Using a Computer Kiosk to Promote Child Safety: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Trial in an Urban Pediatric Emergency Department

Abstract

OBJECTIVES. The effects of a computer kiosk intervention on parents' child safety seat, smoke alarm, and poison storage knowledge and behaviors were evaluated in a pediatric emergency department serving predominantly low-income, urban families. The effects of parent anxiety and the reason for the child's emergency department visit also were examined. METHODS.A randomized, controlled trial of a Safety in Seconds program with a 2-to 4-week follow-up interview was conducted with 759 parents of young children (4 -66 months of age). The intervention group received a personalized report containing tailored, stage-based safety messages based on the precaution adoption process model. The control group received a report on other child health topics.RESULTS. The intervention group had significantly higher smoke alarm, poison storage, and total safety knowledge scores. The intervention group was more likely to report correct child safety seat use. Neither parent anxiety nor the reason for the emergency department visit was related to the safety behaviors. Virtually all (93%) intervention parents read at least some of the report; 57% read it all, and 68% discussed it with others. Lower-income intervention parents who read all of the report and discussed it with others were more likely than control parents to practice safe poison storage. Higher-income intervention parents were more likely than control parents to report correct child safety seat use.CONCLUSIONS. These results bode well for widespread applicability of computer technology to patient education in busy emergency departments and other child health care settings. Reducing financial barriers to certain safety behaviors should continue to be a high priority.www.pediatrics.org/cgi/

Emergency Physicians’ Knowledge and Provision of Child Passenger Safety Information

“…Technology-based interventions such as computer kiosks have been shown to provide effective, tailored educational interventions while simultaneously replacing the need for additional personnel. 27 An additional barrier to injury prevention efforts in the ED is lack of materials. 21 Given the need for and effectiveness of safety device provision, especially in socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, the future of successful injury prevention efforts may be in health insurance coverage.…”

Neighborhood Violence and its Association with Mothers’ Health: Assessing the Relative Importance of Perceived Safety and Exposure to Violence

“…The trial aimed to test the effectiveness of a computer kiosk that generated tailored safety reports for parents on smoke alarm use, poison storage, and child safety seat use. 41,42 The study was approved by the Johns Hopkins Committee for Human Research.…”

“…The remaining 901 participants were randomized into a control and intervention group for a participation rate of 77%. Further specifics about the recruitment process can be found in Gielen et al 41 Data for this analysis comes from the 453 individuals randomized into the control group. As the sample recruited were primarily mothers (90%), and considering the intent of the study, the decision was made to limit the analysis to only mothers.…”

Prevention of childhood poisoning in the home: overview of systematic reviews and a systematic review of primary studies

“…This included six RCTs (Baudier et al, 1988;Clamp & Kendrick, 1998;Colver, Hutchinson, & Judson, 1982;Gielen et al, 2007;Paul, Sanson-Fisher, & Redman, 1994;Watson et al, 2005) and one CBA (Schwarz, Grisso, Miles, Holmes, & Sutton, 1993), evaluating interventions providing safety education (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.10À2.36 (Gielen et al, 2007)) and safety education plus equipment, with effect sizes ranging from RR 1.15 95% CI 1.03À1.28 (Clamp & Kendrick, 1998) to OR 14.30 95% CI 4.22À18.46 (Colver et al, 1982. The remaining 18 studies (see Table 4) evaluating a range of interventions including safety education, tailored safety education, safety education plus equipment found no significant difference in safe storage of medicines between treatment groups.…”