Seating positions and children's risk of dying in motor vehicle crashes

Braver, Elisa R.; Whitfield, R.A.; Ferguson, Susan A.

doi:10.1136/ip.4.3.181

Cited by 128 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[5][6][7][8]10 Those studies all found unrestrained children (particularly those in the front seat) to be at the greatest risk of injury. The results from our multivariate analyses extend those of prior studies by providing additional details on the effects of age-appropriate restraint (not available in other national sources of crash data) and by examining the relative benefits of appropriate restraint and seating position for relevant age groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Although most studies reported that restraint use in rear seats offers the greatest protection to children of any age, Braver et al 8 showed that older children with optimal restraint in the front seat were at lower risk of injury than were unrestrained children in the rear. In addition, the previous studies either did not contain sufficient detail for determination of the ageappropriateness of restraint use [5][6][7][8]10 or did not examine the benefits of appropriate restraint and seating position across a wide range of child ages 9,12 or crash types. 11 Information on the relative benefits of rear seating and appropriate restraint would assist policymakers faced with choices regarding provisions for rear seating or age-appropriate restraint when considering enhancements to state child restraint laws.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Seating Position and Appropriate Restraint Use on the Risk of Injury to Children in Motor Vehicle Crashes

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Background. Currently, many states are upgrading their child restraint laws to include provisions for the use of age-appropriate restraints through 6 to 8 years of age, with some also requiring rear seating for children, enabling the laws to be in closer alignment with best-practice recommendations.Objective. To evaluate the relationships of seating position and restraint status to the risk of injury among children in passenger vehicle crashes.Methods. This was a cross-sectional study of children <16 years of age who were involved in crashes of insured vehicles in 15 states, with data collected via insurance claims records and a telephone survey. A probability sample of 17 980 children in 11 506 crashes, representing 229 106 children in 146 613 crashes, was collected between December 1, 1998, and November 30, 2002. Parent reports were used to define restraint status, seating position, and occurrence of clinically significant injuries, with the use of a previously validated instrument.Results. Approximately 62% of the children used seat belts, 35% used child restraints, and 3% used no restraint. Nearly 4 of 5 children sat in the rear seat, with one half of all children being restrained appropriately for their age in the rear, although this varied according to the age of the child. Overall, 1.6% of children suffered serious injuries, 13.5% had minor injuries, and 84.9% did not have any injury. Unrestrained children in the front were at the highest risk of injury and appropriately restrained children in the rear were at the lowest risk, for all age groups. Inappropriately restrained children were at nearly twice the risk of injury, compared with appropriately restrained children (odds ratio [OR]: 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4 -2.3), whereas unrestrained children were at >3 times the risk (OR: 3.2; 95% CI: 2.5-4.1). The effect of seating row was smaller than the effect of restraint status; children in the front seat were at 40% greater risk of injury, compared with children in the rear seat (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2-1.7). Had all children in the study population been appropriately restrained in the rear seat, 1014 serious injuries (95% CI: 675-1353 injuries) would have been prevented (with the assumption that restraint effectiveness does not depend on a variety of other driver-related, child-related, crash-related, vehiclerelated, and environmental factors).Conclusions. Age-appropriate restraint confers relatively more safety benefit than rear seating, but the 2 work synergistically to provide the best protection for children in crashes. These results support the current focus on age-appropriate restraint in recently upgraded state child restraint laws. However, it is important to note that considerable added benefit would be realized with additional requirements for rear seating. E xisting guidelines for the optimal protection of children in automobiles recommend rear seating for all children Ͻ13 years of age and the use of age-appropriate restraints, including child safety seats and belt-positioning...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Seating Position and Appropriate Restraint Use on the Risk of Injury to Children in Motor Vehicle Crashes

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2,[12][13][14] Unfortunately, most existing motor vehicle legislation addresses only restraint use for children in the front seats; it does not address either child restraint in the rear seats or seating position. 15 Rhode Island's legislation seems to have contributed to changing child seating behavior in motor vehicles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1][2][3] Nationwide educational campaigns now emphasize the need for children to be properly restrained and seated in the rear seats, and professional organizations and government agencies have endorsed these safety messages. The National Transportation Safety Board issued a recommendation in 1997 that each state amend its child passenger safety laws to make it compulsory for children to ride in the rear seats.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Where children sit in cars: the impact of Rhode Island's new legislation

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the impact of Rhode Island's legislation requiring children younger than 6 years to sit in the rear of motor vehicles. METHODS: Roadside observations were conducted in Rhode Island and Massachusetts in 1997 and 1998. Multivariate regression was used to evaluate the proportion of vehicles carrying a child in the front seat. RESULTS: Data were collected on 3226 vehicles carrying at least 1 child. In 1998, Rhode Island vehicles were less likely to have a child in the front seat than in 1997 (odds ratio = 0.6; 95% confidence interval = 0.5, 0.7), whereas no significant changes in child passenger seating behavior occurred in Massachusetts during that period. CONCLUSIONS: Rhode Island's legislation seems to have promoted safer child passenger seating behavior.

show abstract

“…Anne ve babaların en önemli görevlerinden birisi de, bu kazalarda bebek ve çocuklarının zarar görmesini önlemek veya en aza indirmek için, güvenlik önlemlerini arttırmaktır. Bunun için alınacak önlemlerin başında, otomobillerde seyahat esnasında çocuk oto güven-lik koltuğu (ÇOGK) kullanımı ve emniyet kemeri bağlanması gelmektedir (2,3).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

A Survey Study on Families Child Car Safety Seats Usage and Awareness

Çöl¹,

Biçer²,

Uğraş³

et al. 2014

Turk J Ped Em Int Care Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ÖZET Amaç:Bu çalışmada, ebeveynlerin çocuk oto güvenlik koltuğu (ÇOGK) kullanım oranları ve bu konu hakkındaki bilgi düzeyleri değerlendirildi. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu çalışmaya, çocuk polikliniğine başvuran 250 ebeveyn alındı. "Sosyodemogra k özellikler", "çocuk oto güvenlik koltuğu (ÇOGK) kullanımını etkileyen faktörler", "ÇOGK kullanımı" ve "ÇOGK kullanımı ile ilgili bilgiler" hakkın-daki 22 soruluk anket, yüz yüze görüşme yöntemiyle uygulandı. Varyans analizine yönelik olarak t-test, sürekli değişkenler için iki ortalama arasındaki farkın önemlilik testi kullanıldı. Kesikli ve kategorik değişkenlere yönelik olarak ki-kare testi uygul andı. Bulgular: Ebeveynlerin %93.6'sı ÇOGK hakkında bilgi sahibi olup, %80.8'i ÇOGK kullanıyor, %12.8'i ise kullanmıyordu. Gelir düzeyi yüksek olan ebeveynlerin ÇOGK kullanım oranı yüksekti (p < 0,05). Ebeveynlerin eğitim durumu da ÇOGK kullanımı ile doğru orantılıydı (p < 0,05). ÇOGK'nin doğru yerleşimini ailelerin %98'i biliyordu. ÇOGK'nu çocuğun yaşına uygun olarak değiştiren ebeveynlerin oranı %53.5 idi. Yaşa uygun olarak değiştirilmesi gereksinimi hakkındaki bilgi düzeyi geliri orta ve iy i düzeyde olanlarda ve babanın eğitimi yükseköğrenim düzeyinde olanlarda daha yüksekti (p < 0,05). ÇOGK kullanmanın kanuni zorunluluk olduğunu bilenlerin oranı %88.6 idi. ÇOGK hakkındaki bilgiyi ebeveynlerin %37'si internetten, %33'ü medya yoluyla, %27'si ise çevresindeki kişilerden edinmişti. Hekim tavsiyesiyle bilgi sahibi olanların oranı oldukça düşüktü (% 3). Sonuç: Ebeveynlerin eğitim ve gelir düzeylerindeki artış ÇOGK kullanımını artırarak çocuk yaralanma ve ölümlerini azaltabilir. Tıp öğrencilerine tıp eğitiminde ve ebeveynlere rutin çocuk vizitlerinde çocuk güvenliği ve ÇOGK kullanımı hakkında bilgi verilmelidir CAYD 2014;1(2):87-95. Anahtar Kelimeler: Aile, bilgi düzeyi, çocuk oto güvenlik koltuğu, tra k kazaları SUM MARYIn tro duc ti on: The usage and awareness of parents about child car safety seats (CCSS) was evaluated in this study. Material and Method: Two hundred and fty parents presented to the pediatric outpatient clinic were included in this study. Research data were derived from 22-questions survey including "socio-demographic features", "factors a ecting CCSS", "CCSS usage ratio", "the information about correct usage of CCSS" with one to one interviews. T-test for variance analysis and the signi cance test of di erence between two means were used for continuous variables. Chi-square test was applied for discrete and categorical variables. Results: Ninety-three point six (93.6%) percent of parents have knowledge about child car safety seats while 80.8% of them using child car safety seat, whereas 12.8% don't use it. CCSS usage rate was higher in the parents with high level income (p < 0.05). Educational level of parents was also directly proportional with CCSS usage (p < 0.05). Ninety-eight percent of the parents knew the correct placement of CCSS. Fifty-three point ve percent of the parents had revised the CCSS appropriately according to child's age. Change of CCSS was a...

show abstract

Seating positions and children's risk of dying in motor vehicle crashes

Abstract: Parents and others who transport children should be strongly encouraged to place infants and children in rear seats whether or not vehicles have airbags. Existing laws requiring restraint use by children should be strengthened and actively enforced.

Cited by 128 publications

References 20 publications

Effects of Seating Position and Appropriate Restraint Use on the Risk of Injury to Children in Motor Vehicle Crashes

Effects of Seating Position and Appropriate Restraint Use on the Risk of Injury to Children in Motor Vehicle Crashes

Where children sit in cars: the impact of Rhode Island's new legislation

A Survey Study on Families Child Car Safety Seats Usage and Awareness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About