Few Data Are Available on Burn Injuries Involving Children’s Sleepwear

The number of burn injuries associated with children’s sleepwear is uncertain, and few data are available. For example, over the period 1990-98, NEISS reported a total of only 13 cases. This included a maximum of four sleepwear cases annually, and in some years, including 1998, no cases were reported at all. Consequently, although the overall risk of injury appears to be small, these data cannot produce precise national estimates, making it difficult or impossible to observe trends in the number of injuries over time. Costly Additional Information Would Be Needed to Draw Firm Conclusions About the Effect of the Changes to the Sleepwear Standard

Without valid and precise information on injuries associated with different types of sleepwear both before and after the amendments, it is not possible to use injury data to draw firm conclusions about the actual effect of the changes to the children’s sleepwear standard. Even if these basic data were available, assessing the effect of the sleepwear standard would be particularly difficult because multiple factors contribute to burn injuries, including the ignition source, the child’s behavior, and the fabric and fit of the child’s clothing. Moreover, using injury information to compare the risks associated with different types of sleepwear (such as snug-fitting cotton versus flame-resistant polyester) would require information on how many consumers actually use each type. In the absence of these key data, and without baseline data for comparison, it is not possible on the basis of injury data to determine whether one type of sleepwear or clothing is truly more hazardous than another. In its response, the agency stated that CPSC’s burn injury data are comprehensive and reliable and demonstrate that children’s burn injuries have not increased since the amendments to the sleepwear standard. CPSC’s data include only 13 observations over 9 years—a period that extends from before the changes to the standard and the stay of enforcement were proposed to 2 years after the amendments were enacted. Without such data, it would be difficult or impossible to distinguish the type of sleepwear associated with the most injuries from the type of sleepwear most commonly used. Comments From the Consumer Product Safety Commission

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO reviewed the data available on burn injuries to children and the implications of these data for the effect of the recent amendments to the children's sleepwear standard, focusing on: (1) how many burn injuries involving children's sleepwear occurred annually before and after the amendments; and (2) what conclusions, if any, can be drawn from these data about the effect of the changes to the sleepwear standard on the risk of injury.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) the exact number of burn injuries associated with children's sleepwear before and after the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) amended its standard is uncertain; (2) although CPSC collects some burn injury data from a sample of hospital emergency rooms, few sleepwear-related injuries are reported annually; (3) for example, over the period 1990-1998, CPSC's sample of about 100 hospital emergency rooms reported a total of only 13 burn injuries that involved children's sleepwear; (4) this included a maximum of four cases in any one year, and in some years, including 1998, no cases were reported at all; (5) consequently, although the overall risk of injury appears to be small, these data cannot produce precise national estimates, making it difficult or impossible to observe trends in the number of injuries over time; (6) even if more precise data were available, it would not be possible to draw firm conclusions from burn injury data about the effect of the changes to the standard without other equally crucial but unobtainable information; (7) assessing the effect of the sleepwear standard would be particularly difficult because multiple factors contribute to burn injuries, including the ignition source, the child's behavior, and the fabric and fit of the child's clothing; (8) furthermore, using injury information to compare the risks associated with different types of sleepwear (such as snug-fitting cotton versus flame-resistant polyester) would also require information on how many consumers actually use each type; (9) without such data, it would be difficult or impossible to distinguish the type of sleepwear associated with the most injuries from the type of sleepwear most commonly used; (10) however, this information was not gathered for the period before the changes in the standard, and it is not yet available for the period since the final changes to the standard were made; and (11) in the absence of these key data, and without baseline data for comparison, it is not possible to determine the effect of the sleepwear amendments on the risk of injury to children.