Poisoning Prevention Knowledge and Practices of Parents After a Childhood Poisoning Incident

¹ From the Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School; Division of Ambulatory Medicine, The Children's Hospital; University of Massachusetts at Boston and Massachusetts Poison Control System, Boston
² From the School of Nursing, University of Massachusetts at Boston; and Massachusetts Poison Control System, Boston
³ From the Harvard School of Public Health; Massachusetts Poison Control System, Boston

This study investigated the effectiveness of a poison center-initiated mailed intervention on improving the preventive practices of families whose preschool child had recently experienced a poisoning incident. A low-cost, mailed poisoning prevention packet consisting of telephone stickers, a $1 coupon for syrup of ipecac, one slide-style cabinet lock, a nine-step checklist for "poison-proofing" the home, pamphlets, and a cover letter was tested prospectively on a population of parents calling a poison center for advice about possible poisoning exposures involving their preschool children. Parents without ipecac 1 week after the incident were randomized so that half received the mailed intervention. A "blind" follow-up telephone interview was conducted 3 months later. Of the 336 original families enrolled in the study, 301 (90% retention) completed the follow-up interview. Those who had received the intervention were more likely to have a telephone sticker than control families (78% vs 39%; P < .0001) and were more likely to be using at least one slide lock in the home (59% vs 40%; P < .001). However, intervention families were no more likely to have ipecac on hand than control families (57% vs 52%; P = not significant) and did not indicate a higher rate of compliance with suggested changes in other behaviors and practices to prevent poisonings. A poisoning recurrence rate of 3.7% was seen in the total sample during the 3-month period of surveillance; there was no difference between groups in recurrence rate. Even after a poisoning event, parents may not be sufficiently motivated to take poisoning prevention measures on their own. Poison centers can serve as lead agencies in developing effective prevention technologies for reaching out to large numbers of high-risk families. One such technology is a mailed intervention, which can be effective if it removes barriers to compliance with poisoning prevention advice.

Key Words: poisoning prevention • injury prevention • poison centers

Submitted on February 13, 1992
Accepted on May 15, 1992

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D Kendrick, S Smith, A Sutton, M Watson, C Coupland, C Mulvaney, and A Mason-Jones Effect of education and safety equipment on poisoning-prevention practices and poisoning: systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression Arch. Dis. Child., July 1, 2008; 93(7): 599 - 608. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L Gibbs, E Waters, J Sherrard, J Ozanne-Smith, J Robinson, S Young, and A Hutchinson Understanding parental motivators and barriers to uptake of child poison safety strategies: a qualitative study Inj. Prev., December 1, 2005; 11(6): 373 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Watson, D. Kendrick, C. Coupland, A. Woods, D. Futers, and J. Robinson Providing child safety equipment to prevent injuries: randomised controlled trial BMJ, January 22, 2005; 330(7484): 178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Schwartz, M. A. Howland, M. Mercurio-Zappala, and R. S. Hoffman The Use of Focus Groups to Plan Poison Prevention Education Programs for Low-Income Populations Health Promot Pract, July 1, 2003; 4(3): 340 - 346. [Abstract] [PDF]