Improving practices of parents and caregivers to reduce unintentional home injuries of children below 5 years in a village in Sri Lanka

Unintentional injury contributes to the top 15 causes of death across children aged 0–19 years. Other than physical injuries, accidental poisoning, choking are also common home injuries. Children below 5 are most vulnerable... [ view full abstract ]

Unintentional injury contributes to the top 15 causes of death across children aged 0–19 years. Other than physical injuries, accidental poisoning, choking are also common home injuries. Children below 5 are most vulnerable as they often live around in and outside of home. Sri Lankan injury deaths among under 5 year children 16% is injury related. Parents and caregivers can prevent such injuries by addressing their own behavior and risky environmental factors around, and this is determined by factors like; their attitudes and beliefs on possibility of occurring accidents to children, previous incidents, severity and ability to identify or predict a risk. Awareness and knowledge on consequences of child injuries and means of injury prevention also determine the degree of adopting practices. The objective of this study was to assess types and extent of unintentional home injuries among children below 5 and current practices of parents and caregivers, to reduce unintentional home injuries. A descriptive study was conducted in Wannammaduwa and Nambadagaswewa villages in Anuradhapura district representing two MO areas, among 71 participants using a history record index and a practice checklist. Interactive interventions were conducted among 36 mothers to improve knowledge, change attitudes, improve family support and skills on identifying risks. A post evaluation conducted in both study areas to assess the effectiveness of interventions. Injury prevalence was 30.99%; burns (36.4%) being the most common. Most acquired hospitalization and occurred when someone around. Both groups’ mean practice score showed improvements. However the difference between pre and post scores was significantly higher (p=0.001) in the intervention group and showed higher percentages in improvements of knowledge and attitudes in intervention group than in control. The health promotion intervention was effectively administered in terms of improving injury prevention practices, knowledge and changing attitudes.