Existing Laws to Combat Road Traffic Injury in Nepal and Bangladesh: A Review on Cross Country Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Road traffic accidents is a leading cause of injury and death globally. The consequences of road traffic accidents are prominent in developing countries that can least afford to meet the health services, economic and societal challenges. Nepal and Bangladesh are two developing country of South Asia who bear a large share of burden due to road traffic injuries. METHODS: A non-systematic review of relevant documents using Google scholar and PubMed as well as review of relevant legal documents was done. RESULTS: Nepal and Bangladesh have traffic laws including all the key risk factors as recommended by the World Health Organization except the child restraint systems laws. The existing laws for both countries include speed, drunk driving, use of seatbelts and motorcycle helmet, driver license, vehicle condition, overloading and accident related compensations.In both the countries for post-crash response, national emergency care access number has partial coverage and in Nepal there are some provisions related to trauma registry.Vulnerable groups are pedestrians with majority of male and higher mortality found in rural areas than urban areas for both the countries. CONCLUSIONS: Both the countries have traffic laws that focus on the prevention of road traffic accidents and protection of victims. However, amendments in the existing laws are required for confronting immediate challenges of increasing accidents and injuries that both the countries face every year.

Road vehicle transportation of children with physical and behavioral disabilities: A literature review.

Background: A literature review in 2001 found that children with disabilities were frequently transported in unsafe conditions and further research was required to investigate the gap between regulations, standards and actual transportation practices.Objectives: To synthesize available evidence on the transportation of children with disabilities in road vehicles.Methods: Four databases were systematically searched: CINAHL; Medline; National Transport Library Catalogue (Sweden); and Transport Research International Documentation.Results: Nineteen studies ranging in methodological quality from poor to excellent were included in the review. The findings are presented under the following six major themes: child safety restraints, wheelchairs, vehicles, travel habits, parental and professional knowledge. The results are mapped onto two groups of children, those with behavioral problems and those with physical disabilities.Conclusion: The literature reflected little change across the six major themes since the previous review. Children with disabilities continue to be inappropriately restrained in vehicles, constituting an ongoing road safety problem. There is a strong need to increase parent knowledge, upskill health professionals and provide families with financial assistance to enable them to ensure the safe transportation of children with disabilities to minimize the risk of injury and fatalities on the road, and enhance their participation in the community.

Frontal Crash Injury Metrics Are Below Mandated Limits for a Spica Casted Child Dummy in Currently Available Restraints.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data defining safe transport protocols for children treated with hip spica casting. Although restraint devices for casted children are available, all federally mandated testing uses a noncasted anthropomorphic test device (ATD or crash dummy). The purpose of this study was to evaluate current restraint options in simulated frontal crash testing using a casted pediatric ATD to determine injury risk to the head, cervical spine, chest, and pelvis. METHODS: Using a 3-year-old ATD, dynamic crash sled tests simulating frontal crash were performed in accordance with government safety standards. The ATD was casted in a double-leg spica and the following restraint devices were tested: a seat designed for spica casted children, a restraint vest-harness, a traditional booster seat, and 2 traditional forward-facing car seats. RESULTS: Although the presence of the cast increased many of the injury metrics measured, all seats passed current federal guidelines for the head and chest. No single seat performed best in all metrics. The greatest magnitude of neck loading and second-highest head injury criterion values were observed for the booster seat. The vest-harness produced the highest head injury criterion and the chest compression exceeded proposed federal limits. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest safe transport in commercially available seats is possible with the child properly restrained in a correctly fitting seat. However, parents should not assume a child restraint system is appropriate for use just based on fit as, for example, seats with harnesses outperformed an easy to fit booster seat. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Each child and the position of the child's cast are unique and discharge planning involves consideration of safe transportation. Although this study suggests several seats used to transport spica casted children pass the federal head and chest injury prevention requirements, it is important to recognize that some children may still require emergency vehicle transport.

Evaluation of an After-Hours Child Passenger Safety Resource Guide.

Motor vehicle crashes are a leading cause of unintentional injury deaths for children in the United States. Child safety seats are effective in reducing the rate and severity of injury for children. Families seen in an emergency department (ED) outside of injury prevention (IP) operational hours may not have the same opportunity to obtain a child safety seat due to the unavailability of IP resources. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a resource guide that assists the ED staff to screen and provide the appropriate child safety seat. Two retrospective cohort analyses were conducted to assess the following: (1) patients seen in the ED who were eligible to be screened through the resource guide; and (2) patients who were screened and received a restraint system through the resource guide. Records for both cohorts were reviewed from May 1, 2015, to February 29, 2016. Descriptive statistics were used to describe each cohort. In Cohort 1, 10.6% of the 113 patients meeting criteria were screened for a restraint system. In Cohort 2, 20 patients received a restraint system through the resource guide and 90% of these received the appropriate restraint system for their age and weight. Our results demonstrate the need for an algorithm to increase consistency of the resource guide's utilization. Algorithm development to identify screening candidates, further refinement of the guide's restraint identification process, and staff training may improve this tool to ensure that all patients, despite the availability of IP staff, are screened for the appropriate child safety seat.

An assessment of child passenger safety levels of service in Michigan.

Objective: The purpose of this article was to assess the match between child passenger safety resources (child passenger safety technicians [CPSTs], car seat checks, and child restraint system [CRS] distribution programs) and the child population in Michigan by utilizing geographic information systems approaches and to analyze the impact of Michigan's CPSTs on child passenger safety behaviors on departure from a seat check. Methods: Data were collected from administrative sources and a survey of CPSTs to determine the number and location of child passenger safety resources and children in Michigan. The main analyses used data from 2014. The child population ≤4 years old per county and per traffic safety region was determined from census data. CPST and car seat check locations were determined from a list from the Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning (Mi-OHSP) and a survey of CPSTs who coordinate seat checks. Summary sheets from Mi-OHSP served as the data source for CRSs distributed through their occupant protection program. Data from child passenger safety checklists completed with seat checks were obtained from Safe Kids Michigan. Addresses were geocoded using Google Maps Geocoding API and then mapped at the county level using ArcGIS Desktop 10.3.1. Descriptive statistics were calculated and levels of service were determined at the county and regional levels. Results: In 2014, there were 570,929 children ≤4 years old in Michigan and 979 CPSTs who worked at 209 known seat check locations. An average of 6,854 seats was checked per year through Safe Kids Michigan Coalitions. All but 3 regions met an intermediate service level for seat check locations by offering one or more per 5,000 children ≤4 years old. There was at least one CPST in 80 of 83 counties (median 5; interquartile range, 2, 10.5). Assuming that an average Michigan CPST provides 10 h of service each year, all but 2 regions reached an intermediate service level of at least one technician hour per 90 children ≤4 years old. Fewer regions reached a basic level of service for the number of seat checks. Almost half (49.5%) of Safe Kids Michigan seat checks resulted in a change in child passenger safety behaviors. Conclusions: Child passenger safety resources in Michigan are not evenly distributed yet most regions and counties meet intermediate levels of service. Reallocating resources to areas that are providing basic levels of service could help reduce disparities in child passenger safety behaviors.

Pilot Trial of an Emergency Department-based Intervention to Promote Child Passenger Safety Best Practices.

BACKGROUND: Despite demonstrated effectiveness of child restraint systems (CRSs), use remains suboptimal. In this randomized pilot trial, we sought to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of "Tiny Cargo, Big Deal" an ED-based intervention to promote guideline-concordant size-appropriate CRS use. METHODS: Parents of children < 11 years old were recruited in two EDs and randomized in a 2 × 2 factorial design to four conditions: 1) generic information sheet, 2) tailored brochure mailed after the ED visit, 3) a single motivational interviewing-based counseling session in the ED, and 4) full intervention (counseling session plus tailored brochure). We assessed feasibility (recruitment, completion, follow-up rates) and acceptability (parent attitudes, uptake of information) in the ED, at 1 month and at 6 months. We obtained preliminary estimates of effect sizes of the intervention components on appropriate CRS use at 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 514 parents assessed for eligibility, 456 met inclusion criteria and 347 consented to participate. Enrolled parents were mostly mothers (88.1%); 48.7% were 18 to 29 years old; 52.5% were non-Hispanic, white; and 65.2% reported size-appropriate CRS use. Completion rates were 97.7% for baseline survey, 81.6% for counseling, 51.9% for 1-month follow-up, and 59.3% for 6-month follow-up. In the ED, 70.5% rated thinking about child passenger safety in the ED as very helpful. At 1 month, 70.0% expressed positive attitudes toward the study. Of 132 parents who reported receiving study mailings, 78.9% reviewed the information. Parents randomized to the full intervention demonstrated an increase (+6.12 percentage points) and other groups a decrease (-1.69 to -9.3 percentage points) in the proportion of children reported to use a size-appropriate CRS at 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal CRS use can be identified and intervened upon during a child's ED visit. A combined approach with ED-based counseling and mailed tailored brochures shows promise to improve size-appropriate CRS use.

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 to children 4 years and older. Therefore, the American Academy of Pediatrics continues to recommend the 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 affecting 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.

Child Passenger Safety.

Child passenger safety has dramatically evolved over the past decade; however, motor vehicle crashes continue to be the leading cause of death for children 4 years and older. This policy statement provides 4 evidence-based recommendations for best practices in the choice of a child restraint system to optimize safety in passenger vehicles for children from birth through adolescence: (1) rear-facing car safety seats as long as possible; (2) forward-facing car safety seats from the time they outgrow rear-facing seats for most children through at least 4 years of age; (3) belt-positioning booster seats from the time they outgrow forward-facing seats for most children through at least 8 years of age; and (4) lap and shoulder seat belts for all who have outgrown booster seats. In addition, a fifth evidence-based recommendation is for all children younger than 13 years to ride in the rear seats of vehicles. It is important to note that every transition is associated with some decrease in protection; therefore, parents should be encouraged to delay these transitions for as long as possible. These recommendations are presented in the form of an algorithm that is intended to facilitate implementation of the recommendations by pediatricians to their patients and families and should cover most situations that pediatricians will encounter in practice. The American Academy of Pediatrics urges all pediatricians to know and promote these recommendations as part of child passenger safety anticipatory guidance at every health supervision visit.

Use of car beds for infant travel: a review of the literature.

Discharging neonates in a proper car safety seat is standard of care in the United States and many other countries. However, not every neonate can be safely positioned in a standard semi-upright car seat. In these cases, providers may opt for a travel device that allows the infant to lie flat, either supine or prone, known as a car bed. Minimal evidence exists to guide providers on car bed safety and help determine which infants would benefit from discharge in a car bed. In this article, we provide a comprehensive summary of existing literature on the safety of car beds for motor vehicle travel, car bed use in specific patient populations, and car beds vs. car seats for infants at risk of adverse cardiorespiratory events, including preterm infants with Hg-O2 desaturations in the car seat. We discuss recommendations for the follow-up of infants discharged in a car bed in order to safely transition back to a car seat.

School Bus Transportation of Children With Special Health Care Needs.

School systems are responsible for ensuring that children with special needs are safely transported on all forms of federally approved transportation provided by the school system. A plan to provide the most current and proper support to children with special transportation needs should be developed by the Individualized Education Program team, including the parent, school transportation director, and school nurse, in conjunction with physician orders and recommendations. With this statement, we provide current guidance for the protection of child passengers with specific health care needs. Guidance that applies to general school transportation should be followed, inclusive of staff training, provision of nurses or aides if needed, and establishment of a written emergency evacuation plan as well as a comprehensive infection control program. Researchers provide the basis for recommendations concerning occupant securement for children in wheelchairs and children with other special needs who are transported on a school bus. Pediatricians can help their patients by being aware of guidance for restraint systems for children with special needs and by remaining informed of new resources. Pediatricians can also play an important role at the state and local level in the development of school bus specifications.

Analysis of mechanics of side impact test defined in UN/ECE Regulation 129.

OBJECTIVE: This article discusses differences between a side impact procedure described in United Nations/Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) Regulation 129 and scenarios observed in real-world cases. METHODS: Numerical simulations of side impact tests utilizing different boundary conditions are used to compare the severity of the Regulation 129 test and the other tests with different kinematics of child restraint systems (CRSs). In the simulations, the authors use a validated finite element (FE) model of real-world CRSs together with a fully deformable numerical model of the Q3 anthropomorphic test device (ATD) by Humanetics Innovative Solution, Inc. RESULTS: The comparison of 5 selected cases is based on the head injury criterion (HIC) index. Numerical investigations reveal that the presence of oblique velocity components or the way in which the CRS is mounted to the test bench seat fixture is among the significant factors influencing ATD kinematics. The results of analyses show that the side impact test procedure is very sensitive to these parameters. A side impact setup defined in Regulation 129 may minimize the effects of the impact. CONCLUSIONS: It is demonstrated that an artificial anchorage in the Regulation 129 test does not account for a rotation of the CRS, which should appear in the case of a realistic anchorage. Therefore, the adopted procedure generates the smallest HIC value, which is at the level of the far-side impact scenario where there are no obstacles. It is also shown that the presence of nonlateral acceleration components challenges the quality of a CRS and its headrest much more than a pure lateral setup.

Study of chest injuries to 3-year-old child occupants seated in impact shield and 5-point harness CRSs.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate whether the 5-point harness or the impact shield child restraint system (CRS) or both have the potential to cause chest injuries to children. This is determined by examining whether the loading to the chest reaches the internal organ injury threshold for children. METHOD: The chest injury risk to a child occupant in a CRS was investigated using Q3 dummy tests, finite element (FE) simulations (Q3 dummy and human models), and animal tests. The investigation was done for 2 types of CRSs (i.e., the impact shield CRS and 5-point harness CRS) based on the UN R44 dynamic test specifications. RESULTS: The tests using a Q3 dummy indicated that although the chest deflection of the dummy in the impact shield CRS was large, it was less than the injury threshold (40 mm). Computational biomechanics simulations (using finite element FE analysis) showed that the Q3 dummy's chest is loaded by the shield and deforms substantially under this load. To clarify whether chest injuries due to chest compression can occur with an impact shield or with the 5-point harness CRS, 7 experiments were performed using Tibetan miniature pigs with weights ranging from 9.7 to 13 kg. Severe chest and abdominal injuries (lung contusion, coronary artery laceration, liver laceration) were found in the tests using the impact shield CRS. No chest injuries were present when using the 5-point harness CRS. CONCLUSION: When using the impact shield CRS, the chest deformed substantially in dummy tests and FE simulations, and chest and abdominal injuries were observed in pig tests. It is possible that these chest injuries could also occur to child occupants sitting in the impact shield CRS.

Assessing tether anchor labeling and usability in pickup trucks.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate vehicle factors associated with child restraint tether use and misuse in pickup trucks and evaluate 4 labeling interventions designed to educate consumers on proper tether use. METHODS: Volunteer testing was performed with 24 subjects and 4 different pickup trucks. Each subject performed 8 child restraint installations among the 4 pickups using 2 forward-facing restraints: a Britax Marathon G4.1 and an Evenflo Triumph. Vehicles were selected to represent 4 different implementations of tether anchors among pickups: plastic loop routers (Chevrolet Silverado), webbing routers (Ram), back wall anchors (Nissan Frontier), and webbing routers plus metal anchors (Toyota Tundra). Interventions included a diagram label, Quick Response (QR) Code linked to video instruction, coordinating text label, and contrasting text tag. RESULTS: Subjects used the child restraint tether in 93% of trials. However, tether use was completely correct in only 9% of trials. An installation was considered functional if the subject attached the tether to a tether anchor and had a tight installation (ignoring routing and head restraint position); 28% of subjects achieved a functional installation. The most common installation error was attaching the tether hook to the anchor/router directly behind the child restraint (near the top of the seatback) rather than placing the tether through the router and attaching it to the anchor in the adjacent seating position. The Nissan Frontier, with the anchor located on the back wall of the cab, had the highest rate of correct installations but also had the highest rate of attaching the tether to components other than the tether anchor (seat adjustor, child restraint storage hook, around head restraint). None of the labeling interventions had a significant effect on correct installation; not a single subject scanned the QR Code to access the video instruction. Subjects with the most successful installations spent extensive time reviewing the vehicle manuals. CONCLUSION: Current implementations of tether anchors among pickup trucks are not intuitive for child restraint installations, and alternate designs should be explored. Several different labeling interventions were ineffective at achieving correct tether use in pickup trucks.

Child seat belt guidelines: Examining the 4 feet 9 inches rule as the standard.

BACKGROUND: Current American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations regarding transition from child safety/booster seat to adult safety belt use indicate that children should be at least 4 feet 9 inches, 8 years old, or 80 pounds. Proper fit in the vehicle seat, assessed with a five-point fit test, should also be met. Although most children reach 4 feet 9 inches around age 8 years, each child and vehicle presents a unique combination; thus a child may not fit appropriately in all vehicle types using only the 4 feet 9 inches requirement. METHODS: We enrolled children, aged 7 years to 12 years, into our study. Height, weight, and demographic data were obtained. A Child Passenger Safety Technician then performed the five-point fit test in each of a uniform lineup of five vehicles. Data were collected on fit in the standard vehicle seat and also in a booster seat. We set 90% as the threshold proportion of children who meet all criteria for proper fit to validate current recommendations of a height of 4 feet 9 inches. RESULTS: Data were collected on 388 children. The percentage of 90% proper fit was met in the compact car and small sport-utility vehicle (SUV). However, only 80 (77%) of 104 students (p < 0.0001) that were 4 feet 9 inches or higher fit properly in the large SUV, only 87 (83%) of 105 students (p = 0.02) fit properly in the pickup truck, and only 91 (89%) of 102 students (p = 0.74) fit properly in the minivan. CONCLUSION: Substantial proportions of children meeting current height guidelines for an adult seat belt do not meet safety requirements for fit, especially in larger, commonly used vehicles (large SUVs and trucks). This emphasizes the need for evaluation of fit by a trained personnel and/or development of standard back seat dimensions in all vehicles for maximum safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic level 1.

Are mHealth Interventions to Improve Child Restraint System Installation of Value? A Mixed Methods Study of Parents.

Childhood death from vehicle crashes and the delivery of information about proper child restraint systems (CRS) use continues to be a critical public health issue. Safe Seat, a sequential, mixed-methods study identified gaps in parental knowledge about and perceived challenges in the use of appropriate CRS and insights into the preferences of various technological approaches to deliver CRS education. Focus groups (eight groups with 21 participants) and a quantitative national survey (N = 1251) using MTurk were conducted. Although there were differences in the age, racial/ethnic background, and educational level between the focus group participants and the national sample, there was a great deal of consistency in the need for more timely and personalized information about CRS. The majority of parents did not utilize car seat check professionals although they expressed interest in and lack of knowledge about how to access these resources. Although there was some interest in an app that would be personalized and able to push just-in-time content (e.g., new guidelines, location and times of car seat checks), content that has sporadic relevance (e.g., initial installation) seemed more appropriate for a website. Stakeholder input is critical to guide the development and delivery of acceptable and useful child safety education.

Child seat belt guidelines: Examining the 4 feet 9 inches rule as the standard.

BACKGROUND: Current American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations regarding transition from child safety/booster seat to adult safety belt use indicate that children should be at least 4 feet 9 inches, 8 years old, or 80 pounds. Proper fit in the vehicle seat, assessed with a five-point fit test, should also be met. Although most children reach 4 feet 9 inches around age 8 years, each child and vehicle presents a unique combination; thus a child may not fit appropriately in all vehicle types using only the 4 feet 9 inches requirement. METHODS: We enrolled children, aged 7 years to 12 years, into our study. Height, weight, and demographic data were obtained. A Child Passenger Safety Technician then performed the five-point fit test in each of a uniform lineup of five vehicles. Data were collected on fit in the standard vehicle seat and also in a booster seat. We set 90% as the threshold proportion of children who meet all criteria for proper fit to validate current recommendations of a height of 4 feet 9 inches. RESULTS: Data were collected on 388 children. The percentage of 90% proper fit was met in the compact car and small sport-utility vehicle (SUV). However, only 80 (77%) of 104 students (p < 0.0001) that were 4 feet 9 inches or higher fit properly in the large SUV, only 87 (83%) of 105 students (p = 0.02) fit properly in the pickup truck, and only 91 (89%) of 102 students (p = 0.74) fit properly in the minivan. CONCLUSION: Substantial proportions of children meeting current height guidelines for an adult seat belt do not meet safety requirements for fit, especially in larger, commonly used vehicles (large SUVs and trucks). This emphasizes the need for evaluation of fit by a trained personnel and/or development of standard back seat dimensions in all vehicles for maximum safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic study, level III; Therapeutic study, level V.