title: The effectiveness of different interventions to promote poison prevention behaviours in households with children: a network meta-analysis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  There is evidence from 2 previous meta-analyses that interventions to promote poison prevention behaviours are effective in increasing a range of poison prevention practices in households with children. The published meta-analyses compared any intervention against a "usual care or no intervention" which potentially limits the usefulness of the analysis to decision makers. We aim to use network meta-analysis to simultaneously evaluate the effectiveness of different interventions to increase prevalence of safe storage of i) Medicines only, ii) Other household products only, iii) Poisons (both medicines and non-medicines), iv) Poisonous plants; and v) Possession of poison control centre (PCC) telephone number in households with children.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data on the effectiveness of poison prevention interventions was extracted from primary studies identified in 2 newly-undertaken systematic reviews. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using a random effects network meta-analysis model.
  
  
  RESULTS
  28 of the 47 primary studies identified were included in the analysis. Compared to usual care intervention, the intervention with education and low cost/free equipment elements was most effective in promoting safe storage of medicines (odds ratio 2.51, 95% credible interval 1.01 to 6.00) while interventions with education, low cost/free equipment, home safety inspection and fitting components were most effective in promoting safe storage of other household products (2.52, 1.12 to 7.13), safe storage of poisons (11.10, 1.60 to 141.50) and possession of PCC number (38.82, 2.19 to 687.10). No one intervention package was more effective than the others in promoting safe storage of poisonous plants.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The most effective interventions varied by poison prevention practice, but education alone was not the most effective intervention for any poison prevention practice. Commissioners and providers of poison prevention interventions should tailor the interventions they commission or provide to the poison prevention practices they wish to promote.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Network meta-analysis is useful for comparing multiple injury-prevention interventions. More intensive poison prevention interventions were more effective than education alone. Education and low cost/free equipment was most effective in promoting safe storage of medicines. Education, low cost/free equipment, home safety inspection and fitting was most effective in promoting safe storage of household products and poisons. Education, low cost/free equipment and home inspection were most effective in promoting possession of a poison control centre number. None of the intervention packages was more effective than the others in promoting safe storage of poisonous plants.
authors.affiliation: Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Felix A
authors.initials: FA
authors.lastname: Achana
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Alex J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Sutton
authors.affiliation: Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Denise
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Kendrick
authors.affiliation: Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Persephone
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Wynn
authors.affiliation: Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Ben
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Young
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: David R
authors.initials: DR
authors.lastname: Jones
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Stephanie J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Hubbard
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Nicola J
authors.initials: NJ
authors.lastname: Cooper
mesh_terms: D000056:Accident Prevention / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D000061:Accidents, Home / Q000517:prevention & control*; D002648:Child; D004356:Drug Storage; D006795:Household Products / Q000506:poisoning; D006801:Humans; D011042:Poisons
chemical_list: D011042:Poisons