必备乘梯安全知识 电梯遇险学会自救

<正>9月16日,温州一男子一脚踩空跌落电梯井底;15日,重庆一电梯故障,4名小孩被困;14日,华侨大学1名学生被卡电梯窒息死亡……电梯安全事故层出不穷,掌握电梯自救方法,伤害并非不可避免!鉴于人们对电梯的安全问题高度关注,本期我们给大家普及一下乘坐电梯的安全知识。乘坐电梯时需要注意的安全知识1.乘电梯时,请查看电梯是否有安全检验合格标志。超过检验日期或带故障的电梯,存在安全隐患。2.不可未看清电梯轿厢是否停靠在本层的情况下盲目进入,否则有可能将导致人员坠落井道事故的发生。     

必备乘梯安全知识电梯遇险学会自救

9月16日,温州一男子一脚踩空跌落电梯井底;15日,重庆一电梯故障,4名小孩被困;14日,华侨大学1名学生被卡电梯窒息死亡……电梯安全事故层出不穷,掌握电梯自救方法,伤害并非不可避免！鉴于人们对电梯的安全问题高度关注,本期我们给大家普及一下乘坐电梯的安全知识。     

高层建筑电梯事故应急避险及救援

<正>现代社会,一栋栋高楼拔地而起,办公楼、住宅楼、商场、超市、车站、机场、医院等,到处都有电梯的身影,每天上下班、外出办事,电梯为人们的日常生活带来极大的便捷。但连续发生的几起电梯事故,如北京地铁四号线自动扶梯逆行事故、延安市某宾馆乘客坠落电梯井道事故等,使人们开始谈"梯"色变,担心乘坐电梯时被困,或者坠落、剪切等安全事故会发生在自己身上。     

乘坐电梯六大安全须知

9月14日傍晚,华侨大学厦门校区综合教学楼C4的一部电梯内,再现电梯“吃人”事故,一名男生在乘坐电梯时,被夹卡在轿厢中不幸身亡。此消息一出便引起了市民及网友的广泛关注,电梯的安全问题再次被推倒风口浪尖。如何正确使用乘坐电梯？如何在电梯事故中自救？使市民提高安全搭乘意识,预防和减少电梯意外伤害和事故成了当下最重要的环节。在此,秀洲消防部门为大家提供乘坐电梯六大安全须知,避免悲剧重演。     

电梯安装与检验中的几个认识误区

<正>随着国民经济的发展,作为特种设备之一的电梯发展异常迅速。为满足人们对乘坐电梯的可靠、安全、舒适要求,国家质检总局对电梯等特种设备实施安装、改造、重大维修监督检验(以下简称监督检验)。实施监督检验能及时发现问题,及时解决问题,将危险隐患消灭在源头,杜绝安全事故的发生,具有重要意义。福建省在实施电梯监督检验方面积累了一定的经验,同时在实施过程中也经常发现安装单位乃至少数检验人员对有关的电梯法规、标准以及检验方法理解不够透彻,存在认识误区甚至误判。     

电梯检验过程中的人因失误分析与管理对策

近年来,我国电梯行业发展迅速,但电梯安全事故频发.导致电梯安全事故的原因中,人为失误占很大比重.因此,研究电梯检验过程中的人因失误及管理对策具有重要意义.应用层次分析法构建了理论模型,对可能的人因失误的关键要素进行提取并按相对重要性进行排序,确定了影响人因失误的重要因素.结合近6年南京市电梯检验人因失误的统计数据,应用灰色关联度理论对操作因子进行关联分析,并由此提出了减少电梯检验过程中人因失误的管理建议.     

电梯门区系统事故原因分析及预防措施

电梯使用的安全隐患是客观存在的,其发生故障、安全事故的频次居高不下。门区系统作为事故频发的"重灾区",必须引起电梯设计、制造、安装、维修、使用的高度重视。本文对近几年发生在门区区域的事故原因进行统计、分析,并提出预防措施,避免类似事故的再次发生。     

新冠肺炎疫情下电梯智能化发展探讨

新型冠状病毒的疫情防控给电梯的管理带来新的课题。而电梯作为人员出入频繁的密闭空间,由于空间狭小、通风不畅,再加上与操纵盘按键的密切接触,很容易成为病毒交叉感染的危险场所。如何在乘坐电梯中科学有效地预防病毒、确保安全,成为必须解决的问题。本文以新冠肺炎疫情下为背景,分析了当下电梯智能化发展的方向,并提出了自己的一些想法,疫情下加速了电梯物联网技术的发展及需求的迫切性,同时也希望国家做好顶层设计,在安全红线的基础上让市场进一步的自由竞争。     

一起超面积病床电梯溜车事故引发的思考

超面积病床电梯的出现是为了满足医院特殊的使用需求,但这些电梯在改变了原有的用途后,存在很大的安全隐患,尤其是超载后溜车。本文介绍了超面积病床电梯的现状,并对一起溜车事故进行分析,指出在日常检验时应注意的事项,避免超面积电梯发生安全事故。     

乘坐电梯指南

<正>当电梯发生异常现象或故障时,乘客应保持镇静,可拨打轿厢内报警电话寻求帮助或等待救援。电梯作为常用的升降工具,在生活中应用非常广泛,2013年5月,湖北、陕西等地在3天内连发4起电梯事故,造成4人死亡。电梯故障是我们无法预知的,但学会安全乘坐电梯,并在电梯发生故障时保护好自己是非常重要的。那么,乘坐电梯要注意哪些安全问题?在电梯中遇到紧急情     

Use of child safety seats and booster seats in the United States: A comparison of parent/caregiver-reported and observed use estimates

Background: Motor-vehicles crashes are a leading cause of death among children. Age- and size-appropriate restraint use can prevent crash injuries and deaths among children. Strategies to increase child restraint use should be informed by reliable estimates of restraint use practices. Objective: Compare parent/caregiver-reported and observed child restraint use estimates from the FallStyles and Estilos surveys with the National Survey of the Use of Booster Seats (NSUBS). Methods: Estimates of child restraint use from two online, cross-sectional surveys—FallStyles, a survey of U.S. adults, and Estilos, a survey of U.S. Hispanic adults—were compared with observed data collected in NSUBS. Parents/caregivers of children aged ≤ 12 years were asked about the child’s restraint use behaviors in FallStyles and Estilos, while restraint use was observed in NSUBS. Age-appropriate restraint use was defined as rear-facing child safety seat (CSS) use for children aged 0–4 years, forward-facing CSS use for children aged 2–7 years, booster seat use for children aged 5–12 years, and seat belt use for children aged 9–12 years. Age-appropriate restraint users are described by demographic characteristics and seat row, with weighted prevalence and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. Results: Overall, child restraint use as reported by parents/caregivers was 90.8% (CI: 87.5–94.1) (FallStyles) and 89.4% (CI: 85.5–93.4) for observed use (NSUBS). Among Hispanic children, reported restraint use was 82.6% (CI: 73.9–91.3) (Estilos) and 84.4% (CI: 79.0–88.6) for observed use (NSUBS, Hispanic children only). For age-appropriate restraint use, estimates ranged from 74.3% (CI: 69.7–79.0) (FallStyles) to 59.7% (CI: 55.0–64.4) (NSUBS), and for Hispanic children, from 71.5% (CI: 62.1–81.0) (Estilos) to 57.2% (CI: 51.2–63.2) (NSUBS, Hispanic children only). Conclusion and Practical Application: Overall estimates of parent/caregiver-reported and observed child restraint use were similar. However, for age-appropriate restraint use, reported use was higher than observed use for most age groups.     

Behavior of children and accompanying adults at a pedestrian crosswalk

Children and accompanying adults were observed while using a pedestrian crosswalk on the way to or from kindergarten or primary school. The results of this study corroborate earlier findings that accompaniment was less than complete, that adults can set much better examples in various respects and that accompanied children often show no awareness of actively participating in the road crossing task. The solution provided by a two-dimensional scaling analysis of child and adult behavioral data illustrates that adults perform better in some respects than children, but not in all. From the results of this study, five recommendations are made concerning topics that need more emphasis in road safety programs aimed at parents.     

Designing sensor systems capable of differentiating children from adults

INTRODUCTION: Injury prevention systems intended to prevent children from entering hazardous locations (or at least alert caregivers if that occurs) often respond to every instance of a person's presence, regardless of whether the intruder is a child. This performance results in a high nuisance alarm rate that sometimes causes adults to disable or circumvent the safety system. If a child safety system can accurately identify intruders as adults or children, nuisance alarm rates can be decreased. METHOD: This analysis selects three human factors (height, foot length, and cognition) amenable to adult/child differentiation and describes likely sensor strategies, advantages, and disadvantages. RESULTS: Preliminary testing of prototypes systems shows that simple sensor systems are capable of acquiring adequate data for adult/child differentiation. The discussion addresses requirements for discriminator systems and the effects of various sensor combinations on overall performance.     

Restraint use in the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Objectives: This study set out to examine seat belt and child restraint use in the Dammam Municipality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, based on the premise that an increase in seat belt use would significantly reduce personal injury in traffic crashes. It was expected that local data would help identify intervention strategies necessary to improve seat belt use in the region.

Methods: The research involved 2 methodologies. First, 1,389 face-to-face interviews were conducted with male and female adults in regional shopping plazas regarding their own and their children's restraint use in their vehicles and reasons for these attitudes and beliefs. Second, 2 on-road observation studies of adult and child restraint use were conducted by trained observers. Occupants of approximately 5,000 passenger vehicles were observed while stopped at representative signalized traffic intersections.

Results: The findings showed front seat belt use rates of between 43 and 47% for drivers and 26 to 30% for front seat passengers; rear seat belt use rates were lower. While there seemed to be some knowledge about the purpose and reasons for restraining both adults and children in suitable restraints, this failed to be confirmed in the on-road observations.

Conclusions: Reasons for these rates and findings are discussed fully, and recommendations for improving seat belt use in the Dammam Municipality are included.     

Factors affecting use and nonuse of child safety car seats in Gorgan,Iran

Objective: Motor vehicle accidents, which are among the main causes of child mortality in Iran and the Middle East, impose staggering costs for the community. Ignoring use of safety devices for children in most motor vehicle crashes will lead to death or serious injury. Because few studies have been performed on effective and predictive factors regarding use of child safety seats, the purpose of this study was to examine the factors affecting the use and nonuse of child safety seats, along with the factors that can facilitate how a child safety seat is used.

Method: This study was conducted in the urban area of Gorgan using a questionnaire. Through random selection, 204 parents with at least one child, aged 8?years or younger, reported their knowledge about the benefits of using a child safety seat.

Results: The results showed that 80% of parents never use a child safety seat, and 13% always use a child safety seat. More than 93% thought that it was necessary to make usage of the child safety seat obligatory. In addition, 80% of parents believed that a child safety seat prevents children from injury in crashes. In addition, 38% of parents were not aware of child safety devices and child safety, less than 20% said that they did not use a child safety seat because their spouse did not support its use, and 28% of them thought that a child safety seat does not affect the safety of the child. In general, 91% of parents reported that if child safety seat use were mandated, the frequency of use would increase. A law on the use of child safety seats is a very important variable in their use, which can enhance the chance of using a child safety seat by 6.5 times.

Conclusion: Special instructions should be developed to create incentive strategies for using a child safety seat. Mandating the use of a child safety seat, equipping cars with a child safety seat, encouraging children to use it, and providing continuous education and training are important factors for increasing the use of child safety seats.     

Supervision of young children in parking lots: Impact on child pedestrian safety

Introduction: Pedestrian injuries are a significant pediatric public health concern worldwide. Younger children are at particular risk for pedestrian injuries in parking lots, but there is limited research regarding children's pedestrian behaviors in parking lots. Method: This study examined children's behaviors and safety risks in parking lots through unobtrusive and unannounced observation of 124 children ages 2–10 years and their adult supervisors as they crossed a parking lot from their parked vehicle into a community recreation center. Results: Adult supervision was inadequate: over 67% of children 10 years of age and younger were unsupervised in the parking lot at some point between the vehicle parking and the child entering into the building. Approximately 90% of all children were outside of arm's length of the accompanying adult at some point while in the parking lot. Additionally, children exited the vehicle prior to the adult in over 50% of observations. Age was associated with safety risk, with older children being unsupervised more often than younger ones. Conclusions: Adult supervision of children in a parking lot setting was poor, creating significant safety risks. In addition, many children failed to follow basic pedestrian safety practices themselves, such as looking for moving cars. Injury prevention strategies should be implemented. Practical applications: As researchers gain better understanding about the safety risks for children in parking lots, interventions could target adult and child behaviors through improved supervision, altered perception of risk, and mandated behavioral guidelines for child behavior, such as how and when children exit vehicles in parking lots.     

Bicycle helmet use among persons 5 years and older in the United States, 2012

IntroductionIn 2013, injuries to bicyclists accounted for 925 fatalities and 493,884 nonfatal, emergency department-treated injuries in the United States. Bicyclist deaths increased by 19% from 2010 to 2013. The greatest risk of death and disability to bicyclists is head injuries. The objective of this study was to provide estimates of prevalence and associated factors of bicycle riding and helmet use among children and adults in the United States.MethodCDC analyzed self-reported data from the 2012 Summer ConsumerStyles survey. Adult respondents (18 + years) were asked about bicycle riding and helmet use in the last 30 days for themselves and their children (5 to 17 years). For bicycle riders, CDC estimated the prevalence of helmet use and conducted multivariable regression analyses to identify factors associated with helmet use.ResultsAmong adults, 21% rode bicycles within the past 30 days and 29% always wore helmets. Respondents reported that, of the 61% of children who rode bicycles within the past 30 days, 42% always wore helmets. Children were more likely to always wear helmets (90%) when their adult respondents always wore helmets than when their adult respondents did not always wear helmets (38%). Children who lived in states with a child bicycle helmet law were more likely to always wear helmets (47%) than those in states without a law (39%).ConclusionsDespite the fact that bicycle helmets are highly effective at reducing the risk for head injuries, including severe brain injuries and death, less than half of children and adults always wore bicycle helmets while riding.Practical applicationStates and communities should consider interventions that improve the safety of riding such as policies to promote helmet use, modeling of helmet wearing by adults, and focusing on high risk groups, including Hispanic cyclists, occasional riders, adults, and children ages 10 to 14.     

Variations in booster seat use by child characteristics

IntroductionChild weight and height are the basis of manufacturer and best practice guidelines for child restraint system use. However, these guides do not address behavioral differences among children of similar age, weight, and height, which may result in child-induced restraint use errors. The objective of this study was to characterize child behaviors across age in relation to appropriate restraint system use during simulated drives. Methods: Fifty mother–child (4–8 years) dyads completed an installation into a driving simulator, followed by a simulated drive that was video-recorded and coded for child-induced errors. Time inappropriately restrained was measured as the total amount of the simulated drive spent in an improper or unsafe position for the restraint to be effective divided by the total drive time. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to determine differences across age in the frequency of error events and overall time inappropriately restrained. Results: Children in harnessed seats had no observed errors during trips. Within children sitting in booster seats there were differences in time inappropriately restrained across age (p = 0.01), with 4 year-olds spending on average 67% (Median = 76%) of the drive inappropriately restrained, compared to the rest of the age categories spending less than 28% (Medians ranged from 3% to 23%). Conclusion: Some children may be physically compatible with booster seats, but not behaviorally mature enough to safely use them. More research is needed that examines how child behavior influences child passenger safety. Practical Applications: Not all children physically big enough are behaviorally ready to use belt positioning booster seats. Primary sources of information should provide caregivers with individualized guidance about when it is appropriate to transition children out of harnessed seats. Additionally, best practice guidelines should be updated to reflect what behaviors are needed from children to safely use specific types of child restraint systems.     

Child passenger fatality: Child restraint system usage and contributing factors among the youngest passengers from 2011 to 2015

Objective: Motor-vehicle crashes (MVC) remain a leading cause of preventable injury and death for children aged 0–3 in the United States. Despite advancement in legislation and public awareness there is continued evidence of inappropriate child restraint system (CRS) use among the youngest passengers. The current study focuses on appropriate CRS use from 2011 to 2015 using data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) for children aged 0–3. Methods: Child-, driver-, vehicle-, and trip-related characteristics were investigated within a sample of 648 children from 625 crashes over 5-years in which a child aged 0–3 was fatally injured while unrestrained or wearing an identified CRS type. Multivariable log-binomial regression was used to obtain relative risk. Results: Only 48% of the fatally injured children were appropriately restrained in a CRS. Premature transition to a booster seat and seat belt was evident. The largest proportion of rear-facing restraint use was reported in < 1 year olds (40%), with less reported in 1 (11%) and 2 year olds (2%) and no usage in 3 year olds. Younger children were more likely to be in an appropriate CRS, while Black children, driver not restrained in a lap-shoulder belt configuration, and riding in a pickup truck were less likely to be restrained appropriately. Conclusions: Evidence of inappropriate CRS use supports the use of more stringent legislation and parental interventions to communicate best practice recommendations and educate caregivers regarding appropriate child restraint methods. Practical applications: Public health campaigns focused on increasing appropriate restraint use in children are of great importance as optimally restrained children are less likely to sustain injuries, or require crash-related hospitalization compared to unrestrained children. Researchers and practitioners may find these surveillance findings essential when developing education and interventions targeting child–parent dyads at the greatest risk for a MVC-related fatality.     

Misuse of booster cushions among children and adults in Shanghai—an observational and attitude study during buckling up

Objective: Traffic crashes are one of the leading causes of fatalities among Chinese children. Booster cushion usage in China is low, and there are no studies showing how a population with limited experience handles booster cushions during buckling up. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the handling of and explore the attitudes toward booster cushions among children, parents, and grandparents in Shanghai.

Methods: An observational study including a convenience sample of 254 children aged 4–12 years was conducted in 2 passenger cars at a shopping center in Shanghai. Parents, grandparents, or the children themselves buckled up the child on 2 types of booster cushions, a 2-stage integrated booster cushion (IBC) and an aftermarket booster cushion (BC). The test participants were observed during buckling up, first without and then with instructions. The test leaders conducted structured interviews.

Results: Ninety-eight percent of the uninstructed participants failed to buckle up without identified misuse on the aftermarket booster cushion and 31% of those uninstructed on the integrated booster cushion. The majority of misuse was severe, including placing the belt behind the arm and the lap belt routing above the guiding loops. Instruction reduced misuse to 58% (BC) and 12% (IBC), respectively, and, in particular, severe misuse. Some misuse was related to limited knowledge of how to buckle up on the booster cushion, and some misuse was intentional in order to reduce discomfort.

The participants, both children and adults, reported that they preferred the IBC due to good comfort and convenience. Safety was reported as the main reason for adults using booster cushions in general, whereas children reported comfort as the most important motivation.

Conclusions: Education is needed to ensure frequent and correct use of booster cushions in China and to raise safety awareness among children and adults. Furthermore, it is important that the booster cushions offer intuitively correct usage to a population with limited experience of booster cushions.

This is the first study published on the handling of and attitude toward booster cushions after child restraints laws were introduced in Shanghai 2014.