Assessing tether anchor labeling and usability in pickup trucks

• Main Authors: Klinich, Kathleen D., Manary, Miriam A., Malik, Laura A., Flannagan, Carol A., Jermakian, Jessica S.
• Format: Text
• Language: unknown
• Published: Taylor & Francis 2018
• Subjects: Neuroscience; Physiology; FOS Biological sciences; 69999 Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified; Science Policy; 111714 Mental Health; FOS Health sciences; Tundra
• Online Access: https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5552623.v2; https://tandf.figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Assessing_Tether_Anchor_Labeling_and_Usability_in_Pickup_Trucks/5552623/2

Objective : The objective of this study was to investigate vehicle factors associated with child restraint tether use and misuse in pickup trucks and evaluate 4 labeling interventions designed to educate consumers on proper tether use. Methods : Volunteer testing was performed with 24 subjects and 4 different pickup trucks. Each subject performed 8 child restraint installations among the 4 pickups using 2 forward-facing restraints: a Britax Marathon G4.1 and an Evenflo Triumph. Vehicles were selected to represent 4 different implementations of tether anchors among pickups: plastic loop routers (Chevrolet Silverado), webbing routers (Ram), back wall anchors (Nissan Frontier), and webbing routers plus metal anchors (Toyota Tundra). Interventions included a diagram label, Quick Response (QR) Code linked to video instruction, coordinating text label, and contrasting text tag. Results : Subjects used the child restraint tether in 93% of trials. However, tether use was completely correct in only 9% of trials. An installation was considered functional if the subject attached the tether to a tether anchor and had a tight installation (ignoring routing and head restraint position); 28% of subjects achieved a functional installation. The most common installation error was attaching the tether hook to the anchor/router directly behind the child restraint (near the top of the seatback) rather than placing the tether through the router and attaching it to the anchor in the adjacent seating position. The Nissan Frontier, with the anchor located on the back wall of the cab, had the highest rate of correct installations but also had the highest rate of attaching the tether to components other than the tether anchor (seat adjustor, child restraint storage hook, around head restraint). None of the labeling interventions had a significant effect on correct installation; not a single subject scanned the QR Code to access the video instruction. Subjects with the most successful installations spent extensive time reviewing the vehicle manuals. Conclusion : Current implementations of tether anchors among pickup trucks are not intuitive for child restraint installations, and alternate designs should be explored. Several different labeling interventions were ineffective at achieving correct tether use in pickup trucks.