A randomized comparison of restraint fitting education and assistance delivery methods to identify an optimum delivery method for rural and remote areas of Australia (Reach Study)

INTERVENTION: 3‐arm RCT: 1) instructional online video ‐ generic information video (how to install a child seat, how to secure the child, items to check) provided by emailed link, 10 minutes 2) in‐person fitting service ‐ delivered by qualified restraint fitter at Neighbourhood Houses in rural/remote Victoria, 20 minutes 3) fitting service delivered over remote assistance technology ‐ delivered by qualified restraint fitter using Help Lightning interactive app (at Neighbourhood Houses to enable subsequent fitter check of installation), 20 minutes A comprehension assessment is conducted by phone immediately following delivery of each intervention type. All three groups will receive a follow‐up check at 3 months at a Neighbourhood House. The final survey will include questions on education material accessed over the 3 months. Adherence will be determined through answers to the comprehension assessment and final questionnaire. Fidelity of the delivery of the interventions and dose delivered is relatively fixed with the number of people delivering each intervention limited and following defined procedures. CONDITION: Errors in child car restraint use.; ; Errors in child car restraint use. Injuries and Accidents ‐ Other injuries and accidents PRIMARY OUTCOME: Correct use of child car restraint, as per checklist completed by a qualified restraint fitter at Neighbourhood Houses. [3 months after child car restraint fitting education delivered.] SECONDARY OUTCOME: Acceptability ‐ qualitative semi‐structured questionnaire. ; Part of the follow‐up survey developed for this study, the questions for acceptability were developed using a theoretical framework published by Sekhon et al (2017, ‘Acceptability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC health services research). The questions are designed to measure the seven component constructs of that theoretical framework – affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness and self‐efficacy. [3 months after child car restraint fitting education delivered.] Comprehension (10 item questionnaire). ; The comprehension assessment is designed for this study to assess the impact of each intervention on the participants’ level of understanding of key information for ensuring correct use of child restraints. The questions are based on assessments we have used in previous work (Hall et al, 2020, 'User‐driven design of child restraint information to reduce errors in use', Injury Prevention) and is based on the method described by Pander et al (2010, 'Improving the usability of patient information leaflets. Patient Educ Couns).[Immediately after intervention delivery.] Feasibility ‐ quantitative survey. ; Part of the follow‐up survey developed for this study, the questions were developed to collect detail about the practical logistics/potential barriers to accessing child restraint fitting services and potential for the technology being trialled in Arm 3.[3 months after child car restraint fitting education delivered.] INCLUSION CRITERIA: ‐ have a child and want to use a child car seat fitting service. ‐ live in a rural or remote part of Victoria, and able to visit a Neighbourhood Houses location that is taking part in the study. ‐ own a child seat. ‐ speak English well enough to understand consent documents and instructions given by the fitting service. ‐ have a mobile phone or tablet with a camera and able to access a web browser (eg, Google Chrome, Safari).