Search

The efficiency and effectiveness of child safety interventions are determined by the quality of the implementation process. This multinational European study aimed to identify facilitators and barriers for the three phases of implementation: adoption, implementation and monitoring (AIM process). Twenty-seven participants from across the WHO European Region were invited to provide case studies of child safety interventions from their country. Cases were selected by the authors to ensure broad coverage of injury issues, age groups and governance level of implementation (eg, national, regional or local). Each participant presented their case and provided a written account according to a standardised template. Presentations and question and answer sessions were recorded. The presentation slides, written accounts and the notes taken during the workshops were analysed using thematic content analysis to elicit facilitators and barriers. Twenty-six cases (from 26 different countries) were presented and analysed. Facilitators and barriers were identified within eight general themes, applicable across the AIM process: management and collaboration; resources; leadership; nature of the intervention; political, social and cultural environment; visibility; nature of the injury problem and analysis and interpretation. The importance of the quality of the implementation process for intervention effectiveness, coupled with limited resources for child safety makes it more difficult to achieve successful actions. The findings of this study, divided by phase of the AIM process, provide practitioners with practical suggestions, where proactive planning might help increase the likelihood of effective implementation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background: Mortality and morbidity rates, traditionally used indicators for child injury, are limited in their ability to explain differences in child injury between countries, are inadequate in capturing actions to address the problem of child injury and do not adequately identify progress made within countries. There is a need for a broader set of indicators to help better understand the success of countries with low rates of child injury, provide guidance and benchmarks for policy makers looking to make investments to reduce their rates of fatal and non-fatal child injury and allow monitoring of progress towards achieving these goals. This article describes an assessment of national leadership, infrastructure and capacity in the context of child injury prevention in 18 countries in Europe and explores the potential of these to be used as additional indicators to support child injury prevention practice., Methods: Partners in 18 countries coordinated data collection on 21 items relating to leadership, infrastructure and capacity. Responses were coded into an overall score and scores for each of the three areas and were compared with child injury mortality rankings using Spearman's rank correlation., Results: Overall score and scores for leadership and capacity were significantly negatively correlated to child injury mortality ranking., Conclusions: Findings of this preliminary work suggest that these three policy areas may provide important guidance for the types of commitments that are needed in the policy arena to support advances in child safety and their assessment a way to measure progress.

The focus on evidence-based practice is critical to addressing the issue of injuries, yet advances in the science of injury prevention have not always led to advances in practice. Effective approaches are not always adopted, or when adopted and transferred from one setting to another, they do not always achieve expected results. These challenges were the basis of two breakout sessions at the second European Injury Control and Safety Promotion Conference in Paris, France (October 2008). In summarising the key issues raised during those sessions, this article describes what is meant by evidence-based practice, discusses why evidence-based practice tends not to occur and considers approaches that may facilitate the adoption and implementation of evidence-based strategies. To address the challenge, specific action is required, both on the part of the research community and those responsible for developing and implementing injury prevention policies and programmes.