Barriers and facilitators of using child restraint systems (CRS) on airplanes: Perspectives of caregivers and airline personnel

IF 3.3 3区 工程技术 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Transport & Health Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-12 DOI:10.1016/j.jth.2024.101980
Aimee J. Palumbo , Danielle Erkoboni , Julie A. Mansfield
{"title":"Barriers and facilitators of using child restraint systems (CRS) on airplanes: Perspectives of caregivers and airline personnel","authors":"Aimee J. Palumbo ,&nbsp;Danielle Erkoboni ,&nbsp;Julie A. Mansfield","doi":"10.1016/j.jth.2024.101980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Families flying with young children face several options regarding their method of restraint on the aircraft. Travel decisions are often driven by a variety of factors and no study has explored the factors associated with families' choices of travel modes or the airline staff's role in these decisions. The objective of this work is to identify strengths and opportunities for improvement in perception and knowledge about in-flight child restraint system (CRS) use.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A focus group was conducted with United States (US)-based airline personnel (n = 16) and an online survey was conducted with US caregivers who had recently flown with young children (n = 786). Qualitative and quantitative data about restraint decisions, in-flight experiences, and injuries while traveling were collected.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Airline personnel felt that caregivers often do not know best practices for keeping their child safe in-flight and do not recognize flight attendants as highly trained safety professionals. Airline personnel often feel discord between the priorities of the caregivers and the safety rules enforced by the airline. Of caregiver survey respondents, 29% reported using a CRS on their flight, 32% held their child in their lap, and 39% had the child seated in their own seat without a CRS. The primary reason for using a CRS was safety, followed by ease of travel. Barriers to usage include cost and difficulty in logistics of carrying/traveling with the CRS itself. Those who planned to use their own CRS at their destination were five times more likely to use a CRS during the flight compared with those not needing a CRS at their destination (p &lt; 0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Flight attendants are trained extensively in safety measures, but caregivers may not be aware of best in-flight practices. Additional educational efforts, clarity/accessibility of airline policies, and assistance with airport logistics might enable more caregivers to make safe decisions for their children.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47838,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transport & Health","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 101980"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transport & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140524002263","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Families flying with young children face several options regarding their method of restraint on the aircraft. Travel decisions are often driven by a variety of factors and no study has explored the factors associated with families' choices of travel modes or the airline staff's role in these decisions. The objective of this work is to identify strengths and opportunities for improvement in perception and knowledge about in-flight child restraint system (CRS) use.

Methods

A focus group was conducted with United States (US)-based airline personnel (n = 16) and an online survey was conducted with US caregivers who had recently flown with young children (n = 786). Qualitative and quantitative data about restraint decisions, in-flight experiences, and injuries while traveling were collected.

Results

Airline personnel felt that caregivers often do not know best practices for keeping their child safe in-flight and do not recognize flight attendants as highly trained safety professionals. Airline personnel often feel discord between the priorities of the caregivers and the safety rules enforced by the airline. Of caregiver survey respondents, 29% reported using a CRS on their flight, 32% held their child in their lap, and 39% had the child seated in their own seat without a CRS. The primary reason for using a CRS was safety, followed by ease of travel. Barriers to usage include cost and difficulty in logistics of carrying/traveling with the CRS itself. Those who planned to use their own CRS at their destination were five times more likely to use a CRS during the flight compared with those not needing a CRS at their destination (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Flight attendants are trained extensively in safety measures, but caregivers may not be aware of best in-flight practices. Additional educational efforts, clarity/accessibility of airline policies, and assistance with airport logistics might enable more caregivers to make safe decisions for their children.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在飞机上使用儿童约束系统(CRS)的障碍和促进因素:护理人员和航空公司工作人员的观点
有小孩的家庭在飞机上面临着几种约束方法的选择。旅行决定通常是由多种因素驱动的,没有研究探讨与家庭选择旅行方式或航空公司工作人员在这些决定中的作用相关的因素。这项工作的目的是确定优势和机会,以提高对机上儿童约束系统(CRS)使用的认识和认识。方法对美国航空公司工作人员(n = 16)进行焦点小组调查,并对最近带幼儿乘飞机的美国护理人员(n = 786)进行在线调查。收集了有关约束决策、飞行体验和旅行中受伤的定性和定量数据。结果航空公司人员认为,护理人员通常不知道在飞机上保护孩子安全的最佳做法,也不认为空乘人员是训练有素的安全专业人员。航空公司的工作人员经常感到护理人员的优先事项与航空公司执行的安全规则之间存在分歧。在接受调查的护理人员中,29%的人表示他们在飞机上使用了CRS, 32%的人把孩子放在腿上,39%的人让孩子坐在自己的座位上,没有CRS。使用CRS的主要原因是安全,其次是方便旅行。使用CRS的障碍包括成本和携带/旅行CRS本身的物流困难。那些计划在目的地使用自己的CRS的人在飞行期间使用CRS的可能性是那些不需要在目的地使用CRS的人的五倍(p <;0.05)。空乘人员在安全措施方面接受了广泛的培训,但护理人员可能不知道最佳的飞行实践。额外的教育努力、航空公司政策的清晰度/可及性以及机场后勤方面的协助,可能会使更多的照顾者为他们的孩子做出安全的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
196
审稿时长
69 days
期刊最新文献
Exploring perceptions of the barrier effect and their associations with travel mode choice and interactions with neighbours in Santiago, Chile Motion sickness in autonomous driving: Environmental, individual, and time effects Understanding neighborhood walkability perceptions and assessment practices by community: Rural, suburban, and urban settings: A cross-sectional study Eye-tracking and visual processing tests for assessing driving ability in individuals with dementia and mild cognitive impairment: A pilot study Pedestrian fatality in global context: Economic growth, urbanization, and the role of inequality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1