|
Home | Issues | eMJA shop | My account | Classifieds | Contact | More... | Topics | Search |
→ Previous article in this issue
→ See also letters by Hockey & Pitt, Beard and Thompson
→ Contents list for this issue
→ More articles on Paediatrics
To the Editor: The article on the risks of baby walkers by Thompson is welcome.1 However, he used a broad definition of "serious" (ie, those children who required admission to hospital).
Readers should be aware that some of these accidents cause major disfiguring injuries with life-long consequences. Burns sustained as a result of being in a baby walker are more extensive and deeper than those of the average patient admitted to our Burns Unit.
In the 5 years to July 2000, 24 patients were admitted to the Burns Unit at The Children's Hospital at Westmead (the NSW State Paediatric Burn Referral Unit) with burns as a result of being in a baby walker. As baby walkers are used by children before they can walk, all were 13 months old or younger (range, 6–13 months), whereas only 15% of all admissions are under one year. In the same 5-year period, 178 patients were under 12 months, with the number rising to 246 if those under 13 months are also included. Only one of the group with burns from using a baby walker was older than 12 months, and only by a day. (Ironically, he was burnt while playing in a baby walker that he had been given for his birthday the day before.)
The baby-walker burns were extensive — the largest burn covered 48% of the body surface, with the average being 17%. Deep burns were more common than average, 19 of the 24 children needed grafting (80%) versus only 50% of all admissions. Grafting means that the burns are deep enough to cause permanent scarring. Eight of the 24 required admission to the intensive care unit.
Of the 24 children, 21 had scald burns, mostly due to the child being able to reach a cord, tablecloth or container; two had contact burns because the child could reach out to a hot stove; and one sustained a flame burn, because the child moved close to a parent starting a fire with flammable fluid. Thus, the danger results from the child being able to reach higher and move faster than expected.
No improvement has been evident in the last 2 years. From July 2000 to June 2002, seven more children were admitted with burns caused by baby walkers: six spill scalds (four water and two oil) and one contact burn (iron pulled down). This helps confirm Thompson's contention that regulations (introduced in September 2000) will not stop baby-walker injuries.
Apart from the danger of severe injury, baby walkers impede normal balanced muscle development and so are deleterious to every child who uses one. Apart from being a child-minding device, they have only potential for harm. Now that Thompson has shown that the "safety standards" do not protect children from injury, it is time for them to be banned altogether.
→ See also letters by Hockey & Pitt, Beard and Thompson
Medical Centre, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW.
Hugh C O Martin, FRACS, FRCS(Eng), Paediatric Surgeon; and Head, Burns Unit.Correspondence: Dr Hugh C O Martin, Suite 9, Medical Centre, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW 2145. hughmATchw.edu.au
|
Home | Issues | eMJA shop | My account | Classifieds | More... | Contact | Topics | Search |
©The Medical Journal of Australia 2003 www.mja.com.au PRINT ISSN: 0025-729X ONLINE ISSN: 1326-5377