Predictors of restraint use among child occupants

Objectives: The objective of this study was to identify factors that predict restraint use and optimal restraint use among children aged 0 to 13 years.

Methods: The data set is a national sample of police-reported crashes for years 2010–2014 in which type of child restraint is recorded. The data set was supplemented with demographic census data linked by driver ZIP code, as well as a score for the state child restraint law during the year of the crash relative to best practice recommendations for protecting child occupants. Analysis used linear regression techniques.

Results: The main predictor of unrestrained child occupants was the presence of an unrestrained driver. Among restrained children, children had 1.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.27, 2.17) times higher odds of using the recommended type of restraint system if the state law at the time of the crash included requirements based on best practice recommendations.

Conclusions: Children are more likely to ride in the recommended type of child restraint when their state's child restraint law includes wording that follows best practice recommendations for child occupant protection. However, state child restraint law requirements do not influence when caregivers fail to use an occupant restraint for their child passengers.     

Rating child passenger safety laws relative to best practice recommendations for occupant protection

Background: State laws regarding child passenger protection vary substantially.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop a scoring system to rate child passenger safety laws relative to best practice recommendations for each age of child.

Methods: State child passenger safety and seat belt laws were retrieved from the LexisNexis database for the years 2002–2015. Text of the laws was reviewed and compared to current best practice recommendations for child occupant protection for each age of child.

Results: A 0–4 scale was developed to rate the strength of the state law relative to current best practice recommendations. A rating of 3 corresponds to a law that requires a restraint that is sufficient to meet best practice, and a rating of 4 is given to a law that specifies several options that would meet best practice. Scores of 0, 1, or 2 are given to laws requiring less than best practice to different degrees. The same scale is used for each age of child despite different restraint recommendations for each age. Legislation that receives a score of 3 requires rear-facing child restraints for children under age 2, forward-facing harnessed child restraints for children aged 2 to 4, booster seats for children 5 to 10, and primary enforcement of seat belt use in all positions for children aged 11–13. Legislation requiring use of a “child restraint system according to instructions” would receive a score of 1 for children under age 2 and a 2 for children aged 2–4 because it would allow premature use of a booster for children weighing more than 13.6 kg (30 lb).

Conclusions: The scoring system developed in this study can be used in mathematical models to predict how child passenger safety legislation affects child restraint practices.     

Characterizing the child passenger safety workforce in Michigan: A statewide survey in 2015

Objective: In this study, we assessed the number of child passenger safety technicians (CPSTs) in Michigan over 4 years and characterized the CPST workforce in 2015 to identify factors associated with high productivity and longevity in the field.

Methods: We determined the number of CPSTs and those newly certified using lists from the Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning (OHSP) from 2012 to 2015. We conducted a statewide survey of Michigan CPSTs in October 2015. Analyses were conducted in 2016. The survey assessed demographic characteristics, reasons to enter the field and maintain certification, and motivations to conduct seat checks. We used CPST-reported time devoted to seat checks and average number of seats checked per month to create a composite “activity level” variable. We examined activity levels across several characteristics.

Results: The number of CPSTs ranged from 941 to 980 over the study period, with approximately 200 new certifications annually. In 2015, surveys were started by 496 of 962 eligible CPSTs and 427 submitted complete responses. CPST-instructors had a higher response rate than CPSTs in general (89 vs. 49%, P < .0001). The majority of respondents were women (71%) and self-identified as white (88%). More than one third were 35–44 years old. Just 7% were comfortable checking seats using a language other than English. “Personal reasons” were most often cited motivation for becoming a CPST and maintaining certification. Natural fit/job enhancement were more common reasons to maintain certification than become a CPST. Time and distance had the greatest influence on seat check participation. Perceived need, appointments vs. drop-in, and employer factors were very influential for 10–15% of CPSTs. Few CPSTs considered free food and payments/giveaways very influential. About 40% of respondents were considered high-activity (>24 seats checked/year), one third medium-activity (5 to 24 seats checked/year), and one quarter low-activity (<5 seats checked/year). High-activity CPSTs most commonly reported both being paid and volunteering their time to check seats, worked with a Safe Kids coalition, worked in law enforcement or social services, and had recertified at least once. Motivation to participate in seat checks did not vary with activity level.

Conclusions: Understanding the demographic characteristics and motivations of CPSTs can help Michigan OHSP recruit and retain a workforce dedicated to increasing the safety of child passengers. Agencies hosting seat checks can use these results to align the strategies they employ to incentivize CPSTs to serve in their communities with the factors that have the greatest influence on CPST participation.     

An observational study of child safety seat use in an international safe community: Tehran,Iran

Objective: Despite strong evidence of the effectiveness of child safety seats in reducing injuries, the use of these devices in some communities is still rare. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of child safety seat use and the factors influencing its use in the safe community of Tehran.

Methods: This roadside observational study was conducted in 2015 and 2,178 personal cars with a child under 12 years aboard were observed on Tehran's streets in regard to use of child safety seats. Other variables such as the gender of the driver, driver's age group, type of street, region of municipality, time of day, and day of the week were also collected.

Results: Prevalence of child safety seat use was 4.3% and was significantly higher among women drivers, on freeways, and in municipal regions 1, 4, and 7.

Conclusions: The prevalence of child safety seat use in Tehran as a most populous member of the international safe community was very low and most children commuted in insecure situations in the vehicle. Therefore, it is proposed that plans should be made to increase the use of child safety seats in international safe communities.     

Teaching infant car seat installation via interactive visual presence: An experimental trial

Objective: A large portion of child restraint systems (car seats) are installed incorrectly, especially when first-time parents install infant car seats. Expert instruction greatly improves the accuracy of car seat installation but is labor intensive and difficult to obtain for many parents. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of 3 ways of communicating instructions for proper car seat installation: phone conversation; HelpLightning, a mobile application (app) that offers virtual interactive presence permitting both verbal and interactive (telestration) visual communication; and the manufacturer's user manual.

Methods: A sample of 39 young adults of child-bearing age who had no previous experience installing car seats were recruited and randomly assigned to install an infant car seat using guidance from one of those 3 communication sources.

Results: Both the phone and interactive app were more effective means to facilitate accurate car seat installation compared to the user manual. There was a trend for the app to offer superior communication compared to the phone, but that difference was not significant in most assessments. The phone and app groups also installed the car seat more efficiently and perceived the communication to be more effective and their installation to be more accurate than those in the user manual group.

Conclusions: Interactive communication may help parents install car seats more accurately than using the manufacturer's manual alone. This was an initial study with a modestly sized sample; if results are replicated in future research, there may be reason to consider centralized “call centers” that provide verbal and/or interactive visual instruction from remote locations to parents installing car seats, paralleling the model of centralized Poison Control centers in the United States.     

Evaluation of give kids a boost: A school-based program to increase booster seat use among urban children in economically disadvantaged areas

Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness of a series of 1-year multifaceted school-based programs aimed at increasing booster seat use among urban children 4–7 years of age in economically disadvantaged areas.

Methods: During 4 consecutive school years, 2011–2015, the Give Kids a Boost (GKB) program was implemented in a total of 8 schools with similar demographics in Dallas County. Observational surveys were conducted at project schools before project implementation (P₀), 1–4 weeks after the completion of project implementation (P₁), and 4–5 months later (P₂). Changes in booster seat use for the 3 time periods were compared for the 8 project and 14 comparison schools that received no intervention using a nonrandomized trial process.

The intervention included (1) train-the-trainer sessions with teachers and parents; (2) presentations about booster seat safety; (3) tailored communication to parents; (4) distribution of fact sheets/resources; (5) walk-around education; and (6) booster seat inspections.

The association between the GKB intervention and proper booster seat use was determined initially using univariate analysis. The association was also estimated using a generalized linear mixed model predicting a binomial outcome (booster seat use) for those aged 4 to 7 years, adjusted for child-level variables (age, sex, race/ethnicity) and car-level variables (vehicle type). The model incorporated the effects of clustering by site and by collection date to account for the possibility of repeated sampling.

Results: In the 8 project schools, booster seat use for children 4–7 years of age increased an average of 20.9 percentage points between P₀ and P₁ (P₀ = 4.8%, P₁ = 25.7%; odds ratio [OR] = 6.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5, 8.7; P < .001) and remained at that level in the P₂ time period (P₂ = 25.7%; P < .001, for P₀ vs. P₂) in the univariate analysis. The 14 comparison schools had minimal change in booster seat use. The multivariable model showed that children at the project schools were significantly more likely to be properly restrained in a booster seat after the intervention (OR = 2.7; 95% CI, 2.2, 3.3) compared to the P₀ time period and compared to the comparison schools.

Conclusion: Despite study limitations, the GKB program was positively associated with an increase in proper booster seat use for children 4–7 years of age in school settings among diverse populations in economically disadvantaged areas. These increases persisted into the following school year in a majority of the project schools. The GKB model may be a replicable strategy to increase booster seat use among school-age children in similar urban settings.     

Discordance between age- and size-based criteria of child passenger restraint appropriateness

Objectives: In this study, we sought to accomplish the following objectives: to (1) calculate the percentage of children considered appropriately restrained across 8 criteria of increasing restrictiveness; (2) examine agreement between age- and size-based appropriateness criteria; (3) assess for changes in the percentage of children considered appropriately restrained by the 8 criteria between 2011 (shortly after updates to U.S. guidelines) and 2015.

Methods: Data from 2 cross-sectional surveys of 928 parents of children younger than 12 years old (n = 591 in 2011, n = 337 in 2015) were analyzed in 2017. Child age, weight, and height were measured at an emergency department visit and used to determine whether the parent-reported child passenger restraint was considered appropriate according to 8 criteria. Age-based criteria were derived from Michigan law and U.S. guidelines. Weight, height, and size-based criteria were derived from typical restraints available in the United States in 2007 and 2011. The percentage appropriate restraint use was calculated for each criterion. The kappa statistic was used to measure agreement between criteria. Change in appropriateness from 2011 to 2015 was assessed with chi-square statistics.

Results: Percentage appropriate restraint use varied from a low of 19% for higher weight limits in 2011 to a high of 91% for Michigan law in 2015. Agreement between criteria was slight to moderate. The lowest kappa was for Michigan law and higher weight limits in 2011 (κ = 0.06) and highest for U.S. guidelines and lower weight limits in 2011 (κ = 0.60). Percentage appropriate restraint use was higher in 2015 than 2011 for the following criteria: U.S. guidelines (74 vs. 58%, P < .001), lower weight (57 vs. 47%, P = .005), higher weight (25 vs. 19%, P = .03), greater height (39 vs. 26%, P < .001), and greater size (42 vs. 30%, P = .001).

Conclusions: The percentage of children considered to be using an appropriate restraint varied substantially across criteria. Aligning the definition of appropriate restraint use with current U.S. guidelines would increase consistency in reporting results from studies of child passenger safety in the United States. Potential explanations for the increased percentage of children considered appropriately restrained between 2011 and 2015 include adoption of the updated U.S. guidelines and the use of child passenger restraints with higher weight and height limits.     

Parental awareness and perception for correct use of child restraint systems and airbags in Brazil

Objective: The objective of this study was to obtain information about the current knowledge and habits of parents who transport children in cars in Brazil.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted using specifically designed self-report questionnaires to parents of children attending a private pediatric office in a town in southwest Brazil. Data were collected regarding children's age, gender, height, and weight and possession of an automobile child restraint system (CRS), its type, frequency and adequacy of use, and reasons for not possessing or not using the devices. Parents were asked whether their cars were equipped with airbags and about the use of the restraints in seats with airbags.

Results: We interviewed parents of 293 children transported in cars who met the criteria for use of a CRS. Children were younger than 1 year in 15.3% of the cases, between 1 and 4 years in 38.6%, and older than 4 in 46.1%. Cars were equipped with CRS in 78.5% of the cases, but in only 58% of the cases was the device proper for child's age and adequately installed in the seat. Among owners of the devices, 84.3% reported that they always used it. Reasons for infrequency were forgetting the device at home or in another car (6.4%), the child disliking the device (3.2%), or the false impression that the child was grown enough not to use it (3.2%)l 87.1% did not justify why they did not always use the CRS. Considering type of CRS, correct installation of the seat, and frequency of use, only 44.4% of children under 1 year, 69.9% of those 1 to 4 years, and 52.6% over age 4 were protected. Only 28.6% of the parents knew that children should never be positioned in a seat with active airbags.

Conclusion: Considering appropriateness for age, correctness of installation (in the back seat in the correct orientation), and frequency of use, only 50.85% (149/293) of the children were reported as always protected with a CRS. Children between 1 and 4 years were more likely to always use a CRS in this Brazilian survey. We were also able to identify an important gap in the knowledge about airbags among parents. Further efforts are needed to correct those distortions.     

Use of child safety seats and booster seats in the United States: A comparison of parent/caregiver-reported and observed use estimates

Background: Motor-vehicles crashes are a leading cause of death among children. Age- and size-appropriate restraint use can prevent crash injuries and deaths among children. Strategies to increase child restraint use should be informed by reliable estimates of restraint use practices. Objective: Compare parent/caregiver-reported and observed child restraint use estimates from the FallStyles and Estilos surveys with the National Survey of the Use of Booster Seats (NSUBS). Methods: Estimates of child restraint use from two online, cross-sectional surveys—FallStyles, a survey of U.S. adults, and Estilos, a survey of U.S. Hispanic adults—were compared with observed data collected in NSUBS. Parents/caregivers of children aged ≤ 12 years were asked about the child’s restraint use behaviors in FallStyles and Estilos, while restraint use was observed in NSUBS. Age-appropriate restraint use was defined as rear-facing child safety seat (CSS) use for children aged 0–4 years, forward-facing CSS use for children aged 2–7 years, booster seat use for children aged 5–12 years, and seat belt use for children aged 9–12 years. Age-appropriate restraint users are described by demographic characteristics and seat row, with weighted prevalence and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. Results: Overall, child restraint use as reported by parents/caregivers was 90.8% (CI: 87.5–94.1) (FallStyles) and 89.4% (CI: 85.5–93.4) for observed use (NSUBS). Among Hispanic children, reported restraint use was 82.6% (CI: 73.9–91.3) (Estilos) and 84.4% (CI: 79.0–88.6) for observed use (NSUBS, Hispanic children only). For age-appropriate restraint use, estimates ranged from 74.3% (CI: 69.7–79.0) (FallStyles) to 59.7% (CI: 55.0–64.4) (NSUBS), and for Hispanic children, from 71.5% (CI: 62.1–81.0) (Estilos) to 57.2% (CI: 51.2–63.2) (NSUBS, Hispanic children only). Conclusion and Practical Application: Overall estimates of parent/caregiver-reported and observed child restraint use were similar. However, for age-appropriate restraint use, reported use was higher than observed use for most age groups.     

Variations in booster seat use by child characteristics

IntroductionChild weight and height are the basis of manufacturer and best practice guidelines for child restraint system use. However, these guides do not address behavioral differences among children of similar age, weight, and height, which may result in child-induced restraint use errors. The objective of this study was to characterize child behaviors across age in relation to appropriate restraint system use during simulated drives. Methods: Fifty mother–child (4–8 years) dyads completed an installation into a driving simulator, followed by a simulated drive that was video-recorded and coded for child-induced errors. Time inappropriately restrained was measured as the total amount of the simulated drive spent in an improper or unsafe position for the restraint to be effective divided by the total drive time. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to determine differences across age in the frequency of error events and overall time inappropriately restrained. Results: Children in harnessed seats had no observed errors during trips. Within children sitting in booster seats there were differences in time inappropriately restrained across age (p = 0.01), with 4 year-olds spending on average 67% (Median = 76%) of the drive inappropriately restrained, compared to the rest of the age categories spending less than 28% (Medians ranged from 3% to 23%). Conclusion: Some children may be physically compatible with booster seats, but not behaviorally mature enough to safely use them. More research is needed that examines how child behavior influences child passenger safety. Practical Applications: Not all children physically big enough are behaviorally ready to use belt positioning booster seats. Primary sources of information should provide caregivers with individualized guidance about when it is appropriate to transition children out of harnessed seats. Additionally, best practice guidelines should be updated to reflect what behaviors are needed from children to safely use specific types of child restraint systems.     

Seat belt use among car drivers in Iranian safe communities: An observational study

Objective: The number of road traffic injuries and fatalities in Iran is high. The aim of the present study was to investigate the rate of drivers' seat belt use and a number of related factors in Kashmar, Bardaskan, and Khalilabad (Iranian Safe Communities).Methods: In 2014, driver observations were made at 48 road sites on intercity roads, main streets, side streets, and rural roads in these 3 cities.Results: A total of 10,255 vehicles were observed, with the overall rate of seat belt use being 51.8%. The rates in Kashmar, Bardaskan, and Khalilabad were 51.4, 56.3, and 47.7%, respectively. In Kashmar, the odds of seat belt use were higher among drivers who were female, older, and taxi drivers. Higher use was also found during the afternoon, and lower use was observed on rural roads. In Khalilabad the odds of seat belt use were higher among females, older drivers, taxis, and private car drivers. Seat belt use was also higher on weekends and during the morning but was significantly lower on rural roads. Similarly, in Bardaskan the odds of using a seat belt were higher among females, older drivers, taxis, and private car drivers. Seat belt use was also higher during the afternoon but was significantly lower on rural roads, in comparison to main streets and intercity roads.Conclusions: The rate of seat belt use in these 3 cities was found to be low, despite these cities being designated as International Safe Communities. Therefore, seat belt promotion programs, tougher regulations, stronger enforcement, public awareness campaigns, and more research are needed to promote seat belt use in these Iranian cities.     

Restraint use in the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Objectives: This study set out to examine seat belt and child restraint use in the Dammam Municipality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, based on the premise that an increase in seat belt use would significantly reduce personal injury in traffic crashes. It was expected that local data would help identify intervention strategies necessary to improve seat belt use in the region.

Methods: The research involved 2 methodologies. First, 1,389 face-to-face interviews were conducted with male and female adults in regional shopping plazas regarding their own and their children's restraint use in their vehicles and reasons for these attitudes and beliefs. Second, 2 on-road observation studies of adult and child restraint use were conducted by trained observers. Occupants of approximately 5,000 passenger vehicles were observed while stopped at representative signalized traffic intersections.

Results: The findings showed front seat belt use rates of between 43 and 47% for drivers and 26 to 30% for front seat passengers; rear seat belt use rates were lower. While there seemed to be some knowledge about the purpose and reasons for restraining both adults and children in suitable restraints, this failed to be confirmed in the on-road observations.

Conclusions: Reasons for these rates and findings are discussed fully, and recommendations for improving seat belt use in the Dammam Municipality are included.     

Knowledge,attitudes, and behaviors related to child safety restraint in citizens of Shenzhen Municipality,China, and the associations between these factors

Objective: A child safety restraint (CSR) is an effective measure to reduce the risk of child injury from traffic collisions. This study aims to explore knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding CSRs in a Chinese population.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey regarding CSR use was conducted from April to May 2014 in Shenzhen municipality. Respondents were parents who had at least one child 0 to 6 years of age and owned a car. These parents provided a self-report of demographic characteristics as well as information about their knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors toward CSR use.

Results: Most respondents had a fair level of knowledge about CSRs, with higher mean knowledge scores demonstrated among the respondents who were male, had an advanced degree, had a higher income, owned an expensive car, had an older child, drove frequently with children, and routinely drove greater distances with children. In addition, most respondents had a more positive attitude toward CSR use, with a higher mean attitude score among those who had an advanced degree, owned an expensive car, drove frequently with children, and routinely drove greater distances with children. However, some myths regarding CSR use also existed (e.g., parents can effectively protect their children in a car collision by holding them, they are not required to purchase the CSR for child safety if there is no mandatory provision by law, among others). Among 3,768 respondents who had at least one child and a car, 27.8% (1,047) had a CSR and 22.9% (864) used the CSR. A logistic regression model showed the likelihood of CSR ownership to be higher if respondents drove frequently or greater distances and was dependent on both the education level of the respondents and the age of the children. The frequency of CSR use increased as the age of children decreased (P = .0274). Respondents who owned a CSR and those who frequently used CSRs had higher mean knowledge and mean attitude scores.

Conclusions: This observational study found that although the majority of respondents had fair levels of knowledge and positive attitudes, they had lower rates of CSR ownership and use. Therefore, efforts at developing opportunities to expand public awareness of CSR use should be made to improve child passenger safety practices and eliminate child injury caused by traffic collisions.     

Occupant responses in conventional and ABTS seats in high-speed rear sled tests

Objective: This study compared biomechanical responses of a normally seated Hybrid III dummy on conventional and all belts to seat (ABTS) seats in 40.2 km/h (25 mph) rear sled tests. It determined the difference in performance with modern (≥2000 MY) seats compared to older (<2000 MY) seats and ABTS seats.

Methods: The seats were fixed in a sled buck subjected to a 40.2 km/h (25 mph) rear sled test. The pulse was a 15 g double-peak acceleration with 150 ms duration. The 50th percentile Hybrid III was lap–shoulder belted in the FMVSS 208 design position. The testing included 11 <2000 MY, 8 ≥2000 MY, and 7 ABTS seats. The dummy was fully instrumented, including head accelerations, upper and lower neck 6-axis load cells, chest acceleration, thoracic and lumbar spine load cells, and pelvis accelerations. The peak responses were normalized by injury assessment reference values (IARVs) to assess injury risks. Statistical analysis was conducted using Student's t test. High-speed video documented occupant kinematics.

Results: Biomechanical responses were lower with modern (≥2000 MY) seats than older (<2000 MY) designs. The lower neck extension moment was 32.5 ± 9.7% of IARV in modern seats compared to 62.8 ± 31.6% in older seats (P =.01). Overall, there was a 34% reduction in the comparable biomechanical responses with modern seats. Biomechanical responses were lower with modern seats than ABTS seats. The lower neck extension moment was 41.4 ± 7.8% with all MY ABTS seats compared to 32.5 ± 9.7% in modern seats (P =.07). Overall, the ABTS seats had 13% higher biomechanical responses than the modern seats.

Conclusions: Modern (≥2000 MY) design seats have lower biomechanical responses in 40.2 km/h rear sled tests than older (<2000 MY) designs and ABTS designs. The improved performance is consistent with an increase in seat strength combined with improved occupant kinematics through pocketing of the occupant into the seatback, higher and more forward head restraint, and other design changes. The methods and data presented here provide a basis for standardized testing of seats. However, a complete understanding of seat safety requires consideration of out-of-position (OOP) occupants in high-speed impacts and consideration of the much more common, low-speed rear impacts.     

Seat belt use and fit among drivers aged 75 years and older in their own vehicles

Objective: This article aims to describe seat belt wearing patterns and quality of seat belt fit among drivers aged 75 years and older. A secondary aim is to explore associations between body shape, comfort, and seat belt use patterns.

Methods: This is an observation and survey study of a cohort of 380 drivers aged 75 years and over. During home visits, photographs were taken of the drivers in their vehicles for later analysis of belt fit and a short survey was also administered to collect demographic data and information about seat belt use and comfort. Seat belt fit and use of belt and seat accessories were analyzed from the photographs.

Results: Data from 367 participants with photographs were analyzed. Whereas 97% reported using a seat belt and 90% reported their seat belt to be comfortable, 21% reported repositioning their seat belt to improve comfort. Good sash and lap belt fit were achieved in 53 and 59% of participants, respectively, but only 35% achieved overall good fit. Both poor sash and lap belt fit were observed in 23% of participants. Drivers who were in the obese category had over twice the odds (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2–4.1) of having a poor lap belt fit than those in the normal body mass index [BMI] range, and drivers who were overweight had 1.8 times the odds (95% CI, 1.1–2.9) of having poor lap belt fit. Older females also had twice the odds (95% CI, 1.3–3.5) of poor lap belt fit compared to older males, regardless of BMI. Sash belt fit did not vary significantly by BMI, stature, or gender. However older drivers who reported that they had not made any adjustments to the D-ring height had 1.7 times the odds of having poor sash belt fit than those who made adjustments (1.2–2.9). Females were 7.3 times more likely to report comfort problems than males (95% CI, 3.2, 16.3) but there was no association between reported comfort and BMI or seat belt fit. Drivers who reported comfort problems had 6 times the odds (3.2–13.6) of also reporting active repositioning of the belt.

Conclusions: The results suggest that older drivers face challenges in achieving comfortable and correct seat belt fit. This may have a negative impact on crash protection. Belt fit problems appear to be associated with body shape, particularly high BMI and gender. There is a need for further investigation of comfort accessories; in the interim, older drivers and occupants should be encouraged to use features such as D-ring adjusters to improve sash belt fit.     

Child restraint use and parental perceptions of comfort

Objective: Suboptimal child restraint use includes incorrect and/or inappropriate restraint use and increases the risk of injury. Comfort has been suggested as an important factor impacting on optimal use of restraints by children. This article aims to examine the relationships between parent reported comfort and restraint misuse and age-appropriate restraint choice.

Methods: This is an analysis of data from a cross sectional observation study of child restraint use in New South Wales. Logistic regression was used to model the relationship between parent-reported comfort and restraint misuse and age-appropriate restraint choice.

Results: There was no significant relationship between either parent-reported comfort and restraint misuse or parent-reported comfort and age-appropriate restraint choice.

Conclusions: Parent perceptions of comfort of children in child restraints do not appear to be associated with incorrect child restraint use or age appropriate restraint choice. It is possible that the actual comfort of the child may be related to incorrect use but this remains to be tested. Further investigation of the relationship between parent-perceived comfort and the actual comfort of the child, as well as the impact of child comfort on optimal child restraint use is warranted.     

A direct observation study of nighttime safety belt use in Indiana

INTRODUCTION: Nearly all direct observation studies of safety belt use are conducted exclusively during daylight hours. Recent work has suggested that safety belt use at night may differ from daytime belt use. METHODS: An observational study of nighttime safety belt use, utilizing specialized night vision equipment, was conducted in Indiana surrounding the Click It or Ticket 2006 safety belt mobilization activities. A pre- and a post-mobilization statewide direct observation survey was conducted at night coinciding with daytime safety belt use data collection conducted by the state of Indiana. Daytime and nighttime belt use rates were compared. RESULTS: The comparisons across the mobilization period revealed a significant increase during the day, but a significant decrease at night. Comparisons between daytime and nighttime belt use revealed no overall difference during the pre wave, but a significant difference during the post wave. Finally, many common daytime trends in belt use were also found at night, with the exception of the typical age and seating position effects. DISCUSSION: The mobilization activities had a positive effect on daytime belt use, but no effect on nighttime belt use, likely resulting in the differences between daytime and nighttime belt use observed during the post wave. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: The findings of this study suggest that safety belt mobilizations implemented only during the day do not influence nighttime safety belt use. Changes to how these programs are implemented or additional programs specifically targeting belt use at night should be considered, along with continued monitoring of nighttime belt use.     

Observed LATCH use and misuse characteristics of child restraint systems in seven states

INTRODUCTION: Although the LATCH System (Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children) holds the promise of simplifying the installation of a child restraint system (CRS) to the vehicle's seat, many drivers transporting young children have difficulties using this technology. This paper reports on an observation study of LATCH use and misuse. METHOD: Observations of approximately 1,000 children less than 5 years of age in CRSs, in the back seats of vehicles that were equipped with tether and lower anchors, in seven states. RESULTS: Tethers were used for 51% of the children when the forward-facing CRS had tether straps and the vehicle had tether anchors. Lower anchors were used for 58% of the children when the CRS had lower attachments and the vehicle had lower anchors. The most common tether and lower attachment misuses were loose tether straps (18% of cases) and loose lower attachment installation (30% of the cases), respectively. Vehicle safety belts were used in combination with lower attachments in 20% of all lower anchor installations. CONCLUSION: As more caregivers of young children drive vehicles equipped with LATCH, it will be important to promote the proper installation of CRSs using this technology. LATCH education messages must also emphasize that the lower anchors may not always be the safest choice for CRS attachment -- the safest attachment is the one that results in a tight fit and will be used correctly consistently.     

Analysis of occupational accidents: prevention through the use of additional technical safety measures for machinery

This article presents an analysis of results of 1035 serious and 341 minor accidents recorded by Poland's National Labour Inspectorate (PIP) in 2005–2011, in view of their prevention by means of additional safety measures applied by machinery users. Since the analysis aimed at formulating principles for the application of technical safety measures, the analysed accidents should bear additional attributes: the type of machine operation, technical safety measures and the type of events causing injuries. The analysis proved that the executed tasks and injury-causing events were closely connected and there was a relation between casualty events and technical safety measures. In the case of tasks consisting of manual feeding and collecting materials, the injuries usually occur because of the rotating motion of tools or crushing due to a closing motion. Numerous accidents also happened in the course of supporting actions, like removing pollutants, correcting material position, cleaning, etc.