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

Child face detection on front passenger seat through deep learning

OBJECTIVE

One of the main causes of death worldwide among young people are car crashes, and most of these fatalities occur to children who are seated in the front passenger seat and who, at the time of an accident, receive a direct impact from the airbags, which is lethal for children under 13 years of age. The present study seeks to raise awareness of this risk by interior monitoring with a child face detection system that serves to alert the driver that the child should not be sitting in the front passenger seat.

METHODS

The system incorporates processing of data collected, elements of deep learning such as transfer learning, fine-tunning and facial detection to identify the presence of children in a robust way, which was achieved by training with a dataset generated from scratch for this specific purpose. The MobileNetV2 architecture was used based on the good performance shown when compared with the Inception architecture for this task; and its low computational cost, which facilitates implementing the final model on a Raspberry Pi 4B.

RESULTS

The resulting image dataset consisted of 102 empty seats, 71 children (0-13 years), and 96 adults (14-75 years). From the data augmentation, there were 2,496 images for adults and 2,310 for children. The classification of faces without sliding window gave a result of 98% accuracy and 100% precision. Finally, using the proposed methodology, it was possible to detect children in the front passenger seat in real time, with a delay of 1 s per decision and sliding window criterion, reaching an accuracy of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our 100% accuracy in an experimental environment is somewhat idealized in that the sensor was not blocked by direct sunlight, nor was it partially or completely covered by dirt or other debris common in vehicles transporting children. The present study showed that is possible the implementation of a robust noninvasive classification system made on Raspberry Pi 4 Model B in any automobile for the detection of a child in the front seat through deep learning methods such as Deep CNN.

Change in seating position of children in towaway crashes from 1989 to 2019

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the nationwide response to passenger airbag (PA) related deaths of children. The response was implemented in 1996 and focused on moving children to rear seats. This study determined the change in seating position of children from 1989 to 2019.

METHODS

Field accident data on exposed occupants in towaway crashes was determined using 1989-2015 NASS-CDS in five groups (1989-1995, 1996-99, 2000-04, 2005-09 and 2010-15) and 2017-19 CISS in one group. Children were grouped as 0-2 yo (years old), 3-7 yo and 8-12 yo. Occupants 13 + were included for completeness. Seat position was defined as left-front (LF), right-front (RF), 2nd row and 3rd row. The weighted data provided an estimate for the change in seating position over time by occupant age with standard errors.

RESULTS

For 0-2 yo, 27.9% were in the RF seat in 1989-95. The fraction decreased to 0.40% in the 2017-19 (p < 0.001). For 3-7 yo, 32.1% were in the RF seat in 1989-95 and 3.2% in 2017-19 (p < 0.001). There has been a steady decrease in 0-7 yo using the RF seat. For 8-12 yo, there was a step decline in use of the RF seat from 39.5% in 1989-95 to 23.2% in the 2017-19 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The immediate reduction in front-seat use among younger children was associated with the nationwide public information efforts implemented in 1996 to move children to rear seats. Children up to 7 yo are no longer riding in the RF seat of vehicles in towaway crashes, unless there is no other option. Children 8-12 yo are still using the RF seat, but at a lower rate. The change in use of the RF seat for children 0-7 yo provides evidence that safety campaigns on placing young children in rear seats were successful in the US.

Affordability and Availability of Child Restraints in an Under-Served Population in South Africa

Background: Child road traffic injuries are a major global public health problem and the issue is particularly burdensome in middle-income countries such as South Africa where injury death rates are 41 per 100,000 for under 5′s and 24.5 per 100,000 for 5–14-year-old. Despite their known effectiveness in reducing injuries amongst children, the rates of use of child restraint systems (CRS) remains low in South Africa. Little is known about barriers to child restraint use especially in low- and middle-income countries. Methods: We carried out observation studies and parent/carer surveys in 7 suburbs of Cape Town over a three month period to assess usage rates and explore the knowledge and perceptions of parents towards child restraint legislation, ownership and cost; Results: Only 7.8% of child passengers were observed to be properly restrained in a CRS with driver seatbelt use and single child occupancy being associated with higher child restraint use. 92% of survey respondents claimed to have knowledge of current child restraint legislation, however, only 32% of those parents/carers were able to correctly identify the age requirements and penalty. Reasons given for not owning a child seat included high cost and the belief that seatbelts were a suitable alternative. Conclusions: These findings indicate the need for a tighter legislation with an increased fine paired with enhanced enforcement of both adult seatbelt and child restraint use. The provision of low-cost/subsidised CRS or borrowing schemes and targeted social marketing through online fora, well baby clinics, early learning centres would be beneficial in increasing ownership and use of CRS.

Fatal side impact crash scenarios for rear seat and seat belt-restrained occupants from vulnerable populations

Objective: Previous studies have revealed vulnerability of school-age children and older adults in rear seats in motor vehicle crashes. Detailed information about crashes in which these fatalities occur could help improve vehicle and restraint design.Methods: Police accident reports were obtained for crashes from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System data set. Inclusion criteria were crashes in which there was at least one fatally injured restrained rear seat occupant between the ages of 6 and 12 or 55 and older in a passenger vehicle no older than 10 years at the time of the crash. Reports were reviewed for key crash data. Side impacts were selected for analysis.Results: Thirty-nine side impact crashes met the inclusion criteria, resulting in 46 fatalities of interest. Far-side or nondirect impact cases outnumbered near-side cases by 15-11 for juvenile occupants. Sixty-one percent of occupants were in vehicles with side airbags (SABs), all of which deployed for their position, although torso SABs were only present in 3 cases. Head injuries were present in all juvenile cases with injury data available and older occupants suffered equally from head and torso injuries. Impacts with pickup trucks and heavy trucks made up 31 and 22% of all cases, respectively. Three-quarters of cases were judged as survivable for the fatally injured occupant(s), and 5 of 7 cases deemed unsurvivable involved juvenile decedents. Further, of those deemed survivable, two-thirds had damage comparable in magnitude with the same vehicles in consumer information crash tests, evaluated by photo comparison.Conclusions: Older adults suffered thoracic injuries at a higher rate than older children-who suffered predominately head injuries-and most vehicles did not have torso SABs installed, which could have mitigated thoracic injuries. Side impacts in which younger occupants were killed were more severe than impacts that resulted in the death of an older occupant; however, vehicle damage and intrusion in many fatal impacts for both age cohorts appeared similar to that of consumer information testing. Large pickups and heavy vehicles were the striking vehicle in over half of all fatalities; vehicle designs and crash tests should continue to take this into consideration. This research highlights the need for continued work as the automotive safety community seeks to eliminate fatalities in motor vehicle crashes.

Safety awareness and use of child safety seats among parents after the legislation in Shanghai

PURPOSE

To investigate the changes and underlying mechanisms in parents' safety awareness and the use of child safety seats after the mandatory legislation in Shanghai city, China.

METHODS

This study was carried out by Shanghai Key Laboratory of Environment and Children's Health using a multi-stage, simple random sampling method. Volunteers with children aged 0-12 months were recruited. Child safety seats were sent to each volunteer's family. Telephone encounters and/or on-site visits were used to collect data from parents using a phased survey on children's safety during car use.

RESULTS

Among all respondents, 91.2% had heard of motor vehicle accidents involving children, and 97.2% could describe the appropriate use of a safety seat to minimize the risk of child injury in a collision. Among 1078 families with newborns, awareness of child safety seats was 91.9%. There were 86% patients aware that new laws and regulations have been released regarding the use of child safety seats, and 98.5% of them plan to comply with the new laws. Moreover, 61% patients think that taxis should be routinely equipped with child safety seats.

CONCLUSION

The parents in Shanghai obtained a high level of awareness of children's traffic safety after the introduction of child safety seats legislation, and had a positive experience related to the use of child safety seats. Taxi may be an important area of focus for implementation of child traffic safety. Traffic safety laws and regulations with further impact should be continuously studied.

Factors contributing to serious and fatal injuries in belted rear seat occupants in frontal crashes

Objectives: Earlier research has shown that the rear row is safer for occupants in crashes than the front row, but there is evidence that improvements in front seat occupant protection in more recent vehicle model years have reduced the safety advantage of the rear seat versus the front seat. The study objective was to identify factors that contribute to serious and fatal injuries in belted rear seat occupants in frontal crashes in newer model year vehicles. Methods: A case series review of belted rear seat occupants who were seriously injured or killed in frontal crashes was conducted. Occupants in frontal crashes were eligible for inclusion if they were 6 years old or older and belted in the rear of a 2000 or newer model year passenger vehicle within 10 model years of the crash year. Crashes were identified using the 2004-2015 National Automotive Sampling System Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) and included all eligible occupants with at least one Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 3 or greater injury. Using these same inclusion criteria but split into younger (6 to 12 years) and older (55+ years) cohorts, fatal crashes were identified in the 2014-2015 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and then local police jurisdictions were contacted for complete crash records. Results: Detailed case series review was completed for 117 rear seat occupants: 36 with Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) 3+ injuries in NASS-CDS and 81 fatalities identified in FARS. More than half of the injured and killed rear occupants were more severely injured than front seat occupants in the same crash. Serious chest injury, primarily caused by seat belt loading, was present in 22 of the injured occupants and 17 of the 37 fatalities with documented injuries. Nine injured occupants and 18 fatalities sustained serious head injury, primarily from contact with the vehicle interior or severe intrusion. For fatal cases, 12 crashes were considered unsurvivable due to a complete loss of occupant space. For cases considered survivable, intrusion was not a large contributor to fatality. Discussion: Rear seat occupants sustained serious and fatal injuries due to belt loading in crashes in which front seat occupants survived, suggesting a discrepancy in restraint performance between the front and rear rows. Restraint strategies that reduce loading to the chest should be considered, but there may be potential tradeoffs with increased head excursion, particularly in the absence of rear seat airbags. Any new restraint designs should consider the unique needs of the rear seat environment.

Current use of safety restraint systems and front seats in Korean children based on the 2008-2015 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

PURPOSE

The use of proper safety restraint systems by children is vital for the reduction of traffic accident-related injury and death. This study evaluated the rates of use of safety restraint systems and front seats by Korean children.

METHODS

Based on data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2008 to 2015, I investigated the frequencies of safety restraint systems and front seat use by children under six and 12 years of age, respectively.

RESULTS

The percentage of respondents who said they always use safety restraint systems increased from 17.7% in 2008 to 45.0% in 2015. The rate of children who did not use the front seats at all was 47.3 % in 2008 compared to 33.4% in 2015. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed a decrease in safety-restraint-system use as age increased (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-0.77). The use rate of front-passenger seat belts by the mother is significantly correlated with the safety-restraint- system use rate by children (odds ratio, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.12-4.06).

CONCLUSION

Although the rate of safety-restraint-system use for children is increasing annually, it remains low. Additionally, the use rate of front passenger seats for children is high. To reduce the rates of injury and death of children from traffic accidents, it is necessary to educate on the appropriate use of safety restraint systems according to age and body size and to develop stronger regulations.

Seating position and patterns of severely injured body parts among child passengers in motor vehicle crashes: Japan as a distinct case

This study describes injury patterns and outcomes related to the seating position of child passengers involved in motor vehicle crashes in Japan. Using data obtained from a national trauma registry database, we compared the occurrence of injuries by body parts, length of hospital stay and in-hospital deaths between front-seating and rear-seating among children. We analysed 166 children aged 0-5 years and 205 children aged 6-12 years. No significant differences were observed between front- and rear-seating for injured body parts, length of hospital stay or in-hospital deaths in the 0-5-year-old victims. Among those aged 6-12 years, rear-seating was associated with a higher incidence of head and chest injuries but the length of stay or in-hospital deaths did not differ. These findings contrast those of previous studies, which found that rear-seating reduces injury risk, possibly attributed to low age-appropriate restraint use among school-aged children in Japan.

Road traffic accidents in children: the 'what', 'how' and 'why'

INTRODUCTION

Road traffic accidents (RTAs) in Singapore involving children were evaluated, with particular focus on the epidemiology, surrounding circumstances and outcomes of these accidents. Key factors associated with worse prognosis were identified. We proposed some measures that may be implemented to reduce the frequency and severity of such accidents.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of RTAs involving children aged 0-16 years who presented to the Children's Emergency at KK Women's and Children's Hospital, Singapore, from January 2011 to June 2014. Data was obtained from the National Trauma Registry and analysed in tiers based on the Injury Severity Score (ISS).

RESULTS

A total of 1,243 accidents were reviewed. RTA victims included motor vehicle passengers (60.4%), pedestrians (28.5%), cyclists (9.9%) and motorcycle pillion riders (1.2%). The disposition of emergency department (ED) patients was consistent with RTA severity. For serious RTAs, pedestrians accounted for 63.6% and 57.7% of Tier 1 (ISS > 15) and Tier 2 (ISS 9-15) presentations, respectively. Overall use of restraints was worryingly low (36.7%). Not restraining increased the risk of serious RTAs by 8.4 times. Young age, high ISS and low Glasgow Coma Scale score predicted a longer duration of intensive care unit stay.

CONCLUSION

The importance of restraints for motor vehicle passengers or helmets for motorcycle pillion riders and cyclists in reducing morbidity requires emphasis. Suggestions for future prevention and intervention include road safety education, regulation of protective restraints, use of speed enforcement devices and creation of transport policies that minimise kerbside parking.

A comparative analysis of child passenger restraint use in China and the United States

BACKGROUND

Few published studies have examined child passenger safety practices across countries. This study compared the prevalence and associated factors of child passenger restraint use among children, aged 0 to 17 in the state of Iowa in the United States, and the city of Shantou in China.

METHODS

Child restraint use observations were conducted in Iowa and in Shantou in 2012, respectively, among child passengers. Observations in Iowa were conducted at randomly selected gas stations, while in Shantou observations were completed at randomly selected schools or medical clinics. Research observers approached the driver, observed restraint use, and collected brief survey data.

RESULTS

A total of 3049 children from Iowa and 3333 children aged 0 to 17 years from Shantou were observed. For children aged 0 to 3 years, only 0.1% were compliantly restrained in Shantou as compared to 95.9% in Iowa. The proportion of children who were compliantly restrained in Shantou increased with age, but generally decreased with age in Iowa. In Shantou, 36.0% of children aged 0 to 3 were sitting in the front seat as compared to only 1.7% of children of the same age in Iowa. Driver seat belt use was significantly associated with child restraint in both Iowa and Shantou; the association was stronger in Iowa than Shantou for all age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A significantly higher prevalence of children who were not appropriately restrained was observed in Shantou than in Iowa. Our findings support the need of mandatory child safety restraint use legislation in China.

Elderly road collision injury outcomes associated with seat positions and seatbelt use in a rapidly aging society-A case study in South Korea

INTRODUCTION

Aging has long been regarded as one of the most critical factors affecting crash injury outcomes. In South Korea, where the elderly population is projected to reach 35.9% by 2050, the implications of an increasing number of elderly vehicle users on road safety are evident. In this research, the confounding effect of occupant age in a vehicle in terms of seat position and seatbelt use was investigated. In addition, elderly occupants were divided into a younger-old group aged between 65 and 74 years and an older-old group aged 75 years and older in an effort to assess whether the conventional elderly age standard of 65 years should be reconsidered.

METHODS

A multinomial logit framework was adopted to predict two-level injury severity using collision data between 2008 and 2015. Predictor variables included gender, age group, seat position, seatbelt, road type, road slope, road surface, road line, and type of vehicle. Five models, a base model with no interactions and four interaction models which were combinations of age group, seatbelt use and seat position, were devised and evaluated.

RESULTS

With no interacting term, age was the most prominent predictor. Elderly occupants were most likely to suffer from severe injury without a seatbelt in all seat positions, and the use of a seatbelt reduced this likelihood the most in the elderly group as well. Front passenger seats had the highest risk to elderly occupants, while the driver seat was statistically insignificant. When the elderly group was divided into the younger-old group and the older-old group, the older-olds were found to be much more vulnerable compared to the younger-olds. In particular, older drivers were five times more likely to suffer a severe injury without a seatbelt.

CONCLUSIONS

The degree of injury severity of elderly occupants was reduced the most with the use of a seatbelt, demonstrating the importance of using seat restraints. The sharp increase in the risk of injury of the older-old group suggests that the age standard of 65 years as the elderly group with regard to traffic safety may require reconsideration due to the growing number of elderly vehicle users on the road. Our results provide practical evidence with which to formulate new safety policies, including mandatory seatbelt use, driving age limits and insurance pricing.

Factors Associated with Pediatric Mortality from Motor Vehicle Crashes in the United States: A State-Based Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine geographic variation in motor vehicle crash (MVC)-related pediatric mortality and identify state-level predictors of mortality.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the 2010-2014 Fatality Analysis Reporting System, we identified passengers <15 years of age involved in fatal MVCs, defined as crashes on US public roads with ≥1 death (adult or pediatric) within 30 days. We assessed passenger, driver, vehicle, crash, and state policy characteristics as factors potentially associated with MVC-related pediatric mortality. Our outcomes were age-adjusted, MVC-related mortality rate per 100 000 children and percentage of children who died of those in fatal MVCs. Unit of analysis was US state. We used multivariable linear regression to define state characteristics associated with higher levels of each outcome.

RESULTS

Of 18 116 children in fatal MVCs, 15.9% died. The age-adjusted, MVC-related mortality rate per 100 000 children varied from 0.25 in Massachusetts to 3.23 in Mississippi (mean national rate of 0.94). Predictors of greater age-adjusted, MVC-related mortality rate per 100 000 children included greater percentage of children who were unrestrained or inappropriately restrained (P < .001) and greater percentage of crashes on rural roads (P = .016). Additionally, greater percentages of children died in states without red light camera legislation (P < .001). For 10% absolute improvement in appropriate child restraint use nationally, our risk-adjusted model predicted >1100 pediatric deaths averted over 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

MVC-related pediatric mortality varied by state and was associated with restraint nonuse or misuse, rural roads, vehicle type, and red light camera policy. Revising state regulations and improving enforcement around these factors may prevent substantial pediatric mortality.

Age-related differences in fatal intersection crashes in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Given the aging U.S. population and resulting number of older drivers in the coming years, it is important to understand the factors leading to their involvement in vehicle crashes and develop counter-measures to reduce their frequency and severity. This is also useful for helping older adults "age in place" in terms of accessibility, mobility, quality of life and safety. Thus, the objective of this study was to provide up-to-date data on differences in age-related risks and rates for involvement in fatal intersection motor-vehicle crashes in the US.

METHODS

Pooled data for the years 2011-2014 from the FARS, a census of fatal traffic crashes within the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, created by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) were used to calculate summary statistics including annualized crash rates. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate age and gender-related differences in fatal intersection crash risk, controlling for covariates. An induced exposure analysis was conducted to calculate crash involvement ratios (CIRs) for all two-vehicle fatal intersection crashes. Older and younger drivers were compared with respect to the presence of factors related to intersection crashes using a multivariate Poisson regression model.

RESULTS

During the period of 2011-2014, among the reported 120,809 fatal accidents in the US involving 178,489 drivers of vehicles, 48,733 (28%) were drivers involved in fatal intersection crashes. Age-adjusted annualized fatal intersection crash rates per 100,000 licensed drivers were highest for drivers aged 85 or older (9.89/100,000), followed by 20 years of age (8.93/100,000). Teen and older drivers (55+ years of age) were over-involved in fatal intersection crashes, drivers from 20 to 54 years old were under-involved. Male and female drivers, 70-74 years of age, were 20% and 21%, respectively, more likely to be involved in a fatal intersection crash than 20-24year olds (of same gender). By age 85, fatal intersection crash risk for all drivers was almost doubled. Significant differences in factors related to crashes involving younger (<65) and older (65+ years) drivers were time of day, lighting and weather conditions, day of week, roadway type and number of lanes, presence of visible traffic controls, speed limit and estimated driving speed, and whether the driver was deemed at fault for the crash CONCLUSION: The results provide the most up-to-date analysis of aging and fatal intersection crash risk in the US, and underscore several trends worthy of further investigation. Older adults face a number of challenges associated with natural aging, including sensory, perceptual, cognitive and motor declines that may impact their driving. As with younger drivers, expanded or renewed approaches to driver training at licensing renewals, as well as safety-based technological advances are viable avenues toward improving the safety outlook for older adults.

Identify sequence of events likely to result in severe crash outcomes

The current practice of crash characterization in highway engineering reduces multiple dimensions of crash contributing factors and their relative sequential connections, crash sequences, into broad definitions, resulting in crash categories such as head-on, sideswipe, rear-end, angle, and fixed-object. As a result, crashes that are classified in the same category may contain many different crash sequences. This makes it difficult to develop effective countermeasures because these crash categorizations are based on the outcomes rather than the preceding events. Consequently, the efficacy of a countermeasure designed for a specific type of crash may not be appropriate due to different pre-crash sequences. This research seeks to explore the use of event sequence to characterize crashes. Additionally, this research seeks to identify crash sequences that are likely to result in severe crash outcomes so that researchers can develop effective countermeasures to reduce severe crashes. This study utilizes the sequence of events from roadway departure crashes in the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), and converts the information to form a new categorization called "crash sequences." The similarity distance between each pair of crash sequences were calculated using the Optimal Matching approach. Cluster analysis was applied to group crash sequences that are etiologically similar in terms of the similarity distance. A hybrid model was constructed to mitigate the potential sample selection bias of FARS data, which is biased toward more severe crashes. The major findings include: (1) in terms of a roadway departure crash, the crash sequences that are most likely to result in high crash severity include a vehicle that first crosses the median or centerline, runs-off-road on the left, and then collides with a roadside fixed-object; (2) seat-belt and airbag usage reduces the probability of dying in a roadway departure crash by 90%; and (3) occupants who are seated on the side of the vehicle that experience a direct impact are 2.6 times more likely to die in a roadway departure crash than those not seated on the same side of the vehicle where the impact occurs.

Child Restraint Use and Driver Screening in Fatal Crashes Involving Drugs and Alcohol

BACKGROUND

There are reports that the incidence of alcohol-involved crashes has remained stable among fatally injured drivers while drug involvement has increased in recent years.

METHODS

Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) from 2010 to 2013 were used to examine drug and alcohol status of drivers (N = 10 864) of 4-wheeled passenger vehicles involved in a fatal crash while transporting a passenger aged 0 to 14 years (N = 17 179). Mixed effect multivariable logistic regression used SAS GLIMMIX to control for clustering. Odds ratios are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Only 28.9% of drivers were screened for both alcohol and drugs, and 56.7% were not tested for either. The total proportion of unrestrained child passengers increased nearly linearly by age. Findings ranged as high as 70% for 13- to 14-year-olds with drivers positive for drugs and alcohol. In multivariable adjusted models, inappropriate child seating with drivers who tested positive was as follows: alcohol, 1.30 (95% CI, 0.92-1.82); drugs, 1.54 (95% CI, 1.24-1.92); and for both drugs and alcohol, 1.88 (95% CI, 1.38-2.55). More than one-fourth were unrestrained with drivers positive for cannabis (27.7%). Overall mortality was approximately triple for unrestrained versus restrained (33.5% vs 11.5%; P < .0001) and was higher in front-seated than rear-seated passengers (40.7% vs 31.5%; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Passengers were less likely to be appropriately seated and to be restrained when transported by a driver positive for drugs and alcohol, but this finding varied according to passenger age and drug/alcohol category.

Injury risk for matched front and rear seat car passengers by injury severity and crash type: An exploratory study

BACKGROUND

The risk of serious injury or death has been found to be reduced for some front compared to rear seat car passengers in newer vehicles. However, differences in injury severity between car occupants by seating position has not been examined. This study examines the injury severity risk for rear compared to front seat car passengers.

METHOD

A retrospective matched-cohort analysis was conducted of vehicle crashes involving injured rear vs front seat car passengers identified in linked police-reported, hospitalisation and emergency department (ED) presentation records during 2001-2011 in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Odds ratios were estimated using an ordinal logistic mixed model and logistic mixed models.

RESULTS

There were 5419 front and 4588 rear seat passengers in 3681 vehicles. There was a higher odds of sustaining a higher injury severity as a rear-compared to a front seat car passenger, with a higher odds of rear seat passengers sustaining serious injuries compared to minimal injuries. Where the vehicle occupant was older, travelling in a vehicle manufactured between 1990 and 1996 or after 1997, where the airbag deployed, and where the vehicle was driven where the speed limit was ≥70km/h there was a higher odds of the rear passenger sustaining a higher injury severity then a front seated occupant.

CONCLUSION

Rear seat car passengers are sustaining injuries of a higher severity compared to front seat passengers travelling in the same vehicle, as well as when travelling in newer vehicles and where the front seat occupant is shielded by an airbag deployed in the crash. Rear seat occupant protective mechanisms should be examined. Pre-hospital trauma management policies could influence whether an individual is transported to a hospital ED, thus it would be beneficial to have an objective measure of injury severity routinely available in ED records. Further examination of injury severity between rear and front seat passengers is warranted to examine less severe non-fatal injuries by car seating position and vehicle intrusion.

Rear seat safety: Variation in protection by occupant, crash and vehicle characteristics

OBJECTIVES

Current information on the safety of rear row occupants of all ages is needed to inform further advances in rear seat restraint system design and testing. The objectives of this study were to describe characteristics of occupants in the front and rear rows of model year 2000 and newer vehicles involved in crashes and determine the risk of serious injury for restrained crash-involved rear row occupants and the relative risk of fatal injury for restrained rear row vs. front passenger seat occupants by age group, impact direction, and vehicle model year.

METHOD

Data from the National Automotive Sampling System Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) and Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) were queried for all crashes during 2007-2012 involving model year 2000 and newer passenger vehicles. Data from NASS-CDS were used to describe characteristics of occupants in the front and rear rows and to determine the risk of serious injury (AIS 3+) for restrained rear row occupants by occupant age, vehicle model year, and impact direction. Using a combined data set containing data on fatalities from FARS and estimates of the total population of occupants in crashes from NASS-CDS, logistic regression modeling was used to compute the relative risk (RR) of death for restrained occupants in the rear vs. front passenger seat by occupant age, impact direction, and vehicle model year.

RESULTS

Among all vehicle occupants in tow-away crashes during 2007-2012, 12.3% were in the rear row where the overall risk of serious injury was 1.3%. Among restrained rear row occupants, the risk of serious injury varied by occupant age, with older adults at the highest risk of serious injury (2.9%); by impact direction, with rollover crashes associated with the highest risk (1.5%); and by vehicle model year, with model year 2007 and newer vehicles having the lowest risk of serious injury (0.3%). Relative risk of death was lower for restrained children up to age 8 in the rear compared with passengers in the right front seat (RR=0.27, 95% CI 0.12-0.58 for 0-3 years, RR=0.55, 95% CI 0.30-0.98 for 4-8 years) but was higher for restrained 9-12-year-old children (RR=1.83, 95% CI 1.18-2.84). There was no evidence for a difference in risk of death in the rear vs. front seat for occupants ages 13-54, but there was some evidence for an increased relative risk of death for adults age 55 and older in the rear vs. passengers in the right front seat (RR=1.41, 95% CI 0.94-2.13), though we could not exclude the possibility of no difference. After controlling for occupant age and gender, the relative risk of death for restrained rear row occupants was significantly higher than that of front seat occupants in model year 2007 and newer vehicles and significantly higher in rear and right side impact crashes.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study extend prior research on the relative safety of the rear seat compared with the front by examining a more contemporary fleet of vehicles. The rear row is primarily occupied by children and adolescents, but the variable relative risk of death in the rear compared with the front seat for occupants of different age groups highlights the challenges in providing optimal protection to a wide range of rear seat occupants. Findings of an elevated risk of death for rear row occupants, as compared with front row passengers, in the newest model year vehicles provides further evidence that rear seat safety is not keeping pace with advances in the front seat.

Disparities in age-appropriate child passenger restraint use among children aged 1 to 12 years

OBJECTIVE

Observed racial disparities in child safety seat use have not accounted for socioeconomic factors. We hypothesized that racial differences in age-appropriate restraint use would be modified by socioeconomic status and child passenger safety information sources.

METHODS

A 2-site, cross-sectional tablet-based survey of parents seeking emergency care for their 1- to 12-year-old child was conducted between October 2011 and May 2012. Parents provided self-report of child passenger safety practices, demographic characteristics, and information sources. Direct observation of restraint use was conducted in a subset of children at emergency department discharge. Age-appropriate restraint use was defined by Michigan law.

RESULTS

Of the 744 eligible parents, 669 agreed to participate and 601 provided complete responses to key variables. White parents reported higher use of car seats for 1- to 3-year-olds and booster seats for 4- to 7-year-olds compared with nonwhite parents. Regardless of race, <30% of 8- to 12-year-old children who were ≤4 feet, 9 inches tall used a booster seat. White parents had higher adjusted odds (3.86, 95% confidence interval 2.27-6.57) of reporting age-appropriate restraint use compared with nonwhite parents, controlling for education, income, information sources, and site. There was substantial agreement (82.6%, κ = 0.74) between parent report of their child's usual restraint and the observed restraint at emergency department discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts should be directed at eliminating racial disparities in age-appropriate child passenger restraint use for children <8 years. Booster seat use, seat belt use, and rear seating represent opportunities to improve child passenger safety practices among older children.

Gunshot injuries in children served by emergency services

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence, injury severity, resource use, mortality, and costs for children with gunshot injuries, compared with other injury mechanisms.

METHODS

This was a population-based, retrospective cohort study (January 1, 2006-December 31, 2008) including all injured children age ≤ 19 years with a 9-1-1 response from 47 emergency medical services agencies transporting to 93 hospitals in 5 regions of the western United States. Outcomes included population-adjusted incidence, injury severity score ≥ 16, major surgery, blood transfusion, mortality, and average per-patient acute care costs.

RESULTS

A total of 49,983 injured children had a 9-1-1 emergency medical services response, including 505 (1.0%) with gunshot injuries (83.2% age 15-19 years, 84.5% male). The population-adjusted annual incidence of gunshot injuries was 7.5 cases/100,000 children, which varied 16-fold between regions. Compared with children who had other mechanisms of injury, those injured by gunshot had the highest proportion of serious injuries (23%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17.6-28.4), major surgery (32%, 95% CI 26.1-38.5), in-hospital mortality (8.0%, 95% CI 4.7-11.4), and costs ($28,510 per patient, 95% CI 22,193-34,827).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being less common than other injury mechanisms, gunshot injuries cause a disproportionate burden of adverse outcomes in children, particularly among older adolescent males. Public health, injury prevention, and health policy solutions are needed to reduce gunshot injuries in children.

Tweens at risk: examining car safety practices in four economically disadvantaged urban elementary schools in Virginia

INTRODUCTION

Children aged 8- to 12-years-old ("tweens") are at high risk for crash injury, and motor vehicle crashes are their leading cause of death.

METHOD

Data are presented from behavioral observations (N=243), surveys (N=677), and focus groups (N=26) conducted with tweens attending four urban elementary schools in Virginia. The populations assessed were predominantly black (77.9%) and economically disadvantaged (61.9%).

RESULTS

Focus groups revealed a number of inconsistencies in and misconceptions about safety practices. Among the 677 tweens who completed anonymous surveys, the majority (58.1%) reported wearing their seat belts "not very much at all" or "never." Many students (47.8%) reported usually sitting in the front seat or sitting in the front and back seats equally. This is despite the fact that most (92.0%) knew that the back seat was the safest place to sit. Of the 243 tweens observed in vehicles, 65.0% were unrestrained and 60.1% were seated in the front passenger seat.

IMPACT ON INDUSTRY

Findings of this study shed light on the great disparity between the national rates for child safety practices and those of children living in an economically disadvantaged urban school district. Additional intervention programs that are culturally appropriate and specifically target this age group are needed.

Injury risk for rear-seated occupants in small overlap crashes

Small overlap crashes, where the primary crash engagement is outboard from the longitudinal energy absorbing structures of the vehicle, have received recent interest as a crash dynamic that results in high likelihood of injury. Previous analyses of good performing vehicles showed that 24% of crashes with AIS 3+ injuries to front seat occupants were small overlap crashes. However, similar evaluations have not been conducted for those rear seated. Vehicle dynamics suggest that rear seat occupants may be at greater risk due to lack of lateral seating support and a steering wheel to hold, making them more sensitive to lateral movement seen in these crashes. Thus, the objective was to calculate injury risk for rear-seated occupants in small overlap collisions. AIS 2+ and AIS 3+ injury risk was calculated from NASS-CDS data from 2000-2011. Inclusion criteria were vehicles of model year 2000 or later, with CDC codes of "FL" or "FR", and an occupant in the second or third row. AIS2+ injury risk was 5.1%, and AIS3+ injury risk was 2.4%. Of note, half of the occupants were <15 years of age indicating rear seat protection should emphasize the young. Occupants seated near side were nearly three times as likely to sustain an AIS2+ injury than occupants seated far side. Particular attention should be paid to the prominence of head injuries in this crash dynamic and consideration given to their mitigation. Additional research should determine whether countermeasures being implemented for front seat occupants can be beneficial to rear seat occupants.

Injury potential at center rear seating positions in rear-facing child restraint systems in side impacts

Head injuries occur to occupants of rear-facing child restraint systems in side impacts. This study examined the head injury potential of center-seated occupants using sled tests at change in velocities of 35, 29 and 24 km/h. Other parameters included combinations of with and without a simulated door. A twelve-month-old child dummy was used in combination, convertible and infant rear-facing child restraint systems. Head excursions and head injury criteria (HIC) were obtained. In 35 km/h tests without simulated door, head excursions ranged from 568 to 655 mm, exceeding the simulated door intrusion plane. HIC ranged from 87 to 157, below the 390 limit. At this velocity but with the simulated door, HIC ranged from 804 to 1297. Head excursions ranged from 424 to 480 mm. In 29 and 24 km/h tests, the dummy and child restraint system impacted the simulated door. HIC ranged from 275 to 604 and 141 to 314, and head excursions ranged from 388 to 470 mm and 365 to 460 mm, respectively. Far-side belt loads were 2.4-3.2 kN and 1.7-2.3 kN for the 35 km/h tests without and with the simulated door, and 1.5-2.1 kN and 1.0-1.6 kN for 29 and 24 km/h tests with the simulated door. These findings indicate that occupants in the center seating position in smaller/medium-size vehicles may impact an intruding door and sustain head injuries. A need exists for better protection/attachment methods for center positioned rear-facing child restraint systems to reduce the injury potential in side impacts at velocities greater than 29 km/h.

The role of seating position in determining the injury pattern among unrestrained children involved in motor vehicle collisions presenting to a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Seating position in motor vehicle collisions (MVC) plays a major role in determining the injury pattern in mainly restrained children. However, compliance with child seating and restraint laws is still suboptimal. The role of seating position in predicting injury patterns among unrestrained children has not been previously studied.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective review based on the trauma registry of a level I trauma center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Data collection was restricted to unrestrained children involved in MVC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 2001 and March 2010, 274 records were identified. Detailed information about the collision, child seating position and the use of restraints was cross-verified using parental phone interviews.

RESULTS

Of the 274 identified records, cross-verification was possible for 89 (32.4%) unrestrained children, 64 boys and 25 girls, with a mean (SD) age of 83 (40) months. Of these children, 41 (46.1%) were front seated (FS), and 48 (53.9%) were back seated (BS). There were higher rates of rollover (52.1% vs 24.4%, P=.02), ejection (41.7% vs 22%, P=.05), and occupant death ratio (14.8 vs 4, P=.04) among BS children. However, the two groups did not differ in pediatric trauma scores, Glascow coma scale score, or age distribution. FS children were more likely to present with isolated head, neck or facial injuries (HNFI) (51.2% vs 25%, P=.01), whereas BS children were more likely to suffer long bone or pelvic fractures (LPF) (60.4% vs 36.6%, P=.025).

CONCLUSION

Injury pattern can vary according to seating position among unrestrained children presenting at trauma centers after MVC. While FS children are more likely to present with HNFI, BS children more often sustain LPF. BS children had similar trauma severity compared with FS children despite the higher-impact nature of their MVCs. While highlighting the value of proper restraints use and seating position, these results can be valuable in the initial assessment of traumatized children involved in MVC.

Effects of booster seat laws on injury risk among children in crashes

OBJECTIVE

Belt-positioning booster seats have been shown to reduce injury risk among child passengers aged 4 to 8 in motor vehicle crashes. To encourage the use of booster seats, many states have enacted laws that require the use of either a child restraint with internal harness or a belt-positioning booster seat, but the specific age range covered by the laws varies by state. Previous studies have found evidence that booster seat laws are effective in reducing injury risk among children, but these studies primarily have included states with younger age requirements (e.g., ages 4-6) for booster seats. The objective of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of booster seat laws in several states that cover children through age 7 or 8.

METHODS

Police-reported crash data from 5 states--Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Wyoming--were used to compare population-based injury rates, restraint use, and seating position among children before and after booster seat laws. The pre-law period was comprised of the 2 calendar years prior to the year of enactment of the booster seat law, and the post-law period was comprised of the 2 calendar years after the year of the effective start of the booster seat law. Effectiveness estimates were adjusted using a comparison group of children aged 9 to 12 in the same states who were not covered by the booster seat laws.

RESULTS

Among children in crashes who were affected by law changes in the 5 study states, the per capita rate of children using child safety seats (either a harnessed child restraint or booster seat) increased nearly 3 times, and the per capita rate of children riding in rear seats increased 6 percent after the booster seat laws were implemented. Booster seat laws were associated with a 5 percent reduction in the per capita rate of children who sustained injuries of any severity and a 17 percent reduction in the per capita rate of children who sustained fatal or incapacitating injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide evidence that booster seat laws are effective in increasing the use of child safety seats, increasing the placement of children in rear seats, and reducing injuries, especially severe injuries, among children covered by the laws.

Front versus rear seat placement of children aged 12 or younger within vehicles: a rural/urban comparison in North Dakota

OBJECTIVE

Research has shown that rear-seated children are 36 to 40 percent safer than front-seated children. Because of the substantial differences in traffic safety culture that appear to exist in rural areas and the limited research regarding seat placement and rurality, this study seeks to contribute to the safety literature by determining at what rate children are riding in the front seat and whether differences exist between rural and urban areas in regards to child front seat placement.

METHODS

Current child placement frequencies within vehicles were ascertained through direct observations of morning child drop-offs at randomly selected urban and rural elementary schools in eastern North Dakota during November and December of 2009, with a focus on children aged 12 or younger. Two observers wearing orange safety vests and carrying observation sheets were stationed at each elementary school a minimum of 45 min prior to each school's designated start time. Based on the vehicles that entered the school's parking lot/drop-off circle and from which a minimum of one child exited, observers were instructed to record vehicle type, presence of children in the front seat appearing to be younger than 13 years old, availability of room in the back seat, and placement of other children in the vehicle.

RESULTS

During November and December of 2009 a total of 537 vehicles were observed at urban schools and 150 vehicles were observed at rural schools. Of the 537 vehicles observed at urban schools, 28.7 percent had children seated in the front seat, whereas 41.3 percent of the 150 vehicles observed at rural schools had front-seated children. Significant urban/rural differences exist in child seat placement, with vehicles in rural areas much more likely to be carrying front-seated children than vehicles in urban areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a sample of vehicles observed at urban and rural elementary schools in North Dakota, the results of this study indicate that there are significant rural/urban differences in child seat placement.

Avaliação do conhecimento dos pais sobre segurança no transporte de crianças em veículos automotores e motocicletas

OBJETIVO: Avaliar o nível de conhecimento dos pais sobre segurança no transporte de crianças em veículos automotores e motocicletas. MÉTODOS: Estudo transversal, realizado por meio de questionário autoaplicável em pais e responsáveis que acompanhavam crianças na sala de espera de ambulatórios público e privado. Para avaliar os conhecimentos sobre segurança no transporte de crianças, foram utilizadas as recomendações da Associação Brasileira de Medicina do Tráfego. A análise dos dados foi realizada por meio do teste do qui-quadrado e as variáveis quantitativas testadas por Mann-Whitney, sendo significante p<0,05. RESULTADOS: A amostra foi composta por 248 pais, sendo 119 da rede privada e 129 da rede pública. Dentre as questões relacionadas com motocicletas, 76% daqueles que costumam transportar crianças nesse veículo acertaram a idade mínima permitida, todavia mais de 30% não acertaram a posição segura para tal. Quanto ao transporte em automóveis, a questão com maior percentual de respostas corretas foi referente à idade mínima para utilizar o banco da frente, com 64% de acertos. Nas demais questões, estes variaram de 24 a 46%. CONCLUSÕES: O conhecimento da população estudada sobre a segurança no transporte de crianças em veículos automotores é deficiente, tanto no emprego de dispositivos de retenção, pré-requisitos para o uso do banco da frente, bem como idade e forma de transporte de crianças em motocicletas.

Children, automobile restraints and injuries

Injuries are the most common cause of death for Canadians aged one to 18 years, and 50% of injury deaths in this age group involve an automobile. Evidence suggests that 71% reduction in deaths and a 67% reduction in injuries can be achieved when child safety seats are used properly. This article reviews the recommended restraints for children by weight group and describes the proper position for children. Detailed case examples of car crashes are described to illustrate the dangers of incorrectly used or no restraint.

Child passenger safety

Despite significant reductions in the number of children killed in motor vehicle crashes over the past decade, crashes continue to be the leading cause of death for children 4 years and older. Therefore, the American Academy of Pediatrics continues to recommend inclusion of child passenger safety anticipatory guidance at every health-supervision visit. This technical report provides a summary of the evidence in support of 5 recommendations for best practices to optimize safety in passenger vehicles for children from birth through adolescence that all pediatricians should know and promote in their routine practice. These recommendations are presented in the revised policy statement on child passenger safety in the form of an algorithm that is intended to facilitate their implementation by pediatricians with their patients and families. The algorithm is designed to cover the majority of situations that pediatricians will encounter in practice. In addition, a summary of evidence on a number of additional issues that affect the safety of children in motor vehicles, including the proper use and installation of child restraints, exposure to air bags, travel in pickup trucks, children left in or around vehicles, and the importance of restraint laws, is provided. Finally, this technical report provides pediatricians with a number of resources for additional information to use when providing anticipatory guidance to families.

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.

A noncontiguous 2-level spinal injury in a young female driver due to a 3-point seat belt restraint

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this case is to describe noncontiguous fracture and dislocations of the thoracolumbosacral spine in a 23-year-old female driver with a 3-point seat belt restraint.

CLINICAL FEATURES

A 23-year-old woman presented to us after a motor vehicle accident while driving with a 3-point seat belt restraint. She was neurologically intact except for loss of motor function in the distribution of the L5 nerve root in the right lower limb. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging showed fracture and dislocation of T3 with considerable retrolisthesis and complete anterolisthesis of L5 over the sacrum.

INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME

Both fractures were reduced and fixed with bone graft and instrumentation. She was discharged a month later without any further neurologic deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this case is the first report in the literature of a seat belt safety restraint causing 2 noncontiguous fracture dislocations of the spine. Although the consensus is that seat belts can prevent most spine injuries, this case shows that the seat belt can be a contributor to spine injury. It shows that the shoulder-lap restraint can act as 2 fulcrums at the upper and lower bands causing 2 separate fracture dislocations. A thorough radiologic evaluation of the spine with respect to the clinical findings is mandatory in seat belt-restrained road traffic accidents cases.

Strength limitations to proper child safety seat installation: implications for child safety

A majority of child safety restraints are misused in some manner, often leading to an increased risk of serious injury or death. It is possible that at least some instances of misuse are the result of biomechanical limitations during the installation process. Twenty-seven adult participants were trained and then monitored in three stages of child safety seat installation. All installations were done with an identical restraint system in the rear bench seat of a mocked-up minivan. EMG of 10 muscles, as well as trunk, shoulder, and wrist postures were analyzed. Peak maximum efforts were often required of the trunk extensor, forearm, and anterior shoulder muscles during the installation process. Routing and tightening of the seatbelt, as well as placing and securing the child into the seat were observed to be particularly difficult tasks. Many portions of the child safety seat installation process were found to be very physically demanding; some individuals may not be capable of performing these tasks correctly, thereby putting the child at greater risk in the motor vehicle.

Front versus rear seat injury risk for child passengers: evaluation of newer model year vehicles

OBJECTIVE

Design improvements to frontal air bags for vehicles of model year 1998 and newer have reduced the risk of injury to child occupants exposed to their deployment. These changes in conjunction with other improvements in the protection of front seat occupants give impetus for the reconsideration of rear seating recommendations for child occupants. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the association between seating row (front vs. rear) and risk of injury to children in newer model year vehicles.

METHODS

Data was collected on child occupants from December 1, 1998, to November 30, 2007, via insurance claim records and a validated telephone survey. The study sample included child occupants aged 0 to 15 years seated in the front and rear rows of vehicles model year 1998 or newer, involved in a crash in sixteen states. Children were classified as injured if a parent or driver reported an injury corresponding with Abbreviated Injury Scale scores of > or =2. The age-specific relative risk of injury by seat row was calculated for the whole data set and then further stratified by model year.

RESULTS

Complete interview data were obtained on 10,670 crashes involving 16,920 children, representing an estimated 205,408 crashes with 314,968 child passengers in the study population. The adjusted relative risk of injury to children in the rear seat compared to those in the front was 0.36 (0.23-0.57) and 0.69 (0.49-0.98) for 0- to 8-year-olds and 9- to 12-year-olds, respectively. For 13- to 15-year-olds, the reduced injury risk associated with rear row seating narrowly missed statistical significance. When stratified by model year (1998 to 2002 and 2003+), all age group/model year combinations demonstrated a crude rear row injury risk that was lower than that of the front row.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis, conducted on a set of vehicles with advanced front seat safety systems including second-generation and newer air bags, strongly confirmed the recommendation that all children 0-12 years should be seated in the rear row(s) of their vehicles. Children in the rear row(s) were one half to two thirds as likely to sustain injury than those in the front after adjusting for potentially confounding crash, vehicle, and child factors.

Safe transportation of preterm and low birth weight infants at hospital discharge

Safe transportation of preterm and low birth weight infants requires special considerations. Both physiologic immaturity and low birth weight must be taken into account to properly position such infants. This clinical report provides guidelines for pediatricians and other caregivers who counsel parents of preterm and low birth weight infants about car safety seats.

Evaluation of the Boost 'em in the Back Seat Program: using fear and efficacy to increase booster seat use

OBJECTIVES

Recent research supports the use of high-threat messages when they are targeted appropriately and designed to promote high efficacy as well as fear. This research examined the effectiveness of using a novel threat-appeal approach to encourage parents to place their children in booster seats and rear seats of vehicles.

METHOD

A 6-min video-intervention was created and evaluated at after-school/daycare centers via an interrupted time series design with similar control sites for comparison. Caregivers (N=226) completed knowledge and practice surveys and fear and efficacy estimations related to childhood motor vehicle hazards. Researchers observed booster-seat and rear-seat use in study site parking lots.

RESULTS

Compared to baseline and control assessments, the treatment groups' child passenger safety knowledge, risk-reduction attitudes, behavioral intentions, sense of fear related to the hazard, and sense of efficacy related to the recommended behaviors increased significantly. Further, observed overall restraint use and booster-seat use increased significantly following the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying high-threat messages to child passenger safety interventions is promising and has the potential to be adapted to other health risk areas.

Short-term physical limitations in children following motor vehicle crashes

This study describes frequency of injury and short-term physical limitation among child occupants </=15 years in motor vehicle crashes and examines the association between age, restraint use, seating position, and type of crash on the presence of physical limitations. Conducted from 1/1/2005-11/30/2007, as part of a child-specific crash surveillance system in 15 U.S. states; data were collected using claims records and parent/driver telephone surveys. Respondents were asked whether children sustained physical limitations from the crash and the duration limitations persisted. Overall, 3.3% had>or=1 physical limitations. Limitations increased with age, from 0.7% for children<or=3 years to 7.6% for adolescents 13-15 years (p<0.001). Among children with AIS>or=2 injuries, the proportion with physical limitations ranged from 58% to 91% depending on injury diagnosis. Among children with whiplash, 47% resulted in physical limitations. Suboptimally restrained children were nearly twice as likely to have a limitation compared to optimally restrained children. After adjusting for driver characteristics and vehicle type, child's age, restraint use, and type of initial impact were independently associated with the presence of physical limitations. Our results show the importance of assessing children for physical limitations following motor vehicle crashes. We also observed that children with whiplash were at risk for physical limitations.

Rear seat occupant safety: kinematics and injury of PMHS restrained by a standard 3-point belt in frontal crashes

Very little experimental research has focused on the kinematics, dynamics, and injuries of rear-seated occupants. This study seeks to develop a baseline response for rear-seated post mortem human surrogates (PMHS) in frontal crashes. Three PMHS sled tests were performed in a sled buck designed to represent the interior rear-seat compartment of a contemporary mid-sized sedan. All occupants were positioned in the right-rear passenger seat and subjected to simulated frontal crashes with an impact speed of 48 km/h. The subjects were restrained by a standard, rear seat, 3-point seat belt. The response of each subject was evaluated in terms of whole-body kinematics, dynamics, and injury. All the PMHS experienced excessive forward translation of the pelvis resulting in a backward rotation of the torso at the time of maximum forward excursion. The three subjects experienced maximum normalized chest deflections of 30%, 45%, and 30%, respectively, and maximum 3 ms clip resultant chest accelerations of 50, 42, and 52 g, respectively. Additionally, each PMHS received at least 13 rib fractures (maximum of 29 fractures), and flexion-tension induced neck injuries initiating in the lower cervical spine (C4-T1). The neck trauma ranged from ligament damage (AIS 1) to complete cervical spine transection (AIS 5).

Injury risk for children in rear impacts: role of the front seat occupant

As more children move to the rear rows, there is a need to understand the rear impact environment for children to guide future regulatory and due care activities in this impact direction. A probability sample of 1,035 restrained child occupants, aged 0-12 years, seated in a second row outboard position in rear impact tow-away crashes, weighted to represent 10,079 children, was collected from an on-going child specific crash surveillance system between 3/1/00 and 12/31/06. These data were analyzed to quantify the overall injury risk and the influence of both front seat occupant presence and reported front seat back deformation on injury risk. Overall risk of AIS 2+ injury for restrained child occupants seated in the rear row outboard position in rear impact crashes was 2.3%. Occupants were seated in front of these children in 71% of cases and deformation of the front seat back into the child's space was reported in 8% of cases. For those children with seatback deformation occurring directly in front of them, there was a doubling of the injury risk (4.8% vs. 2.1%, adjusted OR=2.4, 95% CI=1.2-4.8). This paper provides the first population-based estimates of the injury risk of rear row-seated children in rear impact crash events and points to the importance of understanding the role of front seat back design on rear impact injury risk for both the front seat and rear seat occupants.

An overview of frontal air bag performance with changes in frontal crash-test requirements: findings of the Blue Ribbon Panel for the evaluation of advanced technology air bags

OBJECTIVE

In the mid-1990s, evidence emerged that air bag deployments could result in deaths to vulnerable vehicle occupants who were very close to air bag modules when they deployed. In 1997, federal frontal crash test requirements were modified to allow crash testing with unbelted dummies to be performed using sled tests. As a result, vehicle manufacturers were able to redesign air bags to deploy with less force and energy, thereby reducing the toll of air bag-induced deaths. However, there was concern that depowered air bags may not provide the same level of protection to unbelted occupants in severe frontal crashes, particularly occupants of large stature and body mass. This paper provides a summary of recent studies addressing this issue.

METHODS

To expedite the accrual of data regarding air bag performance, the collection of additional crash data was funded by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. A panel of experts was commissioned to oversee the process and evaluate the data. During the past 6 years, a series of studies has been undertaken by panel members and others to evaluate the performance of redesigned air bags and the data are summarized here.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

There is now convincing evidence that the combination of air bag redesign and public education have resulted in dramatic reductions in air bag-induced infant and child deaths. In addition, the frontal crash fatality risks among children sitting in front seats have been reduced by as much as half, with younger children showing the greatest benefits. Among adult drivers and right-front passengers, there is no evidence for the predicted overall loss of protection with sled-certified air bags and there are far fewer air bag-induced deaths among this population. However, despite exhaustive analyses of frontal-crash data, the possibility of a somewhat elevated fatality risk among a subset of unbelted drivers in sled-certified 1998-1999 model vehicles cannot be ruled out. There also is some evidence that the risks of serious chest injury may be higher among unbelted drivers in frontal crashes in sled-certified vehicles with redesigned air bags. Further research is warranted to determine whether these differences remain in newer model vehicles designed to the advanced air bag rule, which took effect in 2003.

The safest seat: effect of seating position on occupant mortality

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated the survival rates of occupants of passenger cars involved in a fatal crash between 2000 and 2003.

METHODS

The information from every fatal crash in the United States between 2000 and 2003 was analyzed. Variables such as seat position, point of impact, rollover, restraint use, vehicle type, vehicle weight, occupant age, and injury severity were extracted from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). Univariate and a full logistic multivariate model analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The data show that the rear middle seat is safer than any other occupant position when involved in a fatal crash. Overall, the rear (2(nd) row) seating positions have a 29.1% (Univariate Analysis, p<.0001, OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.22 - 1.37) increased odds of survival over the first row seating positions and the rear middle seat has a 25% (Univariate Analysis, p<.0001, OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.17 - 1.34) increased odds of survival over the other rear seat positions. After correcting for potential confounders, occupants of the rear middle seat have a 13% (Logistic Regression, p<.001, 95% CI 1.02 - 1.26) increased chance of survival when involved in a crash with a fatality than occupants in other rear seats.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that the safest position for any occupant involved in a motor-vehicle crash is the rear middle seat.

IMPACT ON INDUSTRY

The results of this research may impact how automobile manufacturers look at future rear middle seat designs. If the rear seat was to be designed exactly like its outboard counterparts (headrest, armrests, lap and shoulder belt, etc.) people may choose to sit on it more often rather than waiting to use it out of necessity due to multiple rear seat occupants.

Booster seat use by children aged 4-11 years: evidence of the need to revise current Australasian standards to accommodate overweight children

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between child weight and vehicle booster seat usage in the context of current Australasian booster seat standards.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Questionnaire survey conducted between February and April 2005. A convenience sample of parents with children aged 4-11 years in New South Wales and Victoria completed a questionnaire, reporting on the height and weight of their children and the nature of restraint devices used in the family vehicle.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of children meeting standard-specified weight and height criteria who are not restrained in booster seats; proportion of children who meet the specified height criteria but whose weight exceeds the specified weight.

RESULTS

699 of 3959 questionnaires were returned (response rate, 18%), of which seven lacked essential details. The remaining 692 responses provided information on 1500 children. Of these children, 633 aged 4-11 years fell within the recommended height range for using booster seats, but only 29% were typically restrained in booster seats, the majority (70%) being restrained in normal seatbelts. A key finding was that 37% of the children who met the recommended height criteria exceeded the maximum weight for booster seats stipulated by the current Australasian safety standard.

CONCLUSION

In view of increasing rates of overweight and obesity in children, it is important to reassess current Australasian standards for child restraints in vehicles. A concerted parental education campaign is also needed to raise awareness of which restraint types are appropriate for children of various heights and weights.

Seating patterns and corresponding risk of injury among 0- to 3-year-old children in child safety seats

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines for optimal restraint of children in motor vehicles recommend the center rear seating location for installing a child-restraint system. However, recent research on child occupants in child-restraint system has brought this into question. The objective of this study was to describe seating position patterns among appropriately restrained child occupants aged 0 to 3 years in the rear row of vehicles. In addition, we determined the association between rear row seating location and risk of injury.

METHODS

We studied data collected on child occupants from December 1, 1998, to December 31, 2006, via insurance claim records and a validated telephone survey. The study sample included child occupants aged 0 to 3 years seated in a child-restraint system in the rear row of the vehicle, model year 1990 or newer, involved in a crash in 16 states. Children were classified as injured if a parent or driver reported an injury corresponding with Abbreviated Injury Scale scores of > or = 2.

RESULTS

Seating position distribution for child occupants was as follows: left outboard (31%), center (28%), and right outboard (41%). There was an inverse relationship between the center position and increasing child age (39% for occupants < 1 year old versus 18% for occupants 3 years old), independent of the number of additional row occupants. Child occupants seated in the center had an injury risk 43% less than children seated in either of the rear outboard positions.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common seating position for appropriately restrained child occupants in a child-restraint system is the right rear outboard. The center rear seating position is used less often by children restrained by a child-restraint system as they get older. Children seated in the center rear have a 43% lower risk of injury compared with children in a rear outboard position.