seeing the baby and that may help with some settling, but cables are MUCH MUCH better. Whatever they do, that WiFi should only be on for the few moments they are using this technology.

And the RF baby-tags need to go away also.


The term irradiation is most often applied to microwave radiation, gamma radiation and x-radiation.

Please indicate the effects of electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency band have on children. I have quite a bit of formal education that suggests otherwise.
post #29 of 34
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post
Please indicate the effects of electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency band have on children. I have quite a bit of formal education that suggests otherwise.


Would these studies be linked to the ones of people who claim they're 'allergic' to Wi-Fi?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #30 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

The term irradiation is most often applied to microwave radiation, gamma radiation and x-radiation.

Please indicate the effects of electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency band have on children. I have quite a bit of formal education that suggests otherwise.

 

My impression is that (s)he didn't even read the study abstracts (s)he linked to.  

 

But it looks like there are some studies that indicate potential negative effects on sperm motility.  I'm going to go out on a limb and state that's probably not a high concern for babies in the NICU.

post #31 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Would these studies be linked to the ones of people who claim they're 'allergic' to Wi-Fi?


post #32 of 34
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post
[urbanized inquiry]

 

Yep.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #33 of 34

a great idea!

post #34 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

A portable incubator would be better, just wheel the poor little tike in to see his mother.

Actually, it's not that easy. The little tike is connected by wires and tubes to monitors, oxygen, and IV pumps. Many babies also require a ventilator, which would make transporting a high-risk endeavor. This tike is also in need of an entire team of professionals to take him/her anywhere. So, to wheel him/her in would require much more than just a portable incubator. I think the iPads are a great idea!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Hospital uses iPads to connect mothers and newborns with 'BabyTime' initiative
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Hospital uses iPads to connect mothers and newborns with 'BabyTime' initiative