Advertisement

Baby Gate–Related Injuries Among Children in the United States, 1990–2010

Published:February 18, 2014DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2013.12.006

      Abstract

      Objective

      Baby gates are one of the most widely used home safety products to protect children from home hazards. The objective was to describe the epidemiology of baby gate and barrier-associated injuries among children. It was hypothesized that injuries experienced by children ages ≤2 years and those >2 years were significantly different as a result of differences in gate interactions.

      Methods

      A retrospective analysis was conducted by using nationally representative data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System. A total of 1188 actual cases were reviewed and national estimates generated.

      Results

      An estimated 37,673 children were treated in emergency departments for injuries associated with gates, yielding an average of 1794 cases annually. The incidence of gate-related injuries increased significantly from 3.9 per 100,000 children in 1990 to 12.5 per 100,000 children in 2010 (P < .001). Patients were primarily boys (61.0%) and were <2 years of age (60.4%). Patients <2 years of age were most often injured by falls down stairs (odds ratio 6.72; 95% confidence interval 6.32–7.16) after the collapse of the gate. Patients aged 2 to 6 were most often injured by contact with the gate (odds ratio 2.03; 95% confidence interval 1.95–2.12), resulting in open wounds (55.4%) and soft-tissue injuries (24.2%).

      Conclusions

      Given the clear dichotomy between injury characteristics of patients aged <2 years and patients aged 2 to 6 years of age, as well as the prevalence of preventable injuries, greater efforts are needed to promote proper usage, ensure safety in product design, and increase awareness of age-related recommendations for use of gates.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Academic Pediatrics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Howard E. Improvement in children’s nursery-gates. US patent 116960. July 11, 1871.

        • Borse N.N.
        • Gilchrist J.
        • Dellinger A.M.
        • et al.
        CDC Childhood Injury Report: Patterns of Unintentional Injuries Among 0–19 Year Olds in the United States, 2000–2006.
        National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga2008
        • Sengolge M.
        • Vincenten J.
        Child Safety Product Guide: Potentially Dangerous Products.
        European Child Safety Alliance, Eurosafe, Amsterdam2006: 15
      2. Safety gates buying guide. Consumer Reports. Available at: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/safety-gates/buying-guide.htm. Accessed June 26, 2012.

        • Van de Waeter M.
        Priorities in child safety products.
        Int J Consum Prod Saf. 1996; 3: 79-86
        • Towner E.
        • Dowswell T.
        • Mackereth C.
        • Jarvis S.
        What Works in Preventing Unintentional Injuries in Children and Young Adolescents?.
        National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, UK2001
        • Gielen A.C.
        • Wilson M.E.H.
        • McDonald E.M.
        • et al.
        Randomized trial of enhanced anticipatory guidance for injury prevention.
        Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001; 155: 42-49
        • King W.J.
        Long term effects of a home visit to prevent childhood injury: three year follow up of a randomized trial.
        Inj Prev. 2005; 11: 106-109
        • Kendrick D.
        • Young B.
        • Mason-Jones A.J.
        • et al.
        Home safety education and provision of safety equipment for injury prevention.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 9: CD005014
        • Pearson M.
        • Garside R.
        • Moxham T.
        • Anderson R.
        Preventing unintentional injuries to children in the home: a systematic review of the effectiveness of programmes supplying and/or installing home safety equipment.
        Health Promot Int. 2011; 26: 376-392
        • Kendrick D.
        • Watson M.
        • Mulvaney C.
        • Burton P.
        How useful are home safety behaviours for predicting childhood injury? A cohort study.
        Health Educ Res. 2005; 20: 709-718
        • Beirens T.M.
        • Brug J.
        • van Beeck E.F.
        • et al.
        Presence and use of stair gates in homes with toddlers (11–18 months old).
        Accident Anal Prev. 2007; 39: 964-968
        • Beirens T.M.J.
        • Brug J.
        • van Beeck E.F.
        • et al.
        Assessing psychosocial correlates of parental safety behaviour using protection motivation theory: stair gate presence and use among parents of toddlers.
        Health Educ Res. 2007; 23: 723-731
        • Nixon J.W.
        • Pearn J.H.
        • Petrie G.M.
        Childproof safety barriers.
        Aust Paediatr J. 1979; 15: 260-262
        • Chowdhury R.T.
        Nursery Product-Related Injuries and Deaths Among Children Under Age 5.
        Consumer Product Safety Commission, Bethesda, Md2011
      3. Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP). Injuries associated with baby gates. 2002. Available at: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/injury-bles/chirpp/injrep-rapbles/index-eng.php. Accessed February 6, 2014.

      4. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Standard consumer safety specification for expansion gates and expandable enclosures. Pennsylvania; 2012 June 2012. Report No.: F1004 - 12.

      5. US Consumer Product Safety Commission. Infant/child product recalls (not including toys). Releases #83–041, #86-30, #88-117, #09-300, and #10-181. Available at: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/category/child.html. Accessed January 11, 2012.

        • US Consumer Product Safety Commission
        The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System: A Tool for Researchers.
        Division of Hazard and Injury Data Systems, Washington, DC2000: 1-38
      6. US Census Bureau. Intercensal estimates of the United States population by age and sex, 1990–2000: all months. Available at: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/intercensal/national/index.html. Accessed July 5, 2012.

      7. US Census Bureau. National population estimates for the 2000s: monthly postcensal resident population, by single year of age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin. Available at: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/asrh/2011/2011-nat-res.html. Accessed July 5, 2012.

      8. Hagan J. Shaw J.S. Duncan P.M. Bright Futures: Guidelines for Health Supervision of Infants, Children and Adolescents. 3rd ed. American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Ill2008
      9. Shelov S. Altmann T.R. Caring for Your Baby and Young Child: Birth to Age 5. 5th ed. American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Ill2009
        • Gerber R.J.
        • Wilks T.
        • Erdie-Lalena C.
        Developmental milestones: motor development.
        Pediatr Rev. 2010; 31: 267-276