Brock K, Lapidus G
Safe Kids Connecticut, Injury Prevention Center, Connecticut Children's Medical Center, Hartford, Connecticut 06106, USA.
Inj Prev. 2008 Dec;14(6):405-7. doi: 10.1136/ip.2008.018879.
Safety device coding on state police accident report (PAR) forms was compared with provisions in state traffic safety laws. PAR forms were obtained from all 50 states and the District of Columbia (states/DC). For seat belts, 22 states/DC had a primary seat belt enforcement law vs 50 with a PAR code. For car seats, all 51 states/DC had a law and a PAR code. For booster seats, 39 states/DC had a law vs nine with a PAR code. For motorcycle helmets, 21 states/DC had an all-age rider helmet law and another 26 a partial-age law vs 50 with a PAR code. For bicycle helmets, 21 states/DC had a partial-age rider helmet law vs 48 with a PAR code. Therefore gaps in the ability of states to fully record accident data reflective of existing state traffic safety laws are revealed. Revising the PAR forms in all states to include complete variables for safety devices should be an important priority, independent of the laws.
将州警察事故报告（PAR）表格上的安全装置编码与州交通安全法律中的规定进行了比较。PAR表格来自所有50个州和哥伦比亚特区（州/特区）。对于安全带，22个州/特区有主要安全带执法法律，而有PAR编码的为50个。对于儿童安全座椅，所有51个州/特区都有法律和PAR编码。对于增高座椅，39个州/特区有法律，而有PAR编码的为9个。对于摩托车头盔，21个州/特区有全年龄骑手头盔法律，另有26个有部分年龄法律，而有PAR编码的为50个。对于自行车头盔，21个州/特区有部分年龄骑手头盔法律，而有PAR编码的为48个。因此，揭示了各州在全面记录反映现有州交通安全法律的事故数据方面的能力差距。修订所有州的PAR表格以纳入安全装置的完整变量应成为一项重要优先事项，与法律无关。
