Comparative performance of rearward and forward-facing child restraint systems with common use errors: Effect on crash injury risk for a 1-year-old occupant

Abstract

Objective

To compare how errors in child restraint use influence crash injury risk in rearward and forward-facing restraints for a 1-year old occupant.

Methods

Three convertible child restraint systems (CRS) were subjected to frontal dynamic sled tests at 56 km/h in rearward-facing and forward-facing modes in a correct use (baseline) condition and in five incorrect use conditions: loose securing belt, loose harness, partial harness use, top tether slack, and three minor errors. Excursion, head, and chest 3 ms resultant acceleration, HIC15, and neck forces and moments of a Q1 anthropomorphic test device (ATD) seated in the restraints were measured. The effect of incorrect use on each outcome and restraint type was analyzed.

Results

The influence of errors varied across different outcome variables, the three restraints tested and orientation modes. Excursion increased in four of five incorrect use conditions in both rearward and forward-facing orientations. A very loose harness increased four of five outcome variables in at least one forward-facing restraint, whereas only excursion was increased when rearward-facing. Overall, there tended to be a more negative effect of incorrect use (demonstrated through increases in outcome variables compared to the baseline) in the forward-facing orientation.

Conclusions

Overall, errors in use tended to have a larger negative impact on forward-facing restraints than rearward-facing restraints. Given the widespread nature of errors in use, this adds further weight to arguments to keep children rearward-facing to 12 months of age and older. The results also highlight a variation in response to errors across differently designed restraints, suggesting the influence of errors may be minimized by restraint design that is more resistant to errors.

Keywords:

• Child restraint
• incorrect use
• errors
• rearward-facing
• forward-facing
• dynamic testing

Disclosure statement

This work was conducted at the Transurban Road Safety Centre at Neuroscience Research Australia.

Additional information

Funding

Author JB is supported by Australian NHMRC Career Development Fellowships. LB is supported by an Australian NHMRC Investigator Grant (APP1172988). Funding sources had no involvement in study design, in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit the article for publication.