Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2007 Dec;13(6):398-402.
doi: 10.1136/ip.2006.015115.

Car safety seats for children: rear facing for best protection

B Henary  1 , C P Sherwood, J R Crandall, R W Kent, F E Vaca, K B Arbogast, M J Bull
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Car safety seats for children: rear facing for best protection

B Henary et al. Inj Prev. 2007 Dec.

Retraction in

Expression of concern in

Abstract

Objective: To compare the injury risk between rear-facing (RFCS) and forward-facing (FFCS) car seats for children less than 2 years of age in the USA.

Methods: Data were extracted from a US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration vehicle crash database for the years 1988-2003. Children 0-23 months of age restrained in an RFCS or FFCS when riding in passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, or light trucks were included in the study. Logistic regression models and restraint effectiveness calculations were used to compare the risk of injury between children restrained in RFCSs and FFCSs.

Results: Children in FFCSs were significantly more likely to be seriously injured than children restrained in RFCSs in all crash types (OR=1.76, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.20). When considering frontal crashes alone, children in FFCSs were more likely to be seriously injured (OR=1.23), although this finding was not statistically significant (95% CI 0.95 to 1.59). In side crashes, however, children in FFCSs were much more likely to be injured (OR=5.53, 95% CI 3.74 to 8.18). When 1 year olds were analyzed separately, these children were also more likely to be seriously injured when restrained in FFCSs (OR=5.32, 95% CI 3.43 to 8.24). Effectiveness estimates for RFCSs (93%) were found to be 15% higher than those for FFCSs (78%).

Conclusions: RFCSs are more effective than FFCSs in protecting restrained children aged 0-23 months. The same findings apply when 1 year olds are analyzed separately. Use of an RFCS, in accordance with restraint recommendations for child size and weight, is an excellent choice for optimum protection up to a child's second birthday.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

References

    1. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) Insurance Institute for Highway Safety fatality facts. Arlington, VA: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 2005
    1. Hoyert D L, Heron M P, Murphy S L.et alDeaths: final data for 2003. National vital statistics reports. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 200654(13) - PubMed
    1. Weber K. Crash protection for child passengers. A review of best practice. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) 2000311–27.
    1. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Car safety seats: a guide for families 2007. http://www.aap.org/family/carseatguide.htm (accessed 4 Jun 2007)
    1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration General child seat use information (2006). http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov (accessed 14 Nov 2006)

Publication types