Safety education in a pediatric primary care setting. A randomized single-blind evaluation of a discharge teaching book for pediatric patients with burns. Surveillance and prevention of residential-fire injuries. Pediatric counseling and subsequent use of smoke detectors. A randomised controlled trial of general practitioner safety advice for families with children under 5 years. Personal, home and community safety promotion with community-dwelling elderly persons: response to a public health nurse intervention. Project Burn Prevention: outcome and implications. An injury prevention program in an urban African-American community. Incidence of fires and related injuries after giving out free smoke alarms: cluster randomised controlled trial. A preschool program for safety and injury prevention delivered by home visitors. Effects of improved access to safety counseling, products, and home visits on parents' safety practices: results of a randomized trial. Randomized trial of enhanced anticipatory guidance for injury prevention. Evaluation of group well-child care for improving burn prevention practices in the home. Strategies to increase smoke alarm use in high-risk households. Preventing injuries in children: cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care. The effectiveness of a home visit to prevent childhood injury. Providing child safety equipment to prevent injuries: randomised controlled trial. Prevention of childhood injuries: evaluation of the Statewide Childhood Injury Prevention Program (SCIPP).
Parents of 171 children coming to the Yale-New Haven Hospital Primary Care Center for their 6-month checkup were randomized into an intervention group (n = 85) and a control group (n = 86). Parents in the intervention group received a three-part individualized course in child safety that required active parental participation. Parts 1, 2, and 3 were given at the 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month well-child visits, respectively. Parents in the control group received routine safety education as provided at well-child visits. The educational phase of the study was completed by 129 families, 65 in the intervention group and 64 in the control group. Safety knowledge, number of hazards in the home, and reported accidents were assessed by a "blinded" community health worker approximately 1 month after the 12-month well-child visit. A total of 109 home visits were made, 55 for the intervention group and 54 for the control group. Parental safety knowledge was assessed based upon pictorial hazard recognition. Of 13 possible hazards, the mean number of hazards recognized by the intervention group parents was 9.4 (n = 55) v 8.4 (n = 50) by the control group parents (t = 2.1, P less than .05, two-tailed). A hazard score was determined for each family based on nine possible hazards observed at the home visit. The mean hazard score for the intervention group was 2.4 (n = 55 v 3.0 (n = 54) for the control group (t = 2.4, P less than .02, two-tailed). Parentally reported accidents and accidents reported in hospital records were similar for both groups. Results of this study suggest that age-appropriate safety education that is repetitive and individualized and that requires active parental participation results in an increase in parental knowledge and an improvement in certain safety practices. To evaluate the influence of a modular, multidisciplinary, pediatric burn discharge book on burn-care-related knowledge and satisfaction of caregivers, we studied children less than 17 years of age admitted with an acute thermal injury to the pediatric burn unit of a large, tertiary care hospital in Winnipeg, Canada over a 32 month period. Demographic characteristics of the population are similar to published profiles of other pediatric burn units with the exception that North American Indian (NAI) families were disproportionately admitted, with 59 out of the 123 (48%) admissions from a geographic area that has less than 15% NAIs. We randomly assigned the families to receive discharge instructions with the book (intervention group) or routine discharge teaching without the book (comparison group). Knowledge levels of burn care and satisfaction with discharge teaching of caregivers were evaluated with a questionnaire administered in single-blind fashion at the first outpatient follow-up visit. Sixty-two families received the book and 61 families received standard discharge teaching. Bivariate analysis showed greater knowledge in the intervention group, with an average score (range, 0.0 to 1.0) of 0.79 +/- 0.15 versus 0.73 +/- 0.15 in the comparison group (p < 0.05). We did not observe this positive effect of the book when we analyzed NAI families separately: 28 families instructed with the book scored 0.68 +/- 0.14 versus 0.63 +/- 0.13 in 31 families provided with routine teaching (p = 0.18). Stepwise multiple-regression analysis found that the influence of the book was limited to families with children who sustained scald burns (p < 0.05). Factors negatively related to the knowledge levels of caregivers (p < 0.05) were being of NAI origin and being NAI with no safety devices in the home. A positive correlation (p < 0.05) was found with having English as the first language, having a child with more extensive burns, having a younger age of the child with burns, and having fewer children in the home. In conclusion, we found that the discharge book improved the burn-care-related knowledge of caregivers. However, other factors, particularly ethnic and language background, were of greater influence. The majority of severe and fatal burn injuries result from residential fires. We studied the effectiveness of a smoke-alarm-giveaway program in the prevention of burn injuries in an area with a high rate of such injuries.
                We collected data on burn injuries in Oklahoma City from September 1987 through April 1990. The target area for the intervention was an area of 24 square miles (62 km2) with the highest rate of injuries related to residential fires in the city. We distributed smoke alarms door to door in the target area and then surveyed alarm use and function in a sample of the homes that had received an alarm. We also calculated the rates of fire injury per 100,000 population and per 100 fires for both the target area and the rest of the city before and after the smoke-alarm giveaway.
                Before the intervention the rate of burn injuries per 100,000 population was 4.2 times higher in the target area than in the rest of Oklahoma City. An initial survey indicated that 11,881 of the 34,945 homes in the target area (34 percent) did not have smoke alarms. A total of 10,100 smoke alarms were distributed to 9291 homes; 45 percent were functioning four years later. The annualized fire-injury rates declined by 80 percent in the target area during the four years after the intervention (from 15.3 to 3.1 per 100,000 population), as compared with a small increase in the rest of the city (from 3.6 to 3.9 per 100,000 population). There was also a 74 percent decline in the target area in the injury rate per 100 fires (from 5.0 to 1.3; rate ratio, 0.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.1 to 0.6), as compared with a small increase in the rest of the city.
                A targeted intervention involving a smoke-alarm-giveaway program can reduce the incidence of injuries from residential fires. Effects of a brief educational and purchase program concerning home fires and smoke detectors by two pediatricians were compared to "routine" counseling without such a program using two groups each of 120 patients of well children. Inspection performed four to six weeks after the office visits showed that of 55 experimental group parents without detectors prior to the program, 26 purchased and 19 installed them correctly. No control group parents did so. To assess effectiveness of general practitioner advice about child safety, and provision of low cost safety equipment to low income families, on use of safety equipment and safe practices at home.
                Randomised, unblinded, controlled trial with initial assessment and six week follow up by telephone survey. Twenty families from intervention and control groups were randomly selected for a home visit to assess validity of responses to second survey.
                A general practice in Nottingham.
                98% (165/169) of families with children aged under 5 years registered with the practice.
                General practitioner safety advice plus, for families receiving means tested state benefits, access to safety equipment at low cost. Control families received usual care.
                Possession and use of safety equipment and safe practices at home.
                Before intervention, the two groups differed only in possession of fireguards. After intervention, significantly more families in intervention group used fireguards (relative risk 1.89, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 2.94), smoke alarms (1.14, 1.04 to 1.25), socket covers (1.27, 1.10 to 1.48), locks on cupboards for storing cleaning materials (1.38, 1.02 to 1.88), and door slam devices (3.60, 2.17 to 5.97). Also, significantly more families in intervention group showed very safe practice in storage of sharp objects (1.98, 1.38 to 2.83), storage of medicines (1.15, 1.03 to 1.28), window safety (1.30, 1.06 to 1.58), fireplace safety (1.84, 1.34 to 2.54), socket safety (1.77, 1.37 to 2.28), smoke alarm safety (1.11, 1.01 to 1.22), and door slam safety (7.00, 3.15 to 15.6). Stratifying results by receipt of state benefits showed that intervention was at least as effective in families receiving benefits as others.
                General practitioner advice, coupled with access to low cost equipment for low income families, increased use of safety equipment and other safe practices. These findings are encouraging for provision of injury prevention in primary care. Public health clients aged 65 years and older were randomly allocated to receive an intervention by a public health nurse during a home visit, promoting either safety behaviours or influenza immunization. Sixty-eight clients reported making a total of 103 safety changes, with almost equal proportions making changes in the safety and influenza groups (21.9% vs. 18.3%). A higher percentage of males (25.0%) than females (17.3%) reported making safety changes following the intervention. Further research should focus on the effectiveness of safety promotion strategies which are expanded to include seniors participation, policy development and community planning and design. Project Burn Prevention was designed and implemented to determine the ability of a public education program to increase awareness about burn hazards and reduce the incidence and severity of burn injuries. Media messages were transmitted to residents of a large metropolitan area; separate school and community interventions were implemented in two demographically similar communities within the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). A second metropolitan area and two of its communities served as control sites. Messages for specific, high-risk age groups emphasized flame burns because of their severity and scalds because of their frequency. Knowledge gains were demonstrable only as a result of the school program. Neither the school program nor the media campaign reduced burn incidence or severity; the community intervention may have brought about a moderate, temporary reduction in injuries. Multiplicity of messages, brevity of the campaign, and separation of the interventions are among possible reasons for the program's failure to significantly reduce burn injuries. Education for personal responsibility is not sufficient. Product modification and environmental redesign must be instituted through education and legislation for successful control of burn injuries. Injury is a major US public health problem, particularly in urban minority communities. This paper evaluates the impact of the Safe Block Project, a comprehensive injury prevention trial, on home hazards and injury prevention knowledge in a poor urban African-American community.
                Nine census tracts in the community were allocated to either the intervention area or the control area. The intervention, carried out by trained community outreach workers, consisted of (1) home modification for simple prevention measures, (2) home inspection accompanied by information about home hazards, and (3) education about selected injury prevention practices. Approximately 12 months after the intervention, random samples of control and intervention homes were assessed for home hazards and injury prevention knowledge.
                A significantly larger proportion of intervention homes than control homes had functioning smoke detectors, syrup of ipecac, safely stored medications, and reduced electrical and tripping hazards. No consistent differences were observed between control and intervention homes on home hazards requiring major effort to correct.
                There was a distinct difference between control and intervention homes with respect to safety knowledge and home hazards requiring minimal to moderate effort to correct. The Safe Block Project could serve as a model for future urban injury prevention efforts. To measure the effect of giving out free smoke alarms on rates of fires and rates of fire related injury in a deprived multiethnic urban population.
                Cluster randomised controlled trial.
                Forty electoral wards in two boroughs of inner London, United Kingdom.
                Primarily households including elderly people or children and households that are in housing rented from the borough council. Intervention: 20 050 smoke alarms, fittings, and educational brochures distributed free and installed on request.
                Rates of fires and related injuries during two years after the distribution; alarm ownership, installation, and function.
                Giving out free smoke alarms did not reduce injuries related to fire (rate ratio 1.3; 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.9), admissions to hospital and deaths (1.3; 0.7 to 2.3), or fires attended by the fire brigade (1.1; 0.96 to 1.3). Similar proportions of intervention and control households had installed alarms (36/119 (30%) v 35/109 (32%); odds ratio 0.9; 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.7) and working alarms (19/118 (16%) v 18/108 (17%); 0.9; 0.4 to 1.8).
                Giving out free smoke alarms in a deprived, multiethnic, urban community did not reduce injuries related to fire, mostly because few alarms had been installed or were maintained. To evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of an injury prevention program delivered by school based home visitors to the families of low income children attending preschool enrichment programs in Washington State.
                The families of children attending preschool Head Start programs in two regions were eligible. A total of 213 families (77.8% of those eligible) from intervention sites, and 149 families (71.9% of those eligible) from concurrent comparison sites, agreed to participate and completed the trial.
                Trained school personnel conducted home safety inspections as part of a planned home visit. Intervention families were offered educational materials as well as smoke detectors, batteries, ipecac, and age appropriate car safety restraints based on results of the home inspection.
                At a repeat home visit three months later, the proportion of families with a positive change in injury prevention knowledge or behavior among those in the intervention group was compared with the proportion in the comparison group. Smoke detector presence and function were observed.
                Among families without a working smoke detector at baseline, the intervention was associated with an increased probability of having a working detector at follow up (relative risk (RR) 3.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 8.6). Intervention families were also more likely to report the presence of ipecac in the home (RR 4.7, 95% CI 3.0 to 7.3) at follow up and to have obtained an age appropriate booster seat (RR 4.1, 95% CI 1.9 to 8.8). The program was acceptable to client families and to the home visitors who conducted the intervention.
                Among the families of low income children enrolled in preschool enrichment programs, home safety inspections and the distribution of safety supplies by school based home visitors appears to improve knowledge and behavior related to poisoning, smoke detector installation, and car safety seat use over three months of follow up. To present the results of an intervention trial to enhance parents' home-safety practices through pediatric safety counseling, home visits, and an on-site children's safety center where parents receive personalized education and can purchase reduced-cost products.
                Pediatricians were randomized to a standard- or an enhanced-intervention group. Parents of their patients were enrolled when the patient was 6 months or younger and observed until 12 to 18 months of age.
                A hospital-based pediatric resident continuity clinic that serves families living in low-income, inner-city neighborhoods.
                First- and second-year pediatric residents and their patient-parent dyads.
                Parents in the standard-intervention group received safety counseling and referral to the children's safety center from their pediatrician. Parents in the enhanced-intervention group received the standard services plus a home-safety visit by a community health worker.
                Home observers assessed the following safety practices: reduction of hot-water temperature, poison storage, and presence of smoke alarms, safety gates for stairs, and ipecac syrup.
                The prevalence of safety practices ranged from 11% of parents who stored poisons safely to 82% who had a working smoke alarm. No significant differences in safety practices were found between study groups. However, families who visited the children's safety center compared with those who did not had a significantly greater number of safety practices (34% vs 17% had > or 3).
                Home visiting was not effective in improving parents' safety practices. Counseling coupled with convenient access to reduced-cost products appears to be an effective strategy for promoting children's home safety. To develop and evaluate an injury prevention anticipatory guidance training program for pediatric residents.
                Thirty-one residents were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. Both groups attended a 1-hour seminar about injury prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics TIPP (The Injury Prevention Program) materials. The intervention group also received 5 hours of experiential instruction on injury prevention content and counseling skills (SAFE Counseling Framework). Families with infants from birth to age 6 months were enrolled in the study (N = 196); they were followed up until the child was aged 12 to 18 months. Data were collected by means of baseline and follow-up interviews, audiotapes of medical visits, parent exit surveys, and home observations.
                A hospital-based continuity clinic that serves families living in low-income, inner-city neighborhoods.
                Physician counseling and parent satisfaction, knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors.
                Parents seen by physicians in the intervention group received significantly more injury prevention counseling for 5 of the 6 safety practices, and they were significantly more satisfied with the help their physicians provided on safety topics. They were no less satisfied with their physicians' counseling on other anticipatory guidance topics. Parents' knowledge, beliefs, and home safety behaviors did not differ between the 2 groups.
                The frequency and impact of pediatric counseling can be enhanced by experiential training that targets specific injury hazards. Because low-income families face many barriers to carrying out the recommended safety practices, supplemental strategies are needed to ensure safer homes. The inclusion of counseling on home safety procedures has been recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics as a routine part of well-child care. However, few, if any, data exist to give direction to the pediatrician interested in advising parents about home safety. In the present study, 58 couples were randomly assigned, prospectively, to an experimental group and a control group. Both were enrolled in a single group well-child care class that lasted 90 minutes. The control group was provided with information and discussion on nutrition, dental care, safety in the car and home, child development, child rearing, illness management, and immunizations. The experimental group received information and discussion on the same topics, and they also received specific information on burn prevention: hot water heater settings and smoke detectors. On a subsequent home visit, 65% of the couples in the experimental group had their hot water temperature measured at 54.4 degrees C (130 degrees F) or less, whereas all of the couples in the control group had hot water temperatures of more than 54.4 degrees C (130 degrees F) (a significant difference). Although only one couple in the experimental group did not have an operational smoke detector, enough of the couples in the control group had operational smoke detectors that results were not significant.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) A 3-year project was undertaken to evaluate two methods of promoting residential smoke alarm installation and maintenance in high risk households across the U.S. Five states (Arkansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, and North Carolina) participated. The two strategies under study were direct installation of smoke alarms and distribution of a voucher for free smoke alarms. The target population included occupants of high-risk households without working smoke alarms who were approached as part of a door-to-door canvassing program. Fire Safety education was provided to both groups. A follow up assessment conducted 6-12 months post intervention assessed the presence and functional status of smoke alarms in each of the two groups. Demographic and fire safety data were also collected at baseline and follow up for each group. 4,455 households were enrolled in the study [Installation Group: 2,206 (49.5%), Voucher Group: 2,249 (50.5%)]. Baseline characteristics of the groups within each state were comparable. Follow up data was obtained on 1,583 installation group households and 1,545 voucher group households. At follow up, 1,421 (89.8%) households in the installation group had working smoke alarms, compared with 997 (65%) households in the voucher group, Odds Ratio 4.82 (95% CI=3.97, 5.85) (p <.0001). On average, 47% of all households enrolled in the voucher group did not redeem their vouchers (range 26-63%). Direct installation of alarms by program staff resulted in working smoke alarms in 90% of households receiving the direct installation intervention. Only 65% of voucher households had functioning alarms at follow up, largely due to failure to redeem vouchers. To assess the effectiveness of safety advice at child health surveillance consultations, provision of low cost safety equipment to families receiving means tested state benefits, home safety checks, and first aid training on frequency and severity of unintentional injuries in children at home.
                Cluster randomised controlled trial.
                36 general practices in Nottingham.
                All children aged 3-12 months registered with participating practices.
                A package of safety advice at child health surveillance consultations at 6-9, 12-15, and 18-24 months; provision of low cost safety equipment to families on means tested state benefits; and home safety checks and first aid training by health visitors.
                Primary outcomes measures were frequency and severity of medically attended injuries. Secondary outcome measures were self reported safety practices, possession and use of safety equipment, knowledge and confidence in dealing with first aid, and perceptions of risk of injury and risk of hazards assessed by postal questionnaire at baseline and follow up at 25 months.
                At baseline, both groups had similar risk factors for injury, sociodemographic characteristics, safety practices, possession and use of safety equipment, knowledge and confidence in dealing with first aid, and perceptions of risk. No significant difference was found in frequency of at least one medically attended injury (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.30), at least one attendance at an accident and emergency department for injury (1.02, 0.76 to 1.37), at least one primary care attendance for injury (0.75, 0.48 to 1.17), or at least one hospital admission for injury (0.69, 0.42 to 1.12). No significant difference in the secondary outcome measures was found between the intervention and control groups.
                The intervention package was not effective in reducing the frequency of minor unintentional injuries in children at home, and larger trials are required to assess the effect on more severe injuries. To examine the effectiveness of a home visit program to improve home safety and decrease the frequency of injury in children. We examined the effects of the program on 1) parental injury awareness and knowledge; 2) the extent that families used home safety measures; 3) the rate of injury; and 4) the cost effectiveness of the intervention.
                A randomized, controlled trial.
                A multicenter trial conducted at 5 hospitals in 4 Canadian urban centers.
                Children <8 years old, initially enrolled in an injury case-control study, were eligible to participate. Intervention. Subsequent to a home inspection conducted to determine baseline hazard rates for both groups, participants in the intervention group received a single home visit that included the provision of an information package, discount coupons, and specific instruction regarding home safety measures. Main
                The median age was 2 years, with males comprising ~60% of participants. The experimental groups were comparable at outset in terms of case-control status, age, gender, and socioeconomic status. Parental injury awareness and knowledge was high; 73% correctly identified injury as the leading cause of death in children, and an intervention effect was not demonstrated. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the home inspection items indicated that significant safety modifications only occurred in the number of homes having hot water not exceeding 54 degrees C (OR: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14, 1.50) or the presence of a smoke detector (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.94, 2.22). However, the intervention group reported home safety modifications of 62% at 4 months and significantly less injury visits to the doctor compared with the nonintervention group (rate ratio: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.96). The total costs of care for injuries were significantly lower in the intervention group compared with the nonintervention group with a cost of $372 per injury prevented.
                An intervention using a single home visit to improve the extent to which families use safety measures was found to be insufficient to influence the long-term adoption of home safety measures, but was effective to decrease the overall occurrence of injuries. Future programs should target a few, well-focused, evidence-based areas including the evaluation of high-risk groups and the effect of repeated visits on outcome. To assess the effectiveness of safety advice and safety equipment in reducing unintentional injuries for families with children aged under 5 years and living in deprived areas.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                47 general practices in Nottingham.
                3428 families with children under 5.
                A standardised safety consultation and provision of free and fitted stair gates, fire guards, smoke alarms, cupboard locks, and window locks.
                Primary outcome measures were whether a child in the family had at least one injury that required medical attendance and rates of attendance in primary and secondary care and of hospital admission for injury over a two year period. Secondary outcome measures included possession of safety equipment and safety practices.
                No significant difference was found in the proportion of families in which a child had a medically attended injury (odds ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.50) or in the rates of attendance in secondary care (incidence rate ratio 1.02, 0.90 to 1.13) or admission to hospital (1.02, 0.70 to 1.48). However, children in the intervention arm had a significantly higher attendance rate for injuries in primary care (1.37, 1.11 to 1.70, P = 0.003). At both one and two years' follow up, families in the intervention arm were significantly more likely to have a range of safety practices, but absolute differences in the percentages were relatively small.
                The intervention resulted in significant improvements in safety practices for up to two years but did not reduce injuries that necessitated medical attendance. Although equipment was provided and fitted free of charge, the observed changes in safety practices may not have been large enough to affect injury rates. We evaluated the effectiveness of a community-based injury prevention program designed to reduce the incidence of burns, falls in the home, motor vehicle occupant injuries, and poisonings and suffocations among children ages 0-5 years. Between September 1980 and June 1982, we implemented five injury prevention projects concurrently in nine Massachusetts cities and town; five sites, matched on selected demographic characteristics, were control communities. An estimated 42 percent of households with children ages 0-5 years were exposed to one or more of the interventions over the two-year period in the nine communities. Participation in safety programs increased three-fold in the intervention communities and two-fold in the control communities. Safety knowledge and practices increased in both intervention and control communities. Households that reported participatory exposure to the interventions had higher safety knowledge and behavior scores than those that received other community exposure or no exposure to intervention activities. We found a distinct reduction in motor vehicle occupant injuries among children ages 0-5 years in the intervention compared with control communities, associated with participatory exposure of about 55 percent of households with children ages 0-5 years. We have no evidence that the coordinated intervention programs reduced the other target injuries--although exposure to prevention messages was associated with safety behaviors for burns and poisonings.