We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Incidence of fires and related injuries after giving out free smoke alarms: cluster randomised controlled trial.
BMJ : British Medical Journal 2002 November 3
OBJECTIVE: To measure the effect of giving out free smoke alarms on rates of fires and rates of fire related injury in a deprived multiethnic urban population.
DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: Forty electoral wards in two boroughs of inner London, United Kingdom.
PARTICIPANTS: Primarily households including elderly people or children and households that are in housing rented from the borough council.
INTERVENTION: 20 050 smoke alarms, fittings, and educational brochures distributed free and installed on request.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of fires and related injuries during two years after the distribution; alarm ownership, installation, and function.
RESULTS: Giving out free smoke alarms did not reduce injuries related to fire (rate ratio 1.3; 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.9), admissions to hospital and deaths (1.3; 0.7 to 2.3), or fires attended by the fire brigade (1.1; 0.96 to 1.3). Similar proportions of intervention and control households had installed alarms (36/119 (30%) v 35/109 (32%); odds ratio 0.9; 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.7) and working alarms (19/118 (16%) v 18/108 (17%); 0.9; 0.4 to 1.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Giving out free smoke alarms in a deprived, multiethnic, urban community did not reduce injuries related to fire, mostly because few alarms had been installed or were maintained.
DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: Forty electoral wards in two boroughs of inner London, United Kingdom.
PARTICIPANTS: Primarily households including elderly people or children and households that are in housing rented from the borough council.
INTERVENTION: 20 050 smoke alarms, fittings, and educational brochures distributed free and installed on request.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of fires and related injuries during two years after the distribution; alarm ownership, installation, and function.
RESULTS: Giving out free smoke alarms did not reduce injuries related to fire (rate ratio 1.3; 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.9), admissions to hospital and deaths (1.3; 0.7 to 2.3), or fires attended by the fire brigade (1.1; 0.96 to 1.3). Similar proportions of intervention and control households had installed alarms (36/119 (30%) v 35/109 (32%); odds ratio 0.9; 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.7) and working alarms (19/118 (16%) v 18/108 (17%); 0.9; 0.4 to 1.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Giving out free smoke alarms in a deprived, multiethnic, urban community did not reduce injuries related to fire, mostly because few alarms had been installed or were maintained.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Should renin-angiotensin system inhibitors be held prior to major surgery?British Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 May
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app