Huiqian Lei, Ran Gao, and Liping Li are with the Injury Prevention Research Center, Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, China. Jingzhen Yang is with the Center for Injury Research and Policy, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH.
Am J Public Health. 2018 Nov;108(11):1524-1526. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304650. Epub 2018 Sep 25.
To evaluate the effectiveness of parent-based child restraint system (CRS) education and hands-on CRS installation training.
We conducted a randomized trial with cluster sampling from May 2016 to January 2017 in 6 selected kindergarten classes in Shantou and Chaozhou, China. Parents were randomly assigned to receive 1 of the 3 study conditions: CRS education only, CRS education plus hands-on CRS installation training, or control (child electricity safety).
Three months after the intervention, significantly higher CRS use was reported in the CRS education plus hands-on CRS installation training group than was reported in the control group (41.2% vs 18.5%; P = .011). However, no significant difference in CRS use was found between the CRS education only and the control groups (26.7% vs 18.5%; P = .33). The ratings on child passenger safety awareness increased significantly in both intervention groups but remained unchanged in the control group after the intervention.
The CRS education plus hands-on CRS installation training increased the use of child restraints, but the CRS education only condition did not. Both intervention methods helped to improve child passenger safety awareness.
评估基于家长的儿童约束系统（CRS）教育和实际 CRS 安装培训的效果。
我们于 2016 年 5 月至 2017 年 1 月在中国汕头和潮州的 6 个选定幼儿园班级进行了一项随机试验，采用整群抽样。家长被随机分配接受以下 3 种研究条件之一：仅 CRS 教育、CRS 教育加实际 CRS 安装培训或对照（儿童用电安全）。
干预 3 个月后，CRS 教育加实际 CRS 安装培训组报告的 CRS 使用明显高于对照组（41.2%比 18.5%；P=0.011）。然而，CRS 教育组与对照组之间的 CRS 使用无显著差异（26.7%比 18.5%；P=0.33）。干预组的儿童乘客安全意识评分均显著提高，但对照组在干预后无变化。
CRS 教育加实际 CRS 安装培训增加了儿童约束装置的使用，但仅 CRS 教育条件没有。两种干预方法均有助于提高儿童乘客安全意识。
Zotero 插件