HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kendrick, D. Articles by Marsh, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kendrick, D. Articles by Marsh, P.

Babywalkers: prevalence of use and relationship with other safety practices

¹ Division of General Practice, School of Community Health Sciences, Nottingham University Medical School, Clifton Boulevard, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
² Division of Public Health Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Community Health Sciences, University of Nottingham Medical School

Correspondence to: Dr Kendrick (e-mail: Denise.Kendrick{at}nottingham.ac.uk).

Abstract
Objective—To examine the prevalence of walker use, and to compare sociodemographic factors, perceptions of the risk of injury and of household hazards, and safety practices in families by walker use.

Setting—36 primary care practices across Nottingham, UK.

Method—Postal questionnaire to all parents of children aged 3–12 months registered at each practice (n=2152) to assess safety practices, perceptions of risk of injury, and of the risk associated with household hazards and sociodemographic factors. Data were analysed using ² tests for categorical data, Mann-Whitney U tests for ordinal data, and logistic regression analysis.

Results—The response rate was 74%. Fifty per cent of parents used babywalkers. Receipt of means tested benefits (odds ratio (OR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.99), non-owner occupation (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.04), residence in a deprived area (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.91), and unemployment (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.99) were independently associated with use of walkers. Families using babywalkers were less likely to use stair gates (² = 4.36, 1df, p=0.037), fireguards (² = 6.80, 1df, p=0.009), and had a higher total number of unsafe practices (Mann-Whitney U test , Z = -2.90, p=0.004). Perceptions of risk of injury and of the risk associated with household hazards however, did not differ by walker use.

Conclusions—Babywalker use is common across all social groups and is associated with other unsafe practices such as not using stair gates or fireguards. Health professionals should support campaigns to limit the sale of babywalkers, but, in addition, they should ascertain each family's reasons for walker use and try to find acceptable alternatives. They should also make the family aware of the importance of properly fitted stair gates and fireguards and help the family to obtain and use such items of safety equipment.

Keywords: babywalkers; safety practices; socioeconomic status