Peer-reviewed article
Paediatric emergency department-based screening for home fire safety practices and smoke alarm programme awareness in Baltimore, Maryland.
Christian J, Rothschild E, McDonald EM, Shields W, Hodgman E et al. ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This study tested whether a paediatric emergency department in Baltimore could screen caregivers about home fire safety practices and connect them with community smoke alarm programmes. Most caregivers had smoke alarms but rarely tested them, and two-thirds were unaware of free smoke alarm programmes. Only a small fraction of interested caregivers actually contacted the programme after being given enrolment information, suggesting that the ED could be a useful setting for fire safety education but that connecting families to resources remains challenging.
Key points
- Among 103 caregivers surveyed, 40% had children under 5 years in the home
- Only 25% of caregivers reported testing smoke alarms monthly, despite most having multiple alarms
- 32% of households lacked a fire safety plan
- 65% were unaware of community-based smoke alarm programmes; 38% expressed interest
- Only 9% of interested caregivers reported contact with the programme at 1-month follow-up
Limitations
This was a feasibility study using convenience sampling at a single urban ED, so results may not generalize to other settings or populations. The low programme participation rate despite expressed interest limits conclusions about the effectiveness of ED-based referral alone.
Abstract
Background Fire-related injuries and deaths are significant public health concerns, with high-risk groups including children under 5 years. Although the use of functioning smoke alarms is an effective prevention strategy, many are not regularly tested. This study aims to establish the feasibility of surveying home fire safety practices and awareness of community resources among caregivers visiting a paediatric emergency department (ED). Methods This feasibility study surveyed a convenience sample of caregivers accompanying children to an urban mid-Atlantic academic paediatric ED. Caregivers reported on the number, location and status of home smoke alarms, fire safety practices, knowledge of community resources, and interest in using a free smoke alarm programme. Enrolment information for programmes was provided. Telephone and email follow-up was conducted at 1 month to determine programme participation and gather feedback about programme enrolment. Results Of 166 patients approached, 103 (62%) participated; of these, 40% had children under 5 years residing in the home. Although most participants reported having multiple smoke alarms, only 25% reported testing alarms monthly, and 32% lacked a fire safety plan. About two-thirds (65%) were unaware of community-based smoke alarm programmes, 38% expressed interest in participating, and, of these, 9% reported contact with the programme at follow-up. Discussion and conclusions There are opportunities to improve home fire safety practices, awareness of smoke alarm programmes and programme participation in this at-risk population. The paediatric ED may be an important setting to provide fire safety education and directly link caregivers to community resources to reduce fire-related risks.
Findings the Hub has extracted
Each claim below is labelled by its type of design and links back to this report.
- Intervention
- Paediatric ED-based screening for home fire safety practices, education about fire safety, and direct enrolment in community smoke alarm programme
- Population
- Caregivers accompanying children to an urban paediatric emergency department in Baltimore (103 participants, 40% with children under 5)
Key finding
65% of caregivers were unaware of community smoke alarm programmes before screening