How long do smoke alarms function? A cross-sectional follow-up survey of a smoke alarm installation programme

McCoy, Mary A; Roper, Carey; Campa, Emily; Stephens-Stidham, Shelli; Carlin, Debra K; Istre, Gregory R.

doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2013-040824

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our sample, most alarms (89%) were still up and working 6 months after installation. This is consistent with previous community-based interventions; McCoy et al 16 observed 83% alarms working 2 years after installation, and Jackson et al 15 observed 33% working 8–10 years after installation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Six-month follow-up of lithium-battery smoke alarms and self-reported reasons for disabling

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although smoke alarms with lithium batteries are often marketed as '10-year alarms', on average, these alarms do not remain functional for 10 years. This paper describes self-reported reasons for non-working lithium-battery alarms 6-9 months following a smoke alarm installation programme. Data presented are for a cohort of 754 homes that participated in the installation programme and subsequently completed follow-up. A total of 1487 smoke alarms were installed. At follow-up, 126 alarms (8%) were missing and 37 (3%) were observed to be non-working. Of the non-working alarms, residents reported that they had been disabled 57% of the time. Reasons for disabling the alarms most often included that the battery was chirping (38%) or that it sounded while someone was cooking (24%). Smoke alarm installation programmes using lithium-battery alarms should consider highlighting education about smoke alarm maintenance, the hush feature and resources to replace alarms that malfunction soon after installation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Six-month follow-up of lithium-battery smoke alarms and self-reported reasons for disabling

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All in all, small changes to the assumptions made in our model would not dramatically alter the overall estimates of the cost effectiveness of the standard and enhanced programmes relative to the control condition and relative to each other. Although we do not formally model this scenario, it is possible that the 10 year lithium batteries do not last 10 years 13. The smoke alarm distribution education by fire-fighters and health educators in this programme stressed the importance of regularly testing the batteries of smoke alarms and replacing batteries if needed, but long-term follow-up is not available.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We assumed a constant number of smoke alarms each year. Past literature has found evidence of early alarm failure with lithium batteries,13 therefore, this programme used tamper-resistant alarms and added a stronger educational component. Nevertheless if early failure occurred it would lower the benefits.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic evaluation of smoke alarm distribution methods in Baltimore, Maryland

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A separate follow-up study of OI programme houses (n=800) reported 92% of houses still had at least one functioning OI smoke alarm at 2 years post installation, but by 10 years post installation that had dropped to 20%. 17 Unpublished data from the OI effectiveness study were used to identify medical treatment by type among those residents that sustained fire injuries-for example, the number of residents with non-fatal injuries treated and released from a hospital emergency department (ED) or admitted to hospital, and the number of residents with fatal injuries resulting in death at the fire scene, treated initially in an ED, or admitted to hospital followed by death.…”

Section: Programme Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preventing deaths and injuries from house fires: a cost–benefit analysis of a community-based smoke alarm installation programme

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Operation Installation (OI), a community-based smoke alarm installation programme in Dallas, Texas, targets houses in high-risk urban census tracts. Residents of houses that received OI installation (or programme houses) had 68% fewer medically treated house fire injuries (non-fatal and fatal) compared with residents of non-programme houses over an average of 5.2 years of follow-up during an effectiveness evaluation conducted from 2001 to 2011. Objective To estimate the cost–benefit of OI. Methods A mathematical model incorporated programme cost and effectiveness data as directly observed in OI. The estimated cost per smoke alarm installed was based on a retrospective analysis of OI expenditures from administrative records, 2006–2011. Injury incidence assumptions for a population that had the OI programme compared with the same population without the OI programme was based on the previous OI effectiveness study, 2001–2011. Unit costs for medical care and lost productivity associated with fire injuries were from a national public database. Results From a combined payers’ perspective limited to direct programme and medical costs, the estimated incremental cost per fire injury averted through the OI installation programme was $128,800 (2013 US$). When a conservative estimate of lost productivity among victims was included, the incremental cost per fire injury averted was negative, suggesting long-term cost savings from the programme. The OI programme from 2001 to 2011 resulted in an estimated net savings of $3.8 million, or a $3.21 return on investment for every dollar spent on the programme using a societal cost perspective. Conclusions Community smoke alarm installation programmes could be cost-beneficial in high-fire-risk neighbourhoods.

show abstract

How long do smoke alarms function? A cross-sectional follow-up survey of a smoke alarm installation programme

Abstract: Less than a quarter of the originally installed smoke alarms were still present and functioning by year 10. These findings have important implications for smoke alarm installation programmes.

Cited by 9 publications

References 8 publications

Six-month follow-up of lithium-battery smoke alarms and self-reported reasons for disabling

Six-month follow-up of lithium-battery smoke alarms and self-reported reasons for disabling

Economic evaluation of smoke alarm distribution methods in Baltimore, Maryland

Preventing deaths and injuries from house fires: a cost–benefit analysis of a community-based smoke alarm installation programme

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About