Cinnamon A Dixon1, Wendy J Pomerantz, Kimberly W Hart, Christopher J Lindsell, E Melinda Mahabee-Gittens. 1. From the Division of Emergency Medicine (C.A.D., W.J.P., E.M.M.-G.), and Center for Global Health, Department of Pediatrics (C.A.D.), Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, and Department of Emergency Medicine (K.W.H., C.J.L.), University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the efficacy of a video-based dog bite prevention intervention at increasing child knowledge and describe any associated factors and to assess the acceptability of providing this intervention in a pediatric emergency department (PED). METHODS: This cross-sectional, quasi-experimental study enrolled a convenience sample of 5-year-old to 9-year-old patients and their parents, presenting to a PED with nonurgent complaints or dog bites. Children completed a 14-point simulated scenario test used to measure knowledge about safe dog interactions before and after a video intervention. Based on previous research, a passing score (≥ 11/14) was defined a priori. Parents completed surveys regarding sociodemographics, dog-related experiential history, and the intervention. RESULTS: There were 120 child-parent pairs. Mean (SD) child age was 7 (1) years, and 55% were male. Of the parents, 70% were white, two thirds had higher than high school education, and half had incomes less than $40,000. Current dog ownership was 77%; only 6% of children had received previous dog bite prevention education. Test pass rate was 58% before the intervention and 90% after the intervention. Knowledge score increased in 83% of children; greatest increases were in questions involving stray dogs or dogs that were fenced or eating. Younger child age was the only predictor of failing the posttest (p < 0.001). Nearly all parents found the intervention informative; 93% supported providing the intervention in the PED. CONCLUSION: Child knowledge of dog bite prevention is poor. The video-based intervention we tested seems efficacious at increasing short-term knowledge in 5-year-old to 9-year-old children and is acceptable to parents. Parents strongly supported providing this education.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the efficacy of a video-based dog bite prevention intervention at increasing child knowledge and describe any associated factors and to assess the acceptability of providing this intervention in a pediatric emergency department (PED). METHODS: This cross-sectional, quasi-experimental study enrolled a convenience sample of 5-year-old to 9-year-old patients and their parents, presenting to a PED with nonurgent complaints or dog bites. Children completed a 14-point simulated scenario test used to measure knowledge about safe dog interactions before and after a video intervention. Based on previous research, a passing score (≥ 11/14) was defined a priori. Parents completed surveys regarding sociodemographics, dog-related experiential history, and the intervention. RESULTS: There were 120 child-parent pairs. Mean (SD) child age was 7 (1) years, and 55% were male. Of the parents, 70% were white, two thirds had higher than high school education, and half had incomes less than $40,000. Current dog ownership was 77%; only 6% of children had received previous dog bite prevention education. Test pass rate was 58% before the intervention and 90% after the intervention. Knowledge score increased in 83% of children; greatest increases were in questions involving stray dogs or dogs that were fenced or eating. Younger child age was the only predictor of failing the posttest (p < 0.001). Nearly all parents found the intervention informative; 93% supported providing the intervention in the PED. CONCLUSION:Child knowledge of dog bite prevention is poor. The video-based intervention we tested seems efficacious at increasing short-term knowledge in 5-year-old to 9-year-old children and is acceptable to parents. Parents strongly supported providing this education.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Sriram Ramgopal; Lauren Bealafeld Brungo; Michael R Bykowski; Raymond D Pitetti; Robert W Hickey Journal: Acta Paediatr Date: 2018-02-05 Impact factor: 2.299
Authors: Cinnamon A Dixon; Robert T Ammerman; Boyd L Johnson; Cassie Lampe; Kimberly W Hart; Christopher J Lindsell; E Melinda Mahabee-Gittens Journal: Mhealth Date: 2019-01-26
Authors: Lori R Kogan; Wendy Packman; Phyllis Erdman; Jennifer Currin-McCulloch; Cori Bussolari Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-16 Impact factor: 4.614