Center for Injury Research and Prevention, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, United States.
Center for Injury Research and Prevention, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, United States.
Accid Anal Prev. 2023 Aug;188:107094. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2023.107094. Epub 2023 May 6.
Marginalized and otherwise vulnerable groups remain at higher risk than their counterparts for not having all of their children appropriately restrained during vehicle trips. Little is known about potential sources of these disparities, however a commonly theorized factor has been where caregivers find or obtain information (i.e., their information sources). The objective of this study was to: (1) characterize caregivers' actual and preferred sources of information related to child passenger safety information, overall and within sociodemographic groups; and (2) determine if, and if so how, sources impact appropriate child restraint use (i.e., child/seat fit).
We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey of US caregivers. Caregivers answered questions about themselves, their child(ren), their child(ren)'s restraint use during trips, and their information sources to learn which seat their child should be using. We used Fisher's exact and Pearson chi-square tests to compare used and preferred sources of information across caregiver demographics (age, education, race/ethnicity), as well as to determine whether information sources were associated with caregivers' appropriate child restraint use.
A total of 1,302 caregivers from 36 states with 2,092 children completed the survey. The majority (91%) of children were appropriately restrained. More caregivers from marginalized and otherwise vulnerable groups had children inappropriately restrained when compared with their counterparts. We identified multiple differences in both used and preferred information sources by caregivers' age, race/ethnicity, and education level. In addition, we found a trend that caregivers from populations with higher rates of inappropriate use seemingly used fewer information sources. Ultimately, information sources were not associated with appropriate restraint use; however, within vulnerable populations, almost all caregivers had all of their children appropriately restrained if they had used a Child Passenger Safety Technician (CPST)/Inspection Station or their Pediatrician.
Our findings reiterate calls for more tailored interventions and efforts to combat widening disparities in child restraint use and crash outcomes and suggest one promising method may be providing more access to child passenger safety experts. Future studies must untangle the likely complex relationship between information sources and appropriate/accurate child restraint use.
与其他群体相比，边缘化和其他弱势群体在乘车旅行时，其所有子女都未得到适当约束的风险更高。然而，对于造成这些差异的潜在原因知之甚少，一个通常被认为的因素是看护人在哪里获取或获得信息（即他们的信息来源）。本研究的目的是：（1）描述看护人在与儿童乘客安全信息相关的实际和首选信息来源方面的情况，总体上和按社会人口统计学分组情况；（2）确定以及如果确定，这些来源是否会影响适当的儿童约束装置使用（即儿童/座椅适配）。
我们对美国看护人进行了一项在线的横断面调查。看护人回答了有关他们自己、他们的孩子、他们孩子在旅行中的约束装置使用情况以及他们获取信息的来源的问题，以了解他们的孩子应该使用哪个座位。我们使用 Fisher 精确检验和 Pearson χ2 检验比较了看护人社会人口统计学特征（年龄、教育程度、种族/民族）方面的使用信息来源和首选信息来源，并确定信息来源是否与看护人适当的儿童约束装置使用相关。
共有来自 36 个州的 1302 名看护人和 2092 名儿童完成了调查。大多数（91%）儿童的约束装置使用恰当。与其他群体相比，来自边缘化和其他弱势群体的看护人其子女约束装置使用不当的比例更高。我们发现，看护人在年龄、种族/民族和教育程度方面，其使用信息来源和首选信息来源都存在多种差异。此外，我们发现，儿童约束装置使用不当率较高的人群中，看护人使用的信息来源似乎较少。最终，信息来源与适当的约束装置使用无关；然而，在弱势群体中，如果看护人使用了儿童乘客安全技术人员（CPST）/检查站或儿科医生，他们几乎所有的孩子都被正确约束。
我们的研究结果再次呼吁采取更有针对性的干预措施和努力，以应对儿童约束装置使用和碰撞结果方面日益扩大的差距，并表明一个有希望的方法可能是提供更多获得儿童乘客安全专家的途径。未来的研究必须厘清信息来源与适当/准确的儿童约束装置使用之间可能存在的复杂关系。
