4.2 Article

Usual water-related behaviour and 'near-drowning' incidents in young adults

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2005.tb00761.x

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. PHS HHS [M4-45070] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To describe usual water-related behaviour and 'near-drowning' incidents in a cohort of young New Zealand adults. Method. This was a cross-sectional study based on data collected as part of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study, which is the study of a cohort (n=1,037) born between 1 April 1972 and 31 March 1973 in Dunedin, New Zealand. The data analysed were collected at age 21 (1993/94). Each study member was given a face-to-face interview using a structured questionnaire. Results: Males reported a higher level of water confidence, exposure to risk behaviours, and exposure to unsafe locations, and more 'near-drowning' incidents, than the females, but protective behaviour did not differ. Males and females who were 'confident' in the water were more likely to be exposed to unsafe water locations, and water-confident males were more likely to drink alcohol before water activities, but not boating. A total of 169 'near-drowning' incidents were reported by 141 study members (63% males). 'Near-drowning' incidents were associated with unsafe swimming environments for males (p < 0.001) and boating within two hours of consuming alcohol for females (p=0.002). Conclusions: This study described usual water-related behaviour and has provided preliminary evidence of the factors associated with 'near-drowning' incidents among a high-risk age group. Larger case-control studies are required to further investigate risk factors for 'near-drowning'. Implications for practitioners: Further investigation is required to determine the effectiveness of providing water skills acquisition in both safe and unsafe environments on 'near-drowning' experience.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available