Preventing unintentional injuries in US early care and education: Are state regulations sufficient?
Introduction
Unintentional injuries, including falls, burns, and poisonings, are currently the leading cause of death among children older than age one in the United States (US) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2018). During the most recent ten-year period for which national data was available, 2007–2016, a total of 25,724 children ages 0 to 4 years died from unintentional injuries – another 22.4 million experienced nonfatal injuries. Unintentional injuries to young children are also costly, generating annual lifetime costs of $25 billion in a single year, using 2010 data and prices. The good news is that injuries, like many public health problems, are largely “understandable, predictable, and preventable” (Judy, 2011).
Given that nearly 12.5 million children younger than 5 years are in some form of non-parental childcare (Laughlin, 2013), many of these unintentional injuries are likely to occur outside of the home. A 2013 systematic review examining child care center injury rates found that there were between 11.3 and 18 injuries per 100 children per year and 2.6 to 3.3 injuries per child (Hashikawa et al., 2013). Other studies have found similar injury rates between child care centers and non-parental home-based child care (Kotch et al., 1997).
To prevent these injuries, states have enacted early care and education (ECE) licensing and administrative regulations directing child care provider injury training and reporting requirements. This study examined those state regulations to document requirements related to provider training and response to injuries among children, parental and state notifications, and steps providers must take to prevent repeat incidents. We then compared these regulations to national health and safety standards on injury prevention (Caring for Our Children: National Health and Safety Performance Standards, 2011) to determine the extent to which existing regulations align with the standards. We further documented when regulations required providers to notify parents and the state and whether these notifications needed to be in writing.
Section snippets
Methods
The lead author (ERG), a post-doctoral fellow, a graduate student and a research assistant independently reviewed ECE regulations through August 2018 for all 50 states and DC (hereafter “states”). Each individual reviewed regulations for approximately 25 states so that all states were double coded. We examined each state's regulations to determine how well they met the National Health and Safety Performance Standards on injury prevention in Caring for Our Children, third edition (Caring for Our
Results
We present injury regulations related to six selected standards that address ECE provider pre-service training, injury notification, record keeping and corrective action plan requirements for centers and for homes (Table 1). Notably, North Carolina was the only state with regulations consistent with all the standards for both centers and homes. Sixteen states (California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Discussion
This study examined three types of injury-prevention requirements in state regulations for child care centers and family child care homes in the US. In general, most states required child care providers to have training in both emergency preparedness and first aid, including CPR. However, among centers, one state (Missouri) did not have regulations requiring training in either area and 8 states (Alabama, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, Wisconsin, and Wyoming) did not have
Conclusion
In this national review of state regulations, we found that many states required child care providers to be trained on emergency preparedness and first aid, including CPR. However, given the high percentage of children in care and the large numbers of injuries that occur each year, all states should have regulations that meet all the national injury prevention standards. It is disheartening that few states required any sort of corrective action to prevent future injuries from occurring. Moving
Funding source
This study was supported, in part, by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), Healthy Eating Research (#73391) and, in part, by the National Center for Injury Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Injury Control Research Center (#1R49CE002466). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the RWJF or the CDC. The funders had no role in the design of the study, data collection and analysis,
Financial disclosure
The authors wish to report that they have no financial disclosures.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors do not have any conflicts of interest to report.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Carly Babcock, Sarah Gonzalez-Nahm, and Nick Rizzutti for their help reviewing and coding state ECE regulations.
References (20)
- et al.
Early feeding in child care in the United States: are state regulations supporting breastfeeding?
Prev. Med.
(2017) - Anon 214 R.I. Code R. § 40 00 01(1.8) (L)(6)(a)...
- Anon 055 Pa. Code § 3270.31(E)(4)...
- Anon 055 Pa. Code § 3290.31(E)(4)...
- Anon Minn. R. 9503.1760 (D)...
- Anon Minn. R. 9502.0435 (7)...
- Anon Mich. Admin. Code r. 400.8146(1)(h)...
- Anon 214 R.I. Code R. § 40 00 01(1.12)(F)(4)...
- Anon N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. § 418-1.11(c)(2)...
- Anon Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 22, § 12-3-102416.2...