Booster crash tests

What do these all these crash tests imply about boosters, then, in terms of side impact? I'm curious because it seems to me MOST of the boosters (though not all) offer no meaningful head protection, let alone a no back booster!

I figure the Prosport has such deep head wings that I'll use that for his booster in the Civic (he still fits harnessed for now), but it's a short booster so won't last forever...

And I figured I'd get the Frontier85 SICT to use as a booster in the van(if it fits, otherwise regular 85) for the added head protection that the combo seats seem to have, since it'll fit for a LONG time. Plus I can harness longest it in until he's not so squirmy anyway.

But what of these boosters with basically nothing to contain the head? How is that safe? The child wouldn't be tall enough to benefit from side-curtain air-bags in most cases.

I know there are no standards for side-impact, but some of the boosters out there don't seem to have any, so just as instinct I'm skeptical. If there was a side-crash...ouch! The head would slam into the door/window. This has bothered me for years so I've always been drawn to combo seats with depth around the head because they would seem to offer better SI. But companies are getting better, such as the new Turbo, etc.

I read the study linked from carseatblog and found this excerprt

Importantly, these results suggest that the effectiveness of booster seats does not vary by the type of booster seat: backless or high-back.
......
Head injuries remained the most commonly injured body region for all of the restrained children in this study; however, abdominal injuries were the second most common injuries for belted children as a result of “seat-belt syndrome” injuries. Children who were restrained by booster seats sustained injuries to the face and lower extremity, with a notable absence of abdominal injuries.

Click to expand...

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/124/5/1281.full

Thanks for finding that. What year was it?

So were head injuries the most common because there is no protection (or not much) for the head in a booster seat? High back or low back...they all seem to lack. All so shallow...

Would some of the newer seats change that? Seats that act as boosters but provide more head protection..Prosport, Frontier85, Monterrey?

I'm just trying to think this through...I wish we had better standards!

Data were collected from a longitudinal study of children who were involved in crashes in 16 states and the District of Columbia from December 1, 1998, to November 30, 2007, with data collected via insurance claims records and a validated telephone survey. The study sample included children who were aged 4 to 8 years, seated in the rear rows of the vehicle, and restrained by either a seat belt or a BPB seat.

Click to expand...

I don't think we have any more current research than this- and who knows how many of these boosters were being used correctly, if the child was in position, if the shoulder belt was where it needed to be, etc.

I want better standards too- but at some point they'll be too big for high backs and eventually will move to just an adult seat belt and will have only the car/ side airbags to protect them.

The flaw in that study, to me, is that it considers both a poor-fitting booster (say, AOE) and a well-structured booster (say, Monterey) in the same category.

To answer the original question, honestly, it doesn't change my personal practice. Well-fitting, well-structured HBB as long as the child fits and then on to a backless until seatbelt time. I don't necessarily have backless-phobia, and do use them even sometimes for younger (relatively speaking) kids, but I am almost as fanatical about HBB as I am about RF to the limits. In both cases, I can't see reason to decrease the additional protection prematurely.

Interesting points. Yeah, all kinds of boosters in the same category doesn't seem like it tells us much. And what percent of the market even uses a highly structured seat with headwings like the Monterrey? 1998-2007 was the study, but I feel like there has been a big increase in boosters with more structure, head protection since then.

My concern is that (most) boosters are so shallow to begin with.

Once a child/adult is in a seatbelt then the side-curtain airbags (if you have them) can offer head protection, as the person would be tall enough. And in a carseat, hopefully it's one with enough depth that his/her head doesn't smack into the door). But there is that gray area where a child could potentially be in a booster but TOO short to use the side-curtain airbags, but too big to get the protection of a deeper carseat. Hence, I'm fanatical about boosters with deep shells like the Prosport.

And I'm mostly talking side-impact. I'm sure most do what they need to with a frontal crash (and that's great!). It's the lack of standards for SI that seem scary, especially with boosters because their shells seem so shallow.

Perhaps a booster would move forward with the child a bit, idk, I'm kind of liking those deep wings on the air protect. I'll probably just try to harness as long as possible though. Wouldn't most kids be tall enough to benefit from side curtain bags by the time they outgrow, let's say, a nautilus?