School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
School of Physical Therapy, Health and Rehabilitation Science, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
PLoS One. 2019 May 20;14(5):e0215724. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215724. eCollection 2019.
To assess the effectiveness of Home Fire Safety (HFS) interventions versus other interventions/no interventions/controls on HFS knowledge and behaviour at short-, intermediate- and long-term follow ups.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed databases were searched from January 1998 to July 2018, and studies retrieved.
Toddlers, children (primary or secondary school), teenagers or adults.
INTERVENTIONS/COMPARISON: HFS interventions compared to other interventions / no interventions / controls.
HFS knowledge and behaviour.
10 studies were identified (8 RCTs and 2 prospective cohort). Two studies assessed the effects of HFS interventions vs no interventions on HFS knowledge at up to 4 months follow up in school children and demonstrated significant difference between groups (very low quality, 2 RCTs, 535 participants, SMD 0.38, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.55, p < 0.001). One study examined the effects of different modes of HFS interventions (computer-based vs instructor-led) on HFS knowledge and behaviour immediately post-intervention in adults and displayed no significant difference between groups (HFS knowledge; very low quality, 1 RCT, 68 participants, SMD -0.02, 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.45, p = 0.92) and (HFS behaviour; very low quality, 1 RCT, 68 participants, SMD 0.06, 95% CI: -0.41 to 0.54, p = 0.79) respectively.
The limited evidence supports the use of HFS interventions to improve HFS knowledge and behaviour in children, families with children and adults.
评估家庭火灾安全(HFS)干预措施与短期、中期和长期随访时其他干预措施/无干预措施/对照措施相比在 HFS 知识和行为方面的效果。
随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
从 1998 年 1 月至 2018 年 7 月,检索 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 PubMed 数据库,并检索到相关研究。
幼儿、儿童(小学或中学)、青少年或成年人。
干预措施/比较:HFS 干预措施与其他干预措施/无干预措施/对照措施比较。
共确定了 10 项研究(8 项 RCT 和 2 项前瞻性队列研究)。两项研究评估了 HFS 干预措施与无干预措施对在校儿童 HFS 知识的影响,在 4 个月的随访中显示出组间有显著差异(极低质量,2 项 RCT,535 名参与者,SMD 0.38,95%CI:0.21 至 0.55,p < 0.001)。一项研究检测了 HFS 干预措施(基于计算机的干预措施与基于指导的干预措施)不同模式对成人 HFS 知识和行为的即时影响,结果显示组间无显著差异(HFS 知识:极低质量,1 项 RCT,68 名参与者,SMD-0.02,95%CI:-0.50 至 0.45,p = 0.92)和(HFS 行为:极低质量,1 项 RCT,68 名参与者,SMD 0.06,95%CI:-0.41 至 0.54,p = 0.79)。
现有证据有限,支持使用 HFS 干预措施提高儿童、有儿童的家庭和成年人的 HFS 知识和行为。