Big props to A.Mott, K.Rolfe, R.James, R.Evans, A.Kemp, F.Dunstan, K.Kemp, J.Sibert - coauthors of a 1997 article published in The Lancet - who dig into the epidemiology of playground injuries. For the academically inclined, here is the abstract:
"Children sustained significantly more injuries in playgrounds with concrete surfaces than in those with bark or rubberised surfaces (p<0·001). Playgrounds with rubber surfaces had the lowest rate of injury, with a risk half that of bark and a fifth of that of concrete. Bark surfaces were not significantly more protective against arm fractures than concrete. Most injuries were equipment related. Injury risk due to falls from monkey bars (suspended parallel bars or rings between which children swing) was twice that for climbing-frames and seven times that for swings or slides. The height of the equipment correlated significantly with the number of fractures (p=0·005) from falls."
For those who forget their statistics, the authors found that:
(1) Concrete playground surfaces result in lots more injuries than woodchips ("bark") or rubber woodchips
(2) Most injuries were equipment-related
(3) Of all kinds of equipment, monkey bars most dangerous, then "climbing-frames", then swings.
(4) The higher the equipment, the more fractures there are from falls.
No comments:
Post a Comment