200 likes | 211 Views
This report discusses the safety of children between the ages of 18 months and 4 years in relation to guards and climbing in the built environment. It includes a review of building codes, terminology, and peer-reviewed studies on children's physical development and interaction with the built environment.
E N D
Review Of Fall Safetyof Children Between the Ages 18 Months and 4 Years In Relation To Guards And Climbing In The Built Environment ICC Code Technology Committee Meeting Reno, Nevada October 4, 2007 Thomas Kenney, P.E.
Authors • Alan Hedge, PhD, CPE, FHFES, FIEA, FErgS, President of Humanuse Inc. is an independent Ergonomics Consulting company. He is also a Professor in the Department of Design and Environmental Analysis, Cornell University and a Research Professor in the Department of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering at Syracuse University. • Phillip Davis is a Senior Economist/Analyst With the NAHB Research Center for 20 years, his expertise includes statistical and other quantitative analysis, computer-based modeling, and database programming. 2
Authors Thomas Kenney, P.E., is Vice President of Engineering and Research at the NAHB Research Center. He is a licensed professional engineer in Florida and Maryland. His multidisciplinary work on building codes and standards began in 1996 with the CABO One- and Two-Family Dwelling Code and has continued through the development of the International Code Council’s I-Codes. 3
Report Overview Building Codes – Pg 3 & Appendix A United States - Canada – Australia - New Zealand Terminology – Pg 5 Guards – Barriers – Ladder Effect – Facilitate Climbing Consumer Product Safety Commission – Pg 6 & Appendix B National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) Data Sets 2002 - 2005 Peer-Review Studies - Pgs 8 - 61 40 peer-review studies - Children’s Physical Development - Children’s Interaction with the Build Environment 4
TerminologyPage 5 “Guards” is a term-of-art used in ICC codes, standards, and life safety codes to describe a means of fall protection that is required along open-sided walking surfaces; including porches, decks, balconies, mezzanines, stairs, ramps, and landings that are located more than 30 in (76.2 cm) above the floor or grade below. Guards are defined as “A building component or a system of building components located near the open sides of elevated walking surfaces that minimizes the possibility of a fall from the walking surface to the lower level.”
TerminologyPage 5 The term “barrier” is used in the International Residential Code in Appendix A to define a physical obstruction to provide protection against potential drowning by restricting access by children to swimming pools, spas, and hot tubs. The term “barrier” does not appear in the definitions section of the IRC. Barriers are required to be 48 in (1.22 m) above the walk surface, whereas guards are required to be 36 in (0.91 m) above the walk surface. The IRC implicitly differentiates between guards and barriers—guards defend against accidental falls whereas barriers are intended to inhibit motivation by placement of an imposing obstruction between the child and the pool area.
TerminologyPage 6 Ladder Effect In EN-1176-1 (1998) a ladder is defined as “the primary means of access incorporating rungs or steps on which a user can ascend or descend.” The term “Ladder Effect” has been used in building codes of the past, although it was not defined and it no longer appears in current model building codes from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States.
TerminologyPage 6 “Facilitate Climbing” is a term found in building codes to ascribe an attribute that is vague and undefined. Secretariats of model building codes have struggled with providing guidance to assist with enforcement of provisions that require guards to be of a design that does not facilitate climbing. Prescriptive recommendations in code commentary documents and professional judgment by designers are often relied upon to demonstrate compliance.
National Electronic Injury Surveillance System • Consumer product-related injuries • Sample of ~100 hospital emergency departments • NEISS coordinator gathers cases from the day’s records • CPSC collects the information via telephone lines nightly • Data records include two product code fields that together identify up to two consumer products that were involved in an injury • Data record Fields • Case number, date, weight, age, race, body part, disposition, two narrative fields • Web access allows NEISS data to be downloaded
National Electronic Injury Surveillance System • NEISS records for the years 2002 through 2005 • High risk population – children 18 months to 4 years of age • Product codes • Handrails, railings or banisters (1829) • Porches, balconies, open side floors and floor opening (1817)
National Electronic Injury Surveillance System • NEISS records for the years 2002 through 2005 • Product codes • Pull-down or folding stairs (1840) and stair or steps excluding pull-down or folding stairs (1842) • Storm windows (1826) , Window screens (1828), Jalousie glass windows (1836), Windowsills or frames (1870), Windows or window glass, not specified (1873), Other windows or window glass (1875), Window or door security barriers (1888) and Windows and window glass, other than storm windows (1894)
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemTable B1 Page B2
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemTable B2 Page B3
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemTable B3 Page B3
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemTable B4 Page B5
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemTable B5 Page B7
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemConclusions • The results indicate that falls from Porches, Balconies, Open-Side Floors, Floor Openings Handrails, Railings, Banisters among young children aged 18 months to 4 years account for an estimated 0.032 percent of injuries in that population. • The incident rate is approximately 2.5 per 100,000 children between 18 months and 4 years of age • There is much uncertainty in the data to ascribe causality or the physical situation that lead to reported injuries.
National Electronic Injury Surveillance SystemConclusions • CPSC Conducts Follow-Up Studies – Phone and Onsite • Incident Rate For Children in this Study Would Not Warrant a Follow-Up Study Initiated by CPSC • Follow-Up Study Could Be Funded by a Third-Party Through Another Federal Agency