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

IF 3.2 3区 工程技术 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Transport & Health Pub 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":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-12","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":"","PubModel":"","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
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
Under the influence of parents: A longitudinal study of children's walking Integrating user perceptions of socio-emotional aspects in wheelchair design: A pilot study using Kansei Engineering Influence of mobility and technological factors of mobility on the quality of life of older adults: An empirical study focused on mobility as a mediator Healthy ageing and the 15-minute walking environment in the Swedish Arctic communities Commuting mode and university students’ wellbeing: Investigating the role of effort on subjective wellbeing and perceived autonomy
×
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:481959085
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