Seat belt misuse among children transported in belt-positioning booster seats

Objective

Observe and report seat belt use among children transported in belt-positioning booster seats.

Design

We conducted a cross-sectional, observational survey of children transported in motor vehicles between 2006 and 2007. While drivers completed a survey reporting the child's age, weight and gender, and the driver's age, gender, race, income, education, and relationship to the child; a child passenger safety technician recorded vehicle seating location, restraint type, and use of the car safety seat harness or seat belt as appropriate for the child.

Setting

Twenty-five fast food restaurants and discount department stores throughout Indiana.

Participants

A convenience sample of drivers transporting children younger than 16 years.

Main exposure

Seat belt use among children transported in belt-positioning booster seats.

Outcome measure

Seat belt misuse.

Results

Overall, 1446 drivers participated, 2287 children were observed with 564 children in belt-positioning booster seats. At least one seat belt misuse was observed for 64.8% of the children transported. Common misuses were the shoulder belt being placed over the booster seat armrest (35.8%); shoulder belt not at mid-shoulder position (28.5%), seat belt was too loose (24.5%), and the shoulder belt was either behind the child's back (9.1%) or under their arm (10.0%).

Conclusion

There is a high frequency of seat belt misuses among children transported in booster seats. Advice to parents on appropriate car seat selection, and encouragement to parents to supervise seat belt use may decrease misuse.     

Child restraint system use and misuse in six states

This project addressed use and misuse of child restraint systems (CRS) in the nation. CRS use and critical misuse observations were collected in the Fall of 2002 for 5527 children less than 36 kg (80 pounds) in 4126 vehicles in six states: Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Results showed that 62.3% of these children were restrained in a CRS; 25.9% were restrained in a safety belt (SB); and 11.8% were unrestrained. By weight class, CRS use was 97.1% for children less than 9 kg (20 pounds); 86.4% for children between 9 and 18 kg (20 and 40 pounds); 41.7% for children between 18 and 27 kg (40 and 60 pounds); and 10.9% for children between 27 and 36 kg (60 and 80 pounds). Overall critical CRS misuse was 72.6%. Most common critical misuses were loose harness straps and loose vehicle SB attachment to the CRS. Other types of CRS misuses were also observed and recorded in the study. Recommendations are provided for field observation techniques, periodic monitoring, and research for education and enforcement strategies.     

The seat belt syndrome in children

Lap belts, fitted to the centre seats of Australian cars for the past 22 years, have come under criticism as being injurious to children. The weight of evidence is that lap belts provide substantial protection, though less than three-point belts. A specific injury, the seat belt syndrome (SBS), to abdominal viscera and/or lumbar spine has been particularly associated with lap belts, an association confirmed by a hospital-based study in Melbourne. Roadside observations of belt use and Transport Accident Commission claims permitted the calculation of the incidence of SBS and the relative risks of SBS by seated position. The centre rear seat (lap belt) carried about twice the risk of SBS as outboard rear seats (three-point belts), which in turn have 2.7 times the risk of the outboard front seat. The number of SBS cases in Victoria has increased with penetration of the car fleet by 1971 and later cars. Suggestions are made for improvements in the restraint system.     

National roadside survey of child restraint system use in Belgium

In September 2011 the Belgian Road Safety Institute (BRSI) conducted its first roadside survey of child restraint system (CRS) use and misuse. The aim of this study was to obtain population-bases estimates of the prevalence of use and misuse of CRS and to identify predictors of misuse on the basis of observations in real traffic conditions. The survey was conducted on randomly selected sites across the country, stratified across various types of journeys. The principal parameters analysed were: the characteristics of the children and the car drivers, type of journey, types of CRS and types of misuse. The sample consisted of 1461 children (under 135 cm) for whom the conditions of restraint were observed in detail and the driver was interviewed.     

Vehicle child restraint usage for Pacific children aged 6 weeks to 4 years: Findings from the Pacific Islands Families study

Child restraint systems (CRSs) for vehicles are designed to provide protection and prevent or reduce child mortality and morbidity in road traffic accidents. Overall, 90% of children under 5 years of age in New Zealand currently use CRSs. There is considerable regional variability in CRS usage, but little information exists on its ethnic variations or determinants. “Increasing the level of restraint use” is explicitly stated as one of the 13 priorities within the New Zealand Ministry of Transport's new road safety strategy. As such, understanding CRS prevalence, patterns and associates within different communities is essential in realising this priority. Utilising a large birth cohort of Pacific children (n = 1376 mothers), this study aimed to report the prevalence of maternal self-reported car seat usage at the 6 weeks, 1-year, and 2 years postpartum measurement waves; car/booster seat usage at the 4 years postpartum measurement wave; and to identify important associates using generalised estimating equation (GEE) models. Car seats were not used by 161 (11.8%) Pacific children at the 6 weeks measurement wave, 71 (5.8%) at 1-year, and 44 (3.8%) at 2 years, while car/booster seats were not used by 139 (13.3%) at the 4 years wave. Multivariable GEE model results revealed that mothers with no formal education, high parity, who smoked tobacco, lower household income, who lacked English language proficiency, and had multiple births were all at higher odds of failing to use car seat/booster seats. Despite differential attrition being noted in mothers over time, a sensitivity analysis using multiple imputation methods yielded similar findings. Targeted initiatives and education programs focusing on these higher risk groups, in particular, is needed to increase uptake and use of CRS thereby decreasing Pacific children's exposure to injury risk. As New Zealand has a large and increasing proportion of Pacific, Maori and Asian people, there is a continuing need to understand cultural factors in traffic safety. Only when culturally appropriate initiatives and education programs have been developed and disseminated that meet the needs of New Zealand's different communities is the national priority likely to be realised.     

Evaluation of the static belt fit provided by belt-positioning booster seats

Belt-positioning booster seats are recommended for children who use vehicle seat belts as primary restraints but who are too small to obtain good belt fit. Previous research has shown that belt-positioning boosters reduce injury risk, but the belt fit produced by the wide range of boosters in the US market has not previously been assessed. The present study describes the development of a method for quantifying static belt fit with a Hybrid-III 6-year-old test dummy. The measurement method was applied in a laboratory seat mockup to 31 boosters (10 in both backless and highback modes) across a range of belt geometries obtained from in-vehicle measurements. Belt fit varied widely across boosters. Backless boosters generally produced better lap belt fit than highback boosters, largely because adding the back component moved the dummy forward with respect to the lap belt routing guides. However, highback boosters produced more consistent shoulder belt fit because of the presence of belt routing guides near the shoulder. Some boosters performed well on both lap belt and shoulder belt fit. Lap belt fit in dedicated boosters was generally better than in combination restraints that also can be used with an integrated harness. Results demonstrate that certain booster design features produce better belt fit across a wide range of belt geometries. Lap belt guides that hold the belt down, rather than up, and shoulder belt guides integrated into the booster backrest provided better belt fit.     

Factors associated with rear seating of children in motor vehicles: a study in two low-income, predominantly Hispanic communities

This study examined child seating patterns in two predominantly low-income, Hispanic communities in Massachusetts. The purpose was to determine the factors associated with child rear seating in the community as a whole and for a subset of Hispanic motorists. Five hundred and five vehicles carrying child passengers and no adult other than the driver were observed in parking lots of fast food restaurants and grocery stores. Four hundred and thirty-two vehicle drivers agreed to be interviewed. A child was defined as a passenger younger than age 12 as determined by appearance and height (head below the vehicle headrest when seated). Variables under study included driver gender, age, ethnicity, and educational attainment; driver shoulder belt use; driver perception of passenger-side airbag presence; and the number and ages of children in the car. Overall, 51% of vehicles were observed with all children seated in the rear. In a bivariate analysis, child rear seating was strongly associated with female drivers ( P = 0.01), younger drivers ( P = 0.02) driver shoulder belt use ( P < 0.00), perceived presence of a passenger-side airbag ( P < 0.00), all children in the vehicle 相似文献   

Grandparents and child passenger safety

Purpose

This study compares child passenger safety (CPS) practices of grandparents versus parents and determines grandparents’ opinions on car safety seats (CSS), barriers to use, and ways to transport grandchildren safely.

Methods

Observational surveys were conducted on a convenience sample of drivers transporting children younger than sixteen years at 25 locations by certified child passenger safety technicians observing children in motor vehicles and recorded use of child passenger restraints. The drivers were surveyed on their knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices regarding CPS. Data from drivers identifying themselves as grandparents were analyzed; also, three grandparent focus groups provided opinions on CPS practices.

Results

During the study 1758 parents transporting 2713 children and 284 grandparents transporting 391 grandchildren were included. While most drivers were restrained and used child occupant restraints, almost 25% of parents and grandparents chose the incorrect seat to transport the child, and greater than 68% had at least one harness error. Grandparents were more likely to have looser lower anchor straps or seat belts and have children younger than thirteen years in the front seat.The focus group-grandparents had a favorable attitude toward CSS. Grandparents acknowledged the need for CSS but opined that CSS were difficult to use. Physical barriers included arthritis, back pain, mobility, decreased strength, and vision problems.

Conclusions

Grandparents and parents were equally likely to use CSS and choose correct seats. Compared to parents, grandparents were more likely to travel with their grandchildren with CSS installed with looser harnesses or an installed CSS with looser seat belt or lower anchors. Additionally, grandparents were more likely to have a child younger than thirteen years in the front seat. The use of community resources such as permanent fitting stations could help grandparents improve a grandchild's travel safety.     

Injuries to belted older children in motor vehicle crashes

Context

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration currently recommend that, unless they are under 57 in. in height, 8–12-year-old children use seat belts and all should ride in the rear seats of vehicles. These recommendations assume that the vehicle seat belt should provide adequate protection for these older children in the event of a crash.

Objectives

To describe characteristics of older children in the rear seat using seat belts in crashes, to estimate their risk and body region distribution of injury, and to identify risk factors for injury.

Methods

A representative sample of 6680 seat belt-restrained occupants, 8–12 years of age, seated in the rear seat during crashes involving insured vehicles in 16 US states between December 1998 and December 2007. A telephone interview was conducted with the driver of each vehicle. The main outcome was the parent-reported injury defined as Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2 or greater injuries.

Results

The risk of injury for belted 8–12 year olds in the rear seat was 1.3%. Head injury was the most common injury (60%), followed by injuries to the face (9%), upper extremity (9%) and abdomen (9%). One out of five (21%) 8–12 year olds either did not use the shoulder portion of the vehicle seat belt or placed it incorrectly behind their back or under their arm. Bivariate analyses indicated a higher risk of injury for these children (1.8%) as compared to children using both the lap and shoulder portions of the seat belt (1.1%). However, this difference was not statistically significant when other risk factors such as crash severity and characteristics of the driver were considered.

Conclusions

Injuries to the head, face, abdomen and upper extremity are the most common injuries to target for improved protection among 8–12 year olds in seat belts. Driver and crash characteristics are important risk factors for injury. A recent federal motor vehicle safety standard requiring lap and shoulder belts in all rear seat positions has the potential to further decrease the risk of injury to older children using seat belts.     

Comparison of motor vehicle occupant injuries in restrained and unrestrained 4- to 14-year-olds.

This study compares injuries of restrained and unrestrained 4- to 14-year-olds in nine emergency rooms and the Coroner's office in Orange County, California from 1983 to 1989. Analyses were performed separately for 4- to 9- and 10- to 14-year-olds because of differences related to the fit of the seat belt. Significantly fewer intracranial injuries and a significantly lower mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) were seen between the restrained and unrestrained for 10- to 14-year-olds in the front passenger and back seats; but for 4- to 9-year-olds in the back seat only. These same differences were noted between restrained 4- to 9-year-olds in the back compared with those in the front passenger seat. Except for 4- to 9-year-olds in the front passenger seat, our findings are consistent with similar studies of occupants of all ages. Our results suggest that lap-shoulder belts (primary restraint in front seat) may provide less protection for 4- to 9-year-olds than for 10- to 14-year-olds and adults.     

Factors influencing the use of infant car restraints

Over a six-week period 100 mothers in Dunedin, New Zealand obtained General Motors infant car seats from a rental scheme. In interviews conducted in the maternity hospital, before the seats had been used, the mother's perceptions of the comfort and ease of use of the seat were recorded. All mothers rated the seats as very safe. From details of 2,830 car trips undertaken by these mothers while their infants were 0-3 months old and from a further 687 journeys by 85 of those mothers when their infants were 4-6 months old we found that an infant car seat was used for only 72% of journeys with the younger infant compared to 91% of journeys with the older infant. Those mothers who had rated the seat--before ever using it--as appearing uncomfortable or difficult to use were less likely to make use of it. The seat was least likely to be used when the mother was going out for more than two hours in the evening for some purpose that involved only a short car journey.     

Children at risk: predictors of car safety seat misuse in Ontario

When used correctly, child safety seats can reduce the risk of death and serious injury by 54% in toddlers and 71% in infants [National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 2001. Traffic Safety Facts 2001. Children (DOT HS 809 471), U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC]. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that predict correct use of car safety seats. The study was conducted in a large urban area in Southwestern Ontario and a small urban and rural area in Northern Ontario. Participants were 1263 caregivers who completed a self-report survey on their knowledge and use of car safety seats for their children (N=2199). Logistic regression analysis revealed that female caregivers, caregivers with higher levels of education, and caregivers who reported that finding information about the correct use of child safety seats was "difficult" were more likely to report correctly using car safety seats. The results also showed that children aged 7 months to 8 years old had substantially lower odds of being in the correct car safety seat compared to children aged 6 months or younger, or children aged 9 years or older. The high risk nature of misuse of child seats for infants and younger children may be an important cue to action for health professionals to develop comprehensive prevention strategies.     

Predicting seat belt use in fatal motor vehicle crashes from observation surveys of belt use

There is a large difference between the rates of observed seat belt use by the general public and belt use by motor vehicle occupants who are fatally injured in crashes. Seat belt use rates of fatally injured occupants, as reported in the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), are much lower than the use rates found in observation surveys conducted by the states. A series of mathematical models describing the empirical relationship between FARS and observed rates were explored. The initial model was a 'straw man' and used two simplifying assumptions: (a) belt users and nonusers are equally likely to be involved in 'potentially fatal collisions', and (b) belts are 45% effective in preventing deaths. The model was examined by comparing each state's FARS use rate with the predicted rate. The model did not fit the state data points even when possible biases in the data were controlled. We next examined the assumptions in the model. Changing the seat belt effectiveness parameter provided a reasonable fit, but required an assumption that seat belts are 67% effective in preventing fatalities. The inclusion of a risk coefficient for non-belted occupants also provided a reasonable fit between the model and data. A variable risk model produced the best fit with the data. The major finding was that a model consistent with the data can be obtained by incorporating the assumption that nonusers of seat belts have a higher risk of involvement in potentially fatal collisions than do seat belt users. It was concluded that unbelted occupants are over-represented in fatal collisions for two reasons: (a) because of a greater chance of involvement in potentially fatal collisions in the first place, and (b) because they are not afforded the protection of seat belts when a collision does occur.     

An evaluation of the effectiveness of forward facing child restraint systems

The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of forward facing child restraint systems (FFCRS) in preventing serious injury and hospitalization to children 12-47 months of age as compared with similar age children in seat belts. Data were obtained from a cross-sectional study of children aged 12-47 months in crashes of insured vehicles in 15 states, with data collected via insurance claims records and a telephone survey. Effectiveness estimates were limited to those children between 12 and 47 months of age seated in the back row(s) of vehicles, restrained in FFCRS, regardless of misuse, or seat belts of all types and usage. Completed survey information was obtained on 1207 children, representing 12632 children in 11619 crashes between 1 December 1998 and 31 May 2002. Serious injuries occurred to 0.47% of all 12-47-month olds studied, including 1.72% of those in seat belts and 0.39% of those in child restraint systems. The risk of serious injury was 78% lower for children in FFCRS than in seat belts (odds ratio (OR) = 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.11-0.45, P = 0.001). The risk of hospitalization was 79% lower for children in FFCRS than in seat belts (OR = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.09-050, P = 0.001). There was no difference between the restraint types in preventing minor injuries. As compared with seat belts, CRS are very highly effective in preventing serious injuries and hospitalization, respectively. This effectiveness estimate is substantially higher than older estimates, demonstrating the benefits of current CRS designs. These results provide those educating parents and caregivers population-based data on the importance of child restraint use.     

Use of booster seats by Michigan children 4-8 years of age

This study reports the results of a statewide survey of restraint use by 4–8-year-old children in Michigan conducted between July 13 and 29, 2004. In this study, 3420 4–8-year-old children were observed traveling in passenger cars, vans/minivans, sport-utility vehicles, and pickup trucks. Restraint use was estimated for children traveling in all vehicles combined, as well as for each vehicle type separately. Children's restraint use was also calculated by the sex, age, and belt use of the driver. Separate estimates were also made of the restraint use of 4–8-year-old children by the combination of sex and belt use of the driver. Overall, 8.6 ± 5.9% of 4–8-year-old children were seated in a booster seat, 48.8 ± 10.3% were wearing a safety belt, 5.1 ± 3.4% were seated in a child safety seat, and the remaining 37.5 ± 11.5% were traveling completely unrestrained. When examining the rates by vehicle type, booster seat use was highest among children riding in sport-utility vehicles and lowest for those in pickup trucks. Surprisingly, children riding in passenger cars were more likely to be completely unrestrained than those in any other type of vehicle. While the sex of the driver did not seem to influence the restraint use of target-aged children, the driver's age did seem to have an effect. Booster seat use was quite low (0.6%) for children traveling with a driver over the age of 60, compared to 7.0 and 9.1% for those riding with drivers 16–29 and 30–59 years of age, respectively. The safety belt use of the driver also had a substantial influence on children's restraint use. Irrespective of driver sex, children riding with belted drivers were traveling in booster seats about 10% of the time, while those riding with unbelted drivers were only in booster seats 1–2% of the time.     

Injuries to children in automobiles in relation to seating location and restraint use

Findings in this study are based on 26,971 passengers less than 15 years of age in reported crashes in 1967 and later model year automobiles in North Carolina during calendar years 1973 and 1974. (1) Children least likely to be injured in crashes are restrained and in the back seat; those most likely to be injured are unrestrained and are in the front seat. Unrestrained children in the front right seat have the highest injury rate. (2) More than 90% of the children in the surveyed crashes were found unprotected by restraints—paralleling earlier findings for those in cars in general. (3) Back seat location reduced the injury rate by 28% among unrestrained children and 18% among restrained children. Use of restraints reduced the injury rate by 39% in the front seat and 31% in back. (4) Among unrestrained children, back seat location is advantageous for both males and females, for both younger and older children, and in automobiles of various sizes. The advantage of back seat location is most pronounced in frontal impacts.     

Factors influencing the use of booster seats: a state-wide survey of parents

This study used telephone interview data on booster seat use from a state-wide probability sample of parents with children ages 4-8-years-old who were living in Michigan. Interviews were completed with parents of children in 350 households. Analyses examined the entire sample, and three sub-groups: always users, part-time booster seat users, and booster seat non-users. Results indicated that booster seat legislation was a key determinant of the level of use and the motivation to use booster seats. Nearly 70% of part-time users said that they used booster seats because they believed it was the law. Similarly, 60% of part-time and non-booster seat users said that they would be more likely to use booster seats if use were mandated by law, with non-users being 3.5 times more likely than part-time users to agree that a law would increase their booster seat use. Finally, over 90% of part-time and non-booster seat users said it would be easier for them to use booster seats if a law required it, and non-users were almost six times more likely than part-time users to agree that a law would make use easier. The need for booster seat laws, issues of social equity, and implications for intervention were discussed.     

Psychosocial factors related to parental restraint of pre-school children in motor vehicles

While the use of safety restraints effectively reduces the risk of death or injury in accidents, many children still travel unrestrained in motor vehicles. Compulsory seat belt legislation in Australia increased rates of adult use dramatically, but did not have the same impact with children. In order to understand why levels of children's restraint use remain low, it is necessary to investigate parental factors related to use and non-use of restraints. This study assessed the rates of safety restraint use of parents and their pre-school children, and the sociodemographic, attitudinal and belief characteristics of parents which relate to children's restraint use, using the Health Belief Model as a basis for investigation. Restraint use for adults was substantially higher than for pre-school children. Children were more likely to be restrained if their parents were wearing seat belts, were married, were of high socioeconomic status, did not smoke, engaged in certain other preventive health behaviors on their children's behalf, traveled longer distances to pre-school and provided child seats for their children. In terms of the Health Belief Model, parents of restrained and unrestrained children differed in their evaluation of the "costs" and "benefits" of using restraints for their children, and in health locus of control. Parents of unrestrained children perceived the "costs" of restraint use, in terms of nuisance value, installation difficulty and financial cost, to be high. They were also less likely to believe that they could play a significant role in preventing injury to their children. Implications of these findings for safety restraint campaigns are discussed.     

Child restraint seat use behavior and attitude among Japanese mothers

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to assess associations between child restraint seat use and attitudes among Japanese mothers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mothers whose children were under 6 years of age were recruited through 11 kindergartens located in Kanagawa prefecture, Japan. Questions were developed based on the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Past use and future intentions to use, perceived risk of injury, knowledge of safety, attitudes toward use, subjective norms, and safety values related to safety seats were asked. RESULTS: A total of 552 complete questionnaires was obtained. Of 500 car owning households, 54.2% used child restraint seats inconsistently on short drives, and 36.4% did so on long drives. Three variables were associated with inconsistent use on short drives: frequent child resistance to sitting in a restraint seat; mothers' feeling hassled by child restraint seat use; and, mothers' agreement with the lack of need to use a restraint seat when another adult is in a car. Two variables were associated with inconsistent use on long drives: lower subjective norm of husband and frequent child resistance. CONCLUSIONS: In-car environmental modification and parent education need to be considered to increase child restraint seat use among Japanese households.     

Why Turks do not use seat belts? An interview study

Despite the effectiveness of seat belt use and legislation, seat belt use rate is low in Turkey. The aim of this study was to investigate the motives to use and not to use a seat belt in different traveling conditions in a sample of car drivers and passengers. Interviews were made face to face with 221 interviewees from different age and occupation groups. Frequently reported reasons for using a seat belt were traveling conditions, safety, situational conditions, habit of using a seat belt, and avoiding punishment. Frequently reported reasons for not using a seat belt were situational conditions, not believing in the effectiveness, discomfort and having no habit. Safety was the strongest predictor of reported seat belt use in both low and high risk traveling conditions. Findings suggest that seat belt campaigns should mainly emphasize seat belt's safety impact and aim at habit formation.