Adult opinions about the age at which children can be left home alone, bathe alone, or bike alone: Second Injury Control and Risk Survey (ICARIS-2)

Pediatric outdoor recreational injuries: another hidden concern during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Recreational equipment sales rose significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study investigated changes in the incidence of pediatric emergency department (PED) visits related to outdoor recreational activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a large children's hospital with a level 1 trauma center. Data were obtained from PED electronic medical records of children 5-14 years with a visit from March 23-September 1 in years 2015-2020. Patients with an ICD-10 code for injury associated with recreation and use of common outdoor recreational equipment were included. Initial pandemic year, 2020, was compared with pre-pandemic years (2015-2019). Data collected included patient demographics, injury characteristics, deprivation index, and disposition. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the population and Chi-squared analysis was used determine relationships between groups.

RESULTS

There were 29,044 total injury visits during the study months with 4715 visits (16.2%) due to recreational mechanisms. A higher proportion of visits due to recreational injury visits occurred during the COVID pandemic (8.2%) compared to before (4.9%). Comparing patients included within the two times, were no differences in sex, ethnicity, or ED disposition. During the COVID pandemic, there was a higher percentage of White patients (80% vs 76%) and patients with commercial insurance (64% vs 55%). There was a significantly lower deprivation index for patients injured during the COVID pandemic. There were more injuries due to bicycles, ATV/motorbike, and non-motorized wheeled vehicles during the COVID pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an increase in bicycle, ATV/motorbike, and non-motorized wheeled vehicle injuries. White patients with commercial insurance were more likely to be injured compared to years prior. A targeted approach to injury prevention initiatives should be considered.

Child abuse and neglect experts' determination of when a child being left home alone constitutes child neglect

Background

Only 14 states have laws or guidelines regarding the minimum age a child may be left home alone. These ages range from 6 to 14 years. Our objective was to identify factors that influence child neglect determination by experts with regards to parents leaving children home alone.

Methods

American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Child Abuse and Neglect members (N = 523) were surveyed from July–August, 2015. Respondents were asked whether scenarios involving a child of varying age knowingly left home alone for 4 h were neglect in the presence or absence of injury to the child and the legality of the situation. Comparisons were performed using the chi-square test.

Results

One hundred ninety-three members responded (36.9%). In the scenario where there were no relevant laws and the child was uninjured, nearly 100% of the child experts determined this as being child neglect when the child was 6 years old. For 8, 10, 12, and 14 year olds, this was 88, 48, 4, and 1%, respectively. However, a significantly higher percentage of experts considered it child neglect for most ages when there was a law making the scenario illegal as compared when there was no law, and when the child was injured versus when they were not. The only demographic variable that showed a difference in child neglect determination was that females were more likely to consider higher aged children as having been neglected when there were no laws but the child was injured. The vast majority of experts (85%) stated that leaving a child home alone for 4 h should be illegal if the child is < 9 years old, and nearly one-half (44%) said it should be illegal for children < 11 years old.

Conclusions

A number of factors affect how experts view children being left home alone as potential child neglect. Our data suggests that such cases may be evaluated differently due to variations in state laws, even though the risk to the child is the same. These results call for child safety law reform to provide greater uniformity in the evaluation of potential child neglect cases and better protect the safety of children.

Unintentional fatal child drowning in the bath: A 12-year Australian review (2002-2014)

AIM

To establish the prevalence of unintentional fatal drowning in baths involving children <18 years in Australia and to identify causal factors to underpin prevention.

METHODS

We report a total population study of all childhood (0-17 years) unintentional drowning fatalities in baths (bathtubs, spa baths and showers) in Australia between 1 July 2002 and 30 June 2014. Demographic, forensic and aetiological data (including co-bathing, use of bath aids, supervision and enactment of cardiopulmonary resuscitation) were documented for each victim.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight children were identified; two thirds (66.7%) were under 2 years old, of which 43.6% were aged less than 1 year (1.0/100 000/annum) and 23.1% 1-2 years (0.27/100 000/annum). Nine older children (10-17 years) also drowned. Common causes included: infants and children unable to hold their head out of water while unsupervised and associated pre-existing medical conditions, including epilepsy. All children who drowned were left without adult supervision. No child drowned in a bath with water deeper than 40 cm (M = 19.4 cm). Custodian-reported 'time left unsupervised' ranged from 30 s to 60 min. Children with pre-existing medical conditions were, on average, older (9.9 years; confidence interval: 7.9-11.9) and left unsupervised for longer (M = 15.4 min; confidence interval: 3.8-27.1) than those without.

CONCLUSIONS

On average, 6.5 children drown every year in baths in Australia. Children aged younger than 1 year are most affected, with both genders equally represented. Infants and toddlers left unsupervised, false confidence in the preventive role of bath aids, unrealistic expectations in the supervisory capabilities of co-bathing children and epilepsy remain threats to children in the bath.

Adequate supervision for children and adolescents

Primary care providers (PCPs) have the opportunity to improve child health and well-being by addressing supervision issues before an injury or exposure has occurred and/or after an injury or exposure has occurred. Appropriate anticipatory guidance on supervision at well-child visits can improve supervision of children, and may prevent future harm. Adequate supervision varies based on the child's development and maturity, and the risks in the child's environment. Consideration should be given to issues as wide ranging as swimming pools, falls, dating violence, and social media. By considering the likelihood of harm and the severity of the potential harm, caregivers may provide adequate supervision by minimizing risks to the child while still allowing the child to take "small" risks as needed for healthy development. Caregivers should initially focus on direct (visual, auditory, and proximity) supervision of the young child. Gradually, supervision needs to be adjusted as the child develops, emphasizing a safe environment and safe social interactions, with graduated independence. PCPs may foster adequate supervision by providing concrete guidance to caregivers. In addition to preventing injury, supervision includes fostering a safe, stable, and nurturing relationship with every child. PCPs should be familiar with age/developmentally based supervision risks, adequate supervision based on those risks, characteristics of neglectful supervision based on age/development, and ways to encourage appropriate supervision throughout childhood.