Does height matter? (Playgrounds)(Cover Story).

Does the height of playground equipment contribute to play value and child development? What's more, how much should height be considered when designing for playground safety?

The explanations for children's propensities to climb and the value of climbing are multifaceted, including physiological, psychological, sociological and biological factors. Benefits of climbing include excitement for the child -- he learns and develops, he learns what he can and cannot do -- yet! On a playground a child's nerves and muscles develop, as he develops motor skills such as depth and distance judgment as well as strength, agility and coordination. Children climb objects because "they are there!" It's exciting! And, he feels close to nature. A well-designed playground teaches basic physics -- gravity, inertia, pendulums and optics. Kids climb to test their abilities, to show off and compete with peers, and to engage in pretend games.

Both the National Program for Playground Safety (NPPS, 1999) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC, 1997) point out that children use play equipment in unintended ways. What adults feel the equipment is used for, however, and what kids do is different. How children play is not at all representative of how adults expect children to behave. The risks to children, especially young children, increase as potential fall height increases.

National Guidelines and Standards for Heights and Surfacing

Every major national playground safety organization recommends restricting fall heights of playground equipment. This can be done in two ways. The most authoritative documents, now recognized as the "national standard of care" in litigation (CPSC and ASTM), do not specify maximum equipment or fall heights per se, but effectively limit heights by recommending resilient surfacing that accommodates limited heights if heights are based on prescribed criteria (HIC and G-Forces). Only two tested materials among eight types of compressed material (namely wood chips and double shredded bark mulch installed nine inches deep) are recommended for heights over six feet. Uncompressed material usually becomes compressed after play begins. This recommendation, if applied, limits fall heights (as defined by CPSC and ASTM) to six feet for most common surfacing materials. National surveys by three major professional organizations -- American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, Consumer Federation of America, and National Program for Playground Safety - show widespread violation of CPSC/ASTM recommendations for heights and surfacing in neighborhood playgrounds.

The Consumer Federation of America stipulates that the fall height of climbing equipment and slides shall not exceed a maximum of six feet for school-age children, and a maximum of four feet for preschool-age children (CFA, 1996a). They recommend that swing heights (height of the crossbeam) be limited to eight feet (CFA, 1996b). The American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics standards (1992)stipulate that the maximum height of playground equipment shall be no greater than 5.5 feet for children up to the age of six, and no higher than three feet for children up to three. The Playground Safety Audit Form published by the National Recreation and Park Association recommends that slides should be no more than eight feet high, that accessible equipment height (platforms, decks, etc.) should not exceed four feet for two to five-year-old users, and that protective surfacing should pass the 200 G ASTM 1292 test.

Playground Equipment Height Research

A study from Australia concluded that the odds of injury in a playground fall increase with increases in height of falls, and that a marked increase occurs when children fall one to 1.5 meters. Studies in Canada, the United States and England further implicate increasing heights with severity of injuries. A study of 126 children injured in falls at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto found that the median height of falls was 6.47 feet for severe cases and 5.20 feet for minor cases. Playgrounds with rubber surfaces had the lowest rate of injury, with a risk half that of bark and one-fifth that of concrete. "The height of the equipment correlated significantly with the number of fractures from falls" according to the researcher Mott.

Other research confirms the relationships among risk of injury, surface resilience and height of equipment, and also between type of surface material and severity of injury. This data suggests that acceptable limits for surface resilience be set at less than 200 G, perhaps even less than 150 G, and not to exceed two meters for equipment height.

Guidelines from the Experts

Numerous professional books, articles and reports were reviewed for this article. The goal was for safety professionals with extensive experience in the field of play and playgrounds to determine maximum playground equipment heights. A wide range of variables (e.g., age and skill of child, type of equipment, nature of surfacing) affecting potential injury resulting from falls precludes clear agreement among professionals. Readdick and Park specify one foot of height for every year of age. It is important to prevent falls that exceed the standing reaching height of the tallest child user. Following an extensive review of 177 serious playground injuries and 13 fatalities resulting in lawsuits, Frost and Sweeney concluded that the height of falls exceeded the ability of surfacing to protect children. CPSC and ASTM violations were seen in 93% of the injury sites.

The Comsis Corporation conducted the most extensive review of playground safety research and expert opinion on record for CPSC. Comsis recommended conforming to the ASTM standards for testing playground surfacing. They split with ASTM and CPSC by concluding that the highest accessible part of slides and climbers should be the maximum height above ground, of the guardrail or protective barrier, rather than the maximum height of the playing platform or deck. Their recommendation of maximum heights of 10 feet for school-age children and seven feet for preschool-age children (ground to top of protective barrier) means that the maximum recommended height of playing surfaces would be limited to 82 inches for older children and 55 inches for younger children. Finally, Comsis concluded, "additional height is not necessary for the play or developmental value of equipment."

National Surveys of Playgrounds

National surveys of playgrounds have been conducted and published by three different organizations. The American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance sponsored surveys of elementary school playgrounds, community park playgrounds and preschool centers. The average maximum height of climbing equipment in the elementary school playgrounds was 9.3 feet with 30% of the structures over 12 feet in height. The average maximum height of community park equipment was 7.4 feet with 18% higher than 11 feet. About 14% of the climbing equipment in the preschool survey was more than eight feet high.

The U.S. Public Interest Research Group and the Consumer Federation of America conducted five nationwide surveys of public playgrounds. Following one survey, the researchers suggest, "increasing the height of the equipment does not necessarily increase challenge or play value, yet it always increases hazard."

Between 1998 and 2000 the National Program for Playground Safety (NPPS) conducted surveys of 3,052 school, park and child care playgrounds in all 50 states. In over half the playgrounds, surfacing was not at the proper depth and in the proper use zones. In personal interviews, Thompson and Hudson of the NPPS recommended that the maximum height of play equipment not exceed eight feet.

The Facts on Playground Safety

* Falls are by far the leading cause of injuries on playgrounds. Most injuries result from falls to the surface below equipment. 60% to 70% of all playground injuries result from falls and approximately 90% of serious injuries result from falls. Most serious injuries to the head occur in falls greater than 4.5 feet. Issues of height, hazards and injuries are not simple issues of restricting the maximum height of equipment. For example, rotating tire swings must be installed with swivel or beam heights sufficient to avoid injuries from children's heads impacting overhead beams. Decks or platforms need to be sufficiently high to accommodate young children engaging in make-believe or dramatic play underneath the structure. On the other hand, there appears to be no reasonable rationale for the common practice of installing or keeping in place playground equipment that violates national guidelines and standards for heights (CPSC/ASTM) with respect to protective surfacing. All responsible parties -- manufacturers, designers, installers and consumers -- should veto any practice that links excessive heights with inadequate surfacing.

* Children climb for many reasons resulting from both innate and experiential factors. Climbing follows a developmental progression beginning with exploration and advancing through increasingly complex and refined stages. Children frequently climb to the highest possible level of equipment regardless of the designer's intent. Using play equipment in unintended ways is normal behavior for children, though contrary to adult conceptions of how children should play.

* Fear of heights has both maturational and experiential bases. The levels of fear include abnormal fear (phobias), normal fear and abnormal lack of fear. Fears may be intensified to abnormal levels by experiences with excessive heights. For example, many very young children climb to platforms 10 to 12 feet in height, become frustrated about descending, and scream with fear until extricated by an adult. Apparent lack of fear is seen among some very young children and some children with mental disabilities.

* The subject of hazardous heights has been discussed in professional literature throughout the history of manufactured playground equipment. The first national standards for playground apparatus, published in 1931 by the National Recreation Association, a precursor of the National Recreation and Park Association, recommended restricting equipment heights. Throughout the 20th century, most manufacturers reduced the height of their playground equipment. Yet contemporary national surveys still show widespread violation of CPSC/ASTM recommendations for heights with respect to protective surfacing.

* All of the national surveys, guidelines, and standards (ASHPERD, CFA, NPPS, CPSC, and ASTM) reviewed for this article conclude that equipment designed for older groups is anthropomorphically unsuitable for younger children's play. Despite this conclusion, toddlers and preschool children commonly play on excessively high structures designed for the sizes and skills of older children. Adult supervisors commonly stand by and even encourage this practice. Educational programs are needed to assist adults in making wise decisions about matching playgrounds to the skills levels of children.

* Despite national guidelines and standards regarding equipment fall heights with respect to type of surfacing, some manufacturers advertise and sell equipment that exceeds Peak G and HIC values of the protective surfacing that is initially installed. For example, slides with platform heights of 10 to 12 feet are commonly protected by sand surfacing which has a compacted protective value up to about six feet. Overhead apparatus is commonly installed at the maximum allowable height (CPSC/ASTM) of seven feet, which quickly becomes about eight feet when loose protective surfacing is worn away. These heights are excessive for almost all elementary-age children and are extremely hazardous for preschool and primary-age children. Several variables are implicated in this problem -- poor equipment design, improper initial installation and lack of maintenance following installation.

* There was no evidence in the literature, the interviews with experts, or the observations of children on playgrounds contrary to the principle that the further the child falls, the greater the likelihood of serious injury. However, height is a critical variable for ensuring fun, challenge and development for children. Innovative design of playground equipment can help ensure these qualities without increasing potential fall heights (not equipment heights) beyond criteria recommended by safety experts, research evidence and the criteria established by ASTM/CPSC and other national professional organizations concerned with children's play and safety.

THE HIGHER YOU CLIMB, THE HARDER YOU FALL

Falls are the second leading cause of unintentional injury and the most common cause of injuries resulting in hospital admissions for trauma. In 1999 a study indicated that kids falling off equipment and hitting the ground accounted for approximately 79% of the injuries reported on public playgrounds and 81% reported on home playgrounds. Serious head injuries, such as fractures and concussions are likely to occur when a child falls from distances of about four and one-half feet or higher.

What Do the Experts Say?

In 2001, eight experts from the fields of education, child development, kinesiology, playground design and play-related litigation provided their opinions regarding the relationship between children's play and the heights of playground equipment. They responded to questions regarding why children climb, maximum climbing heights for play equipment, how to measure height and how height influences degree of injuries in falls.

The experts agreed that children, when given the opportunity, will climb as high as possible. They agreed that increasing heights increases the potential for serious injury ("the higher you climb, the harder you fall"). The experts responded to the questions about maximum playground equipment heights in two ways. Some addressed equipment height (difference in elevation from ground entry to highest point on equipment). They proposed that equipment be any height if children could be protected from falling. Others addressed fall height (vertical distance of highest possible fall from equipment). Those addressing fall heights proposed that they should be limited. A proposed maximum height was eight feet. None of the experts contended that fall height should be unlimited.

Children at Play

The authors conducted a series of observations of children playing on four playgrounds with equipment platforms more than 10 feet high. These playgrounds were located at public parks and pay-for-play venues. There appeared to be great play value from climbing. The purposes for climbing appeared to be observing from a height, exploring, accessing play events, playing chase, engaging in make-believe play, responding to parent's encouragement, responding to peer pressure, and competition with peers. Climbing was marked with signs of fun and pleasure, except for children who became frightened when unable or unwilling to come down from heights. Chase games on equipment were perhaps the activities marked with most excitement.

Unintended use of equipment was common at the community park and restaurant playgrounds. None of these sites contained soft-play equipment or equipment enclosed with nets. Children climbed up slides, stopped in the middle of spiral slide and tube slides, several slid down at once and some slid down headfirst on their backs. Of greater concern, children commonly climbed on the outside of play structures using support poles, rails of protective barriers and edges of platforms to access the highest possible point.

They climbed on the exterior of tube slides to the highest point, exceeding 13 feet, using protruding tube connections. At a playground where crayons were provided for children at dining tables, children covered upper exterior areas (panels and tube slides) of play structures with graffiti, recording the high frequency of climbing on the outside of equipment. Children as young as four and five were observed shimmying up support poles of equipment. While older children rough-housed and climbed on the outside of equipment 10 to 14 feet high, toddlers and young children played in the sand directly below.

Such unintended use often occurred under the observation of parents or guardians who appeared to feel that such behavior was not a hazard. Some children were warned about sitting on the protective barriers and climbing on the protective barriers, but the admonitions were infrequent and did not extend to the most hazardous activities. Although younger children were more closely supervised than older children, parents commonly encouraged young children, even toddlers, to climb and play on equipment designed for older children. It was difficult for some parents to reach children who were frightened and climb down with them.

The observation sites included equipment installed during the past two to four years, with compacted sand or pea gravel surfacing, depleted from lack of maintenance. The hazard of greatest concern was the excessive height of equipment (10 to 12 feet deck heights) with respect to the type and condition of surfacing. Even when initially installed, the surfacing material would not meet common ASTM/CPSC recommendations. After only limited play the surfacing became compacted and scattered in critical fall areas, creating even more serious hazards.

References

American Public Health Association. (1992). Caring for our Children: National Health and Safety Performance Standards: Guidelines for Out-of-Home Child Care Programs. Washington, D.C.: The American Public Health Association.

American Society for Testing and Materials. (1995). Standard Test Method for Shock-Absorbing Properties of Playing Surface Systems and Materials. Philadelphia, PA: The American Society for Testing and Materials.

Baker, S. P., O'Neill, B., Ginsburg, M. J., & Li, G. (1992). The Injury Factbook. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bruya, L. D., & Langendorfer, S. J. (1988). Where our Children Play: Elementary School Playground Equipment. Reston, VA: American Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance.

Chalmers, D. J., Marshall, S. W., Langley, J. D., Evans, M. J., Brunton, C. R., Kelly, A. M., & Pickering, A. F. (1996). Height and Surfacing as Risk Factors for Injury in Falls from Playground Equipment: A case-control study. Injury Prevention, 2, 98-104.

Consumer Federation of America (1996a). Report and Model Law on Public Play Equipment and Areas. Washington, DC: The Federation.

Consumer Federation of America (1996b). Action Alert.' Comments on Improving the Consumer Product Safety Commission Handbook for Public Playground Safety. Washington, D. C.: The Federation.

Crawford, M. (1989). In Thompson, D., & Bowers, L. (Eds.), Where Our Children Play: Community Park Playground Equipment (pp. 37-49). Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance.

Ellis, M. J. (1973). Why People Play. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Frost, J. L. (1992). Play and Playscapes. Albany, NY: Delmar.

Frost, J. L., & Sweeney, T. B. (1996). Cause and Prevention of Playground Injuries and Litigation: Case studies. Wheaton, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.

Frost, J. L., Wortham, S. & Reifel, S. (2001a). Play and Child Development. Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall/Merrill.

Hudson, S., Mack, M., & Thompson, D. (2000). How Safe are America's Playgrounds? A National Profile of Child Care, School and Park Playgrounds. Cedar Falls, IA: National Program for Playground Safety.

Kutska, K. S., & Hoffman, K. J. (1992). Play ground Safety is No Accident. Arlington, VA: National Recreation and Park Association.

Laforest, S., Robitaille, Y., Lesage, D., & Dorval, D. (2001). Surface Characteristics, Equipment Height, and the Occurrence and Severity of Playground Injuries. Injury Prevention, 7, 35-40.

Macarthur, C., Hu, X., Wesson, D. E., & Parkin, P. C. (May, 2000). Risk Factors for Severe Injuries Associated with Falls from Playground Equipment. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 32 (3), 377-82.

Marotz, L (2001). Childhood Injury in Early Care and Education Programs. In J. L. Frost (Ed.), Children and Injuries (pp. 171-197). Tucson, AZ: Lawyers & Judges Publishing Co.

Mierzwinski, E., Fise, M. E., & Morrison, M. (1996). Playing it Safe: A Third Nationwide Safety Survey of Public Playgrounds. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Public Interest Research Group and Consumer Federation of America.

Moore, R. C., & Wong, H. H. (1997). Natural Learning: Creating Environments for Rediscovering Nature's Way of Learning. Berkley, CA: MIG Communications.

Mott, A., Rolfe, K., James, R., Evans, Kemp, A., Dunstan, F., Kemp, K., & Sibert, J. (Jan., 1997). Safety of Surfaces and Equipment for Children in Playgrounds. Lancet, 349 (9069), pp.1874-6.

National Program for Playground Safety. (1999). America's Playgrounds Safety Report Card. Cedar Falls, IA: Author.

National Recreation and Park Association. (1976). Proposed Safety Standard for Public Playground Equipment. Arlington, VA: Consumer Product Safety Commission.

National Recreation Association. (1931). Report of Committee on Standards in Playground Apparatus. (Bulletin 2170). NY: The Association.

Playground and Recreation Association of America. (1928). Play Areas: Their Design and Equipment. NY: A. S. Barnes and Company.

Playground Association of America. (1910). Proceedings of the Third Annual Congress of the Playground Association, 3 (3).

Ratte, D. J., Denham, S. A., & Johnson, D. M. (1990). Development of Human Factors Criteria for Playground Equipment Safety. Silver Spring, MD: Comsis Corporation.

Readdick, C. A., & Park, J. J. (1998, November). Achieving Great Heights: The Climbing Child. Young Children, 53 (6), 14-19.

Rivkin, M. (1997). The Great Outdoors: Restoring Children's Right to Play Outdoors. Washington, D. C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Sikes, L., Fise, M. E., & Morrison, M. (1992). Playing it Safe: A Nationwide Safety Survey of Public Playgrounds. Washington, DC: U.S. Public Interest Research Group and the Consumer Federation of America.

Thompson, D., & Bowers, L. (1989). Where our Children Play: Community Park Playground Equipment. Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance.

Thompson, D., & Hudson, S. (2001). In J. L. Frost, (Ed.), Children and Injuries (pp. 249-312). Tucson, AZ: Lawyers and Judges Publishing Co.

Tinsworth, D. K., & Kramer, J. T. (1990). Playground Equipment-Related Injuries and Deaths. Washington, DC: U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Tinsworth, D. K., & McDonald, J. E., (April, 2001). Special Study: Injuries and Deaths Associated with Children's Playground Equipment. Washington, DC: U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. (1981, 1997). Washington, DC: The Commission.

Wood, B., Fise, M. E., & Morrison, M. L. (1994). Playing it Safe: A Second Nationwide Safety Survey of Public Playgrounds. Washington, DC: Consumer Federation of America.

Wortham, S. C., & Frost, J. L. (1990). Playgrounds for Young Children: National Survey and Perspectives. Reston, VA: National Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance.

This study was commissioned by Game-Time, a PlayCore, Inc. Company, Fort Payne, Alabama U.S.A.

Candra D. Thornton is a doctoral candidate at The University of Texas at Austin, studying early childhood pre-service teachers' beliefs and behaviors.

Pei-San Brown is a founding member of the Children's Institute for Learning and Development (CHILD) and a doctoral student in Early Childhood Education at the University of Texas at Austin.

James A. Therrell, certified National Playground Safety Inspector and author of How To Play With Kids, is a doctoral candidate at University of Texas in Early Childhood Education.

Joe Frost is Parker Centennial Professor Emeritus, University of Texas. He directs a quarter-century old research project on child development and play environments, and has lectured throughut Asia, Europe and North America. He assists schools, universities, and municipalities in park and playground design.

John Sutterby is a lecturer at The University of Texas at Brownsville where he teaches courses in Early Childhood and Bilingual Education. Check out their article, "Does Height Matter?" on page 74.