Time to Examine Rear-Facing Infant Seat Safety Improvements?

That an infant seat should be placed in the rear-seat of the car, facing rearwards is an article of faith, preached by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the American Academy of Pediatricians. Manufacturers only make rear-facing infant seats.

On its website, NHTSA advises:

“A rear-facing car seat is the best seat for your young child to use. It has a harness and in a crash, cradles and moves with your child to reduce the stress to the child’s fragile neck and spinal cord. Your child under age 1 should always ride in a rear-facing car seat.”

But Transport Canada researcher Suzanne Tylko presented data at the biennial Enhanced Safety of Vehicles conference that questions the certainty of that policy. Transport Canada has been at the forefront of child motor vehicle crash safety research. In particular, the agency’s dynamic testing has yielded important insights. In this three-year study, TC tested 131 child restraints in 85 motor vehicle crash tests. The vast majority were rigid barrier tests on rear-facing infant seats, secured by a three-point belt conducted at speed of 48km/h; 11 were conducted at 56 km/h; and seven were conducted at 40 km/h. TC also tested seats in offset deformable barrier tests, conducted at 40 km/h. (Fourteen tests involved convertible seats installed facing the rear.)

Memo to the Medical Device Industry: You’ve Got Problems

FDA News, a purveyor of U. S. Food and Drug Administration regulatory and international standards compliance newsletters, books, special reports and conferences, gathered the medical devices industry to a come-to-Jesus meeting last week and the warnings were stern: quality has been low and the number of U.S. Food and Drug Administration warnings and recalls is high. Medical device manufacturers haven’t met the bar for quality control and the regulations are about to get a whole lot tighter.

Presenters at the three-day conference on risk management and post-market surveillance reeled off a list of unhappy statistics:

Adverse events are growing faster than the market. Infusion pumps, automated external defibrillators and catheters produced 65 percent of the serious adverse events from 2005-2009, according to FDA data.

In 2010, the FDA issued 89 warning letters for Quality Systems deficiencies.

Nearly one-third of all medical device recalls occur as a result of design and/or manufacturing defects and root cause analyses shows that there are wide gaps in product design, manufacturing process control, and supplier management. (The FDA can also require a recall based on a wide variety of non-conformance issues including bad record-keeping, failing to report death and injuries associated with a device and failure to establish a corrective action plan.)

Taking the Burn Out of Seat Heaters

Back in February, SRS wrote to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and National Mobility Equipment Dealers about the problem of car seat heaters and drivers with lower body sensory deficits, such as paraplegics and diabetics (See It's Time to Make Seat Heaters Safer). Many consumer heating devices that make direct contact with the body, such as electric blankets, are designed with maximum temperature limits, but not so in the auto industry. In the absence of any regulation or industry standard, vehicle manufacturers have implemented a variety of designs, some of which lack an automatic cut-off and reach maximum temperatures that can produce third-degree burns or both.

For occupants who have limited or no sensations below the waist, these designs are dangerous. The medical literature has been documenting severe burns suffered by disabled drivers and passengers from car seat heaters since 2003, and nationally recognized burn care specialists joined our effort to engage adapters, regulators and manufacturers in averting these preventable injuries.

Hindsight’s Still 20-20: The Toyota Quality Report

We here at the Safety Record Blog are getting caught up on our blogging after a hectic  before-the-holiday-weekend week attending Edmund.com’s Let’s Blame it on the Drivers conference and releasing our response to the NHTSA and NESC report on Toyota. If you haven’t had a chance to read this special edition of The Safety Record, you can catch it here.

And son of a gun if Toyota didn’t release its long awaited quality report on the same day! (A little awkward, we know.) This panel of Very Serious People outside of the company was charged with the task of evaluating just what went wrong:

“The Charter directs the Panel to conduct a thorough and independent review of the soundness of these processes and provide its assessment to Toyota’s senior management.”

Categories

Archive Dates

Follow us on Twitter

Categories

Archive Dates

Follow us on Twitter