Dataset Information

Effectiveness of booster seats compared with no restraint or seat belt alone for crash injury prevention.

ABSTRACT: The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of belt-positioning booster seats, compared with no restraint use and with seat belt use only, during motor vehicle crashes among U.S. children.This was a retrospective matched cohort study with data from the 1998 through 2009 National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) Crashworthiness Data System (CDS). The study sample consisted of children aged 0 to 10 years who were not seated in the front seat of the vehicle. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the risk of overall, fatal, and regional body injury.Children using seat belts in belt-positioning booster seats experienced less overall injury (Injury Severity Score [ISS] > 0, adjusted risk ratio [RR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.55 to 0.96; Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] score of 2 or higher, adjusted RR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.16 to 0.58; ISS > 8, adjusted RR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.06 to 0.56), and less injury in most body regions except the neck (adjusted RR = 4.79, 95% CI = 1.43 to 16.00) than did children with no restraint use. Children using seat belts in belt-positioning booster seats had an equal risk of injury but higher risks of neck (adjusted RR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.02 to 3.40) and thorax (adjusted RR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.33 to 6.15) injury than did children restrained by seat belts only.Children using belt-positioning booster seats appear to experience a higher risk of AIS > 0 injury to the neck and thorax than do children using seat belts only. Future research should examine whether the observed increase in neck and thorax injuries can be attributed to improper use of booster seats.

SUBMITTER: Ma X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3798005 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of booster seats compared with no restraint or seat belt alone for crash injury prevention.

Ma Xiaoguang X Griffin Russell R McGwin Gerald G Allison David B DB Heymsfield Steven B SB He Wei W Zhu Shankuan S

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 20130901 9

<h4>Objectives</h4>The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of belt-positioning booster seats, compared with no restraint use and with seat belt use only, during motor vehicle crashes among U.S. children.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a retrospective matched cohort study with data from the 1998 through 2009 National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) Crashworthiness Data System (CDS). The study sample consisted of children aged 0 to 10 years who were not seated in the front seat of the vehicle. ...[more]

PMID: 24050794

Similar Datasets

Project description:The study was conducted to determine the association between vehicle-, crash-, and demographic-related factors and injuries to front seat far-side occupants in modern environments.Field data were obtained from the NASS-CDS database for the years 2009-2012. Inclusion factors included the following: adult restrained front outboard-seated occupants, no ejection or rollovers, and vehicle model years less than 10 years old at the time of crash. Far-side crashes were determined by using collision deformation classification. Injuries were scored using the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). Injuries (MAIS 2+, MAIS 3+, M denotes maximum score) were examined based on demographics, change in velocity, vehicle type, direction of force, extent zone, collision partner, and presence of another occupant in the front seat. Only weighted data were used in the analysis. Injuries to the head and face, thorax, abdomen, pelvis, and upper and lower extremity regions were studied. Odds ratios and upper and lower confidence intervals were estimated from multivariate analysis.Out of 519,195 far-side occupants, 17,715 were MAIS 2+ and 4,387 were MAIS 3+ level injured occupants. The mean age, stature, total body mass, and body mass index (BMI) were 40.7 years, 1.7 m, 77.2 kg, and 26.8 kg/m2, respectively. Of occupants with MAIS 2+ injuries, 51% had head and 19% had thorax injuries. Of occupants with MAIS 3+ injuries, 50% had head and 69% had thorax injuries. The cumulative distribution of changes in velocities at the 50th percentile for the struck vehicle for all occupants and occupants with MAIS 2+ and MAIS 3+ injuries were 19, 34, and 42 km/h, respectively. Furthermore, 73% of MAIS 2+ injuries and 86% of MAIS 3+ injuries occurred at a change in velocity of 24 km/h or greater. Odds of sustaining MAIS 2+ and MAIS 3+ injuries increased with each unit increase in change in velocity, stature, and age, with one exception. Odds of sustaining injuries were higher with the presence of an occupant in the front seat at the MAIS 3+ level, although it was reversed at the lower level. The extent zone of 3+ increased the odds compared to the extent zones of 1 to 2 at both MAIS 2+ and MAIS 3+ injuries. Odds ratios and confidence intervals are given.The findings are as follows: head and thorax are the more frequently injured body regions, and the prevalence of cranium injuries is similar at both injury severities; thoracic injuries are more prevalent at the MAIS 3+ level; the presence of another front seat occupant plays a role in MAIS 3+ trauma; injuries continue to occur at changes in velocity representative of side impact environments; and mean demographic factors are close to mid-size automotive anthropometry, indicating the need to pursue this line of study. Because data were gathered from only 4 years, it would be important to include additional NASS-CDS database years, rescore injuries from previous years, and analyze other international databases to reinforce these findings for advancing safety for far-side occupants.

Project description:Improving access to parasitological diagnosis of malaria is a central strategy for control and elimination of the disease. Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are relatively easy to perform and could be used in primary level clinics to increase coverage of diagnostics and improve treatment of malaria.A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken of RDT-based diagnosis in public health sector facilities in Afghanistan comparing the societal and health sector costs of RDTs versus microscopy and RDTs versus clinical diagnosis in low and moderate transmission areas. The effect measure was 'appropriate treatment for malaria' defined using a reference diagnosis. Effects were obtained from a recent trial of RDTs in 22 public health centres with cost data collected directly from health centres and from patients enrolled in the trial. Decision models were used to compare the cost of RDT diagnosis versus the current diagnostic method in use at the clinic per appropriately treated case (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, ICER).RDT diagnosis of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum malaria in patients with uncomplicated febrile illness had higher effectiveness and lower cost compared to microscopy and was cost-effective across the moderate and low transmission settings. RDTs remained cost-effective when microscopy was used for other clinical purposes. In the low transmission setting, RDTs were much more effective than clinical diagnosis (65.2% (212/325) vs 12.5% (40/321)) but at an additional cost (ICER) of US$4.5 per appropriately treated patient including a health sector cost (ICER) of US$2.5 and household cost of US$2.0. Sensitivity analysis, which varied drug costs, indicated that RDTs would remain cost-effective if artemisinin combination therapy was used for treating both P. vivax and P. falciparum. Cost-effectiveness of microscopy relative to RDT is further reduced if the former is used exclusively for malaria diagnosis. In the health service setting of Afghanistan, RDTs are a cost-effective intervention compared to microscopy.RDTs remain cost-effective across a range of drug costs and if microscopy is used for a range of diagnostic services. RDTs have significant advantages over clinical diagnosis with minor increases in the cost of service provision.The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT00935688.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of booster seats compared with no restraint or seat belt alone for crash injury prevention.

Publications

Effectiveness of booster seats compared with no restraint or seat belt alone for crash injury prevention.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets