Rudin-Brown Christina M, Kramer Chelsea, Langerak Robin, Scipione Andrea, Kelsey Shelley
a Human Factors North, Inc. , Toronto , Ontario , Canada.
b CAE Canada , Ottawa , Ontario , Canada.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2017 Nov 17;18(8):870-876. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2017.1322204. Epub 2017 Apr 27.
Although numerous research studies have reported high levels of error and misuse of child restraint systems (CRS) and booster seats in experimental and real-world scenarios, conclusions are limited because they provide little information regarding which installation issues pose the highest risk and thus should be targeted for change. Beneficial to legislating bodies and researchers alike would be a standardized, globally relevant assessment of the potential injury risk associated with more common forms of CRS and booster seat misuse, which could be applied with observed error frequency-for example, in car seat clinics or during prototype user testing-to better identify and characterize the installation issues of greatest risk to safety.
A group of 8 leading world experts in CRS and injury biomechanics, who were members of an international child safety project, estimated the potential injury severity associated with common forms of CRS and booster seat misuse. These injury risk error severity score (ESS) ratings were compiled and compared to scores from previous research that had used a similar procedure but with fewer respondents. To illustrate their application, and as part of a larger study examining CRS and booster seat labeling requirements, the new standardized ESS ratings were applied to objective installation performance data from 26 adult participants who installed a convertible (rear- vs. forward-facing) CRS and booster seat in a vehicle, and a child test dummy in the CRS and booster seat, using labels that only just met minimal regulatory requirements. The outcome measure, the risk priority number (RPN), represented the composite scores of injury risk and observed installation error frequency.
Variability within the sample of ESS ratings in the present study was smaller than that generated in previous studies, indicating better agreement among experts on what constituted injury risk. Application of the new standardized ESS ratings to installation performance data revealed several areas of misuse of the CRS/booster seat associated with high potential injury risk.
Collectively, findings indicate that standardized ESS ratings are useful for estimating injury risk potential associated with real-world CRS and booster seat installation errors.
尽管众多研究报告称，在实验和实际场景中，儿童约束系统（CRS）和增高座椅存在大量错误使用和误用情况，但由于这些研究几乎没有提供关于哪些安装问题构成最高风险从而应作为改进目标的信息，其结论受到限制。对于立法机构和研究人员而言，对与更常见的CRS和增高座椅误用形式相关的潜在伤害风险进行标准化的、全球适用的评估将大有裨益，这种评估可结合观察到的错误频率来应用，例如在汽车座椅诊所或原型用户测试期间，以便更好地识别和描述对安全构成最大风险的安装问题。
一组8位世界领先的CRS和损伤生物力学专家，他们是一个国际儿童安全项目的成员，估计了与CRS和增高座椅常见误用形式相关的潜在伤害严重程度。这些伤害风险错误严重程度评分（ESS）评级被汇总，并与之前使用类似程序但受访者较少的研究所得分数进行比较。为了说明其应用，并作为一项关于CRS和增高座椅标签要求的更大规模研究的一部分，新的标准化ESS评级被应用于26名成年参与者的客观安装性能数据，这些参与者在车辆中安装了可转换（后向与前向）CRS和增高座椅，并在CRS和增高座椅中放置了儿童测试假人，所使用的标签仅刚刚符合最低监管要求。结果指标风险优先数（RPN）代表伤害风险和观察到的安装错误频率的综合得分。
本研究中ESS评级样本的变异性小于先前研究产生的变异性，表明专家们在构成伤害风险的因素上达成了更好的共识。将新的标准化ESS评级应用于安装性能数据，揭示了与高潜在伤害风险相关的CRS/增高座椅的几个误用领域。
总体而言，研究结果表明标准化ESS评级有助于估计与现实世界中CRS和增高座椅安装错误相关的潜在伤害风险。
