Evaluation criteria for AIS 1 neck injuries in frontal impacts--a parameter study combining field data and Madymo modeling

Two situations with an expected higher AIS 1 neck injury rate in frontal impact were compared to a reference situation using a Madymo human body model in three different sitting postures and four different crash pulses. The two situations were reduced occupant weight and occupant with initial forward arm resistance, respectively. Occupant neck motion phases were identified and corresponding possible evaluation criteria were evaluated within the phases. Typical neck kinematics was seen for the two different situations. Occupants of lower weight had a more extended neck in the initial protraction phase and also a generally more pronounced upper neck link angle. Occupants with initial arm resistance had generally greater lower neck link angle at the time when the upper neck link angle was straight. No evaluation criteria reflected the anticipated AIS 1 neck injury rate consistently. In the initial protraction phase, NICmin correlated to expected injury outcome in almost half of the cases. In the protraction-flexion shift phase, Nkm, Nij, upper neck shear force and neck tension force reflected anticipated severity outcome to some extent. In the flexion phase, upper and lower neck extension correlated to anticipated AIS 1 neck injury rate only to a minor extent. The different sitting postures were more influential than the different crash pulses, emphasizing the importance of not only considering the spectra of impact severity but also differences in sitting postures in safety system development and evaluation.     

Analysis of pedestrian-to-ground impact injury risk in vehicle-to-pedestrian collisions based on rotation angles

IntroductionDue to the diversity of pedestrian-to-ground impact (secondary impact) mechanisms, secondary impacts always result in more unpredictable injuries as compared to the vehicle-to-pedestrian collisions (primary impact). The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of vehicle frontal structure, vehicle impact velocity, and pedestrian size and gait on pedestrian-to-ground impact injury risk.MethodA total of 600 simulations were performed using the MADYMO multi-body system and four different sizes of pedestrians and six types initial gait were considered and impacted by five vehicle types at five impact velocities, respectively. The pedestrian rotation angle ranges (PRARs) (a, b, c, d) were defined to identify and classify the pedestrian rotation angles during the ground impact.ResultsThe PRARs a, b, and c were the ranges primarily observed during the pedestrian landing. The PRAR has a significant influence on pedestrian-to-ground impact injuries. However, there was no correlation between the vehicle velocity and head injury criterion (HIC) caused by the secondary impact. In low velocity collisions (20, 30 km/h), the severity of pedestrian head injury risk caused by the secondary impact was higher than that resulting from the primary impact.ConclusionsThe PRARs defined in this study are highly correlated with the pedestrian-to-ground impact mechanism, and can be used to further analyze the pedestrian secondary impact and to predict the head injury risk.Practical applicationsTo reduce the pedestrian secondary impact injury risk, passive and active safety countermeasures should be considered together to prevent the pedestrian's head-to-ground impacts, particularly in the low-velocity collisions.     

Effects of vehicle impact velocity, vehicle front-end shapes on pedestrian injury risk

Objective: This study aimed at investigating the effects of vehicle impact velocity, vehicle front-end shape, and pedestrian size on injury risk to pedestrians in collisions with passenger vehicles with various frontal shapes. Method: A series of parametric studies was carried out using 2 total human model for safety (THUMS) pedestrian models (177 and 165?cm) and 4 vehicle finite element (FE) models with different front-end shapes (medium-size sedan, minicar, one-box vehicle, and sport utility vehicle [SUV]). The effects of the impact velocity on pedestrian injury risk were analyzed at velocities of 20, 30, 40, and 50?km/h. The dynamic response of the pedestrian was investigated, and the injury risk to the head, chest, pelvis, and lower extremities was compared in terms of the injury parameters head injury criteria (HIC), chest deflection, and von Mises stress distribution of the rib cage, pelvis force, and bending moment diagram of the lower extremities. Result: Vehicle impact velocity has the most significant influence on injury severity for adult pedestrians. All injury parameters can be reduced in severity by decreasing vehicle impact velocities. The head and lower extremities are at greater risk of injury in medium-size sedan and SUV collisions. The chest injury risk was particularly high in one-box vehicle impacts. The fracture risk of the pelvis was also high in one-box vehicle and SUV collisions. In minicar collisions, the injury risk was the smallest if the head did not make contact with the A-pillar. Conclusion: The vehicle impact velocity and vehicle front-end shape are 2 dominant factors that influence the pedestrian kinematics and injury severity. A significant reduction of all injuries can be achieved for all vehicle types when the vehicle impact velocity is less than 30?km/h. Vehicle designs consisting of a short front-end and a wide windshield area can protect pedestrians from fatalities. The results also could be valuable in the design of a pedestrian-friendly vehicle front-end shape. [Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Traffic Injury Prevention for the following free supplemental resource: Head impact conditions and injury parameters in four-type vehicle collisions and validation result of the finite element model of one-box vehicle and minicar. ].     

A study of pedestrian and bicyclist exposure to head injury in passenger car collisions based on accident data and simulations

The objective was to assess head injury risks and kinematics of adult pedestrians and bicyclists in primary impact to the passenger cars and secondary impact to the ground using real world accident data and computer reconstructions of the accidents. For this purpose, a subsample of 402 pedestrians and 940 bicyclists from the GIDAS database, Germany, was used for the statistical analysis, from which 22 pedestrian and 18 bicyclist accidents were further selected for reconstruction. PC-Crash was used to calculate impact conditions, such as vehicle impact velocity, vehicle kinematic sequence, and thrown distance. These conditions were employed to identify the initial conditions in reconstruction in MADYMO program. A comparable analysis was conducted based on the results from accident analysis and computer reconstructions for the impact configurations and the resulting injury patterns of pedestrians and bicyclists in view of head injury risks. Differences in HIC, head-relative impact velocity, linear acceleration, maximum angular velocity and acceleration, contact force, thrown distance, Wrap Around Distance (WAD), and head contact time were evaluated. Injury risk curves were generated by using a logistic regression model for vehicle impact velocity. The results indicate that bicyclists suffered less severe injuries compared with severity of pedestrian injuries. In the selected samples, the AIS 2+ and AIS 3+ head injury risks for pedestrians are 50% probability at impact speed of 38.87 km/h and 54.39 km/h respectively, while for bicyclists at 53.66 km/h and 58.89 km/h respectively. The findings of high injury risks suggested that in the area with high frequency car-pedestrian accidents, the vehicle speed limit should be 40 km/h, while in the area with high frequency car-cyclist accidents the vehicle speed limit should be 50 km/h.     

Reliability of police-reported information for determining crash and injury severity

Posted speed limit and police-reported injury codes are commonly used by researchers to approximate vehicle impact and occupant injury severity. In-depth crash investigations, however, produce more precise measures of crash and injury severity: change in velocity (delta-V) for crash severity and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) scores for injury severity. A comparison of data from police crash reports with that gathered by National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) investigators highlighted the inadequacy of speed limit and police injury codes as proxies for delta-V and AIS injury severity. In general, delta-V increased with speed limit and higher values of AIS were associated with higher police-coded injury severity, but there were a number of anomalies. In particular, 49% of the drivers coded by police as having incapacitating injuries actually had sustained no more than minor injuries. This overstatement of injury severity was less frequent among male (44%) and elderly (37%) drivers than among female (53%) and nonelderly (50%) drivers. Also, 79% of the investigated vehicles that crashed on roads posted at 60 mph (96 km/h) or higher experienced a delta-V less than 25 mph (40 km/h). Safety studies depending on data from only police reports to establish injury or crash severity therefore could produce erroneous results.     

Parameters influencing AIS 1 neck injury outcome in frontal impacts

In order to gain more knowledge of the neck injury scenario in frontal impacts, a statistical study of parameters influencing incidences of AIS 1 neck injuries was performed. The data set consisted of 616 occupants in Volvo cars. Information regarding the crash, the safety systems, occupant characteristics (including prior neck problems), behavior and sitting posture at the time of impact, and neck symptoms (including duration) was collected and analyzed. Occupant characteristics (mainly gender, weight, and age), kinematics (head impacts) and behavior at the time of impact were identified as the most prominent parameter areas with regard to AIS 1 neck injury outcome. Specifically, women had a significantly higher AIS 1 neck injury rate as compared to men, occupants under the age of 50 had a significantly higher AIS 1 neck injury rate as compared to those above 50 and occupants weighing less than 65 kg have a significantly higher AIS 1 neck injury rate than heavier occupants. Drivers stating that they impacted their head against a frontal interior structure had a significantly higher AIS 1 neck injury rate than those without head impact. Also, occupants who stated they had tensed their neck muscles at the time of impact, had a significantly higher AIS 1 neck injury rate as compared to occupants who did not. Occupant activities, such as tightly gripping the steering wheel or straightening their arms showed a significantly increased AIS 1 neck injury rate, indicating that occupant behavior at time of impact could be influential with respect to AIS 1 neck injury outcome. Also, occupants reporting prior neck problems had a higher rate of persistent symptoms (>1 year) but no difference with respect to passing symptoms (<3 months) as compared to those without prior neck problems. Additionally, there was no distinct pattern for the duration of neck symptoms.     

Differences in Long-term Medical Consequences Depending on Impact Direction Involving Passenger Cars

Objective: There is limited knowledge of the long-term medical consequences for occupants injured in car crashes in various impact directions. Thus, the objective was to evaluate whether injuries leading to permanent medical impairment differ depending on impact direction.

Methods: In total, 36,743 injured occupants in car crashes that occurred between 1995 and 2011 were included. All initial injuries (n = 61,440) were classified according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2005. Injured car occupants were followed for at least 3 years to assess permanent medical impairment. The data were divided into different groups according to impact direction and levels of permanent impairment. The risk of permanent medical impairment was established for different body regions and injury severity levels, according to AIS.

Results: It was found that almost 12% of all car occupants sustained a permanent medical impairment. Given an injury, car occupants involved in rollover crashes had the highest overall risk to sustain a permanent medical impairment. Half of the head injuries leading to long-term consequences occurred in frontal impacts. Far-side occupants had almost the same risk as near-side occupants. Occupants who sustained a permanent medical impairment from cervical spine injuries had similar risk in all impact directions (13%) except from rollover (17%). However, these injuries occurred more often in rear crashes. Most of the injuries leading to long-term consequences were classified as minor injuries by AIS for all impact directions.

Conclusions: Studying crash data from a perspective of medical impairment is important to identify injuries that might not be prioritized only considering the AIS but might lead to lower quality of life for the occupant and also costs for society. These results can be used for road transport system strategies and for making priority decisions in vehicle design.     

Epidemiology of injury patterns for 4- to 10-year-olds in side and oblique impacts

Abstract

Objectives: With regard to the pediatric population involved in vehicle side impact collisions, epidemiologic data can be used to identify specific injury-producing conditions and offer possible safety technology effectiveness through population-based estimates. The objective of the current study was to perform a field data analysis to investigate injury patterns and sources of injury to 4- to 10-year-olds in side and oblique impacts to determine the potential effect of updated side impact regulations and airbag safety countermeasures.

Methods: The NASS-CDS, years 1991 to 2014, was analyzed in the current study. The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2005–Update 2008 was used to determine specific injuries and injury severities. Injury distributions were examined by body region as specified in the AIS dictionary and the Maximum AIS (MAIS). Children ages 4 to 10 were examined in this study. All occupant seating locations were investigated. Seating positions were designated by row and as either near side, middle, or far side. Side impacts with a principal direction of force (PDOF) between 2:00 and 4:00 as well as between 8:00 and 10:00 were included. Restraint use was documented only as restrained or unrestrained and not whether the restraint was being used properly. Injury distribution by MAIS, body region, and source of injury were documented. Analysis regarding occupant injury severity, body region injured, and injury source was performed by vehicle model year to determine the effect of updated side impact testing regulation and safety countermeasures. Because the aim of the study was to identify the most common injury patterns and sources, only unweighted data were analyzed.

Results: Main results obtained from the current study with respect to 4- to 10-year-old child occupants in side impact were that a decrease was observed in frequency of MAIS 1–3 injuries; injuries to the head, face, and extremities; as well as injuries caused by child occupant interaction with the vehicle interior and seatback support structures in 1998 model year passenger cars and newer.

Conclusions: Results from this study could be useful in design advances of pediatric anthropomorphic test devices, child restraints, as well as vehicles and their safety countermeasure systems.     

Mortality Risk in Pediatric Motor Vehicle Crash Occupants: Accounting for Developmental Stage and Challenging Abbreviated Injury Scale Metrics

Objective: Survival risk ratios (SRRs) and their probabilistic counterpart, mortality risk ratios (MRRs), have been shown to be at odds with Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) severity scores for particular injuries in adults. SRRs have been validated for pediatrics but have not been studied within the context of pediatric age stratifications. We hypothesized that children with similar motor vehicle crash (MVC) injuries may have different mortality risks (MR) based upon developmental stage and that these MRs may not correlate with AIS severity.

Methods: The NASS-CDS 2000–2011 was used to define the top 95% most common AIS 2+ injuries among MVC occupants in 4 age groups: 0–4, 5–9, 10–14, and 15–18 years. Next, the National Trauma Databank 2002–2011 was used to calculate the MR (proportion of those dying with an injury to those sustaining the injury) and the co-injury-adjusted MR (MR_MAIS) for each injury within 6 age groups: 0–4, 5–9, 10–14, 15–18, 0–18, and 19+ years. MR differences were evaluated between age groups aggregately, between age groups based upon anatomic injury patterns and between age groups on an individual injury level using nonparametric Wilcoxon tests and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate. Correlation between AIS and MR within each age group was also evaluated.

Results: MR and MR_MAIS distributions of the most common AIS 2+ injuries were right skewed. Aggregate MR of these most common injuries varied between the age groups, with 5- to 9-year-old and 10- to 14-year-old children having the lowest MRs and 0- to 4-year-old and 15- to 18-year-old children and adults having the highest MRs (all P <.05). Head and thoracic injuries imparted the greatest mortality risk in all age groups with median MR_MAIS ranging from 0 to 6% and 0 to 4.5%, respectively. Injuries to particular body regions also varied with respect to MR based upon age. For example, thoracic injuries in adults had significantly higher MR_MAIS than such injuries among 5- to 9-year-olds and 10- to 14-year-olds (P =.04; P <.01). Furthermore, though AIS was positively correlated with MR within each age group, less correlation was seen for children than for adults. Large MR variations were seen within each AIS grade, with some lower AIS severity injuries demonstrating greater MRs than higher AIS severity injuries. As an example, MR_MAIS in 0- to 18-year-olds was 0.4% for an AIS 3 radius fracture versus 1.4% for an AIS 2 vault fracture.

Conclusions: Trauma severity metrics are important for outcome prediction models and can be used in pediatric triage algorithms and other injury research. Trauma severity may vary for similar injuries based upon developmental stage, and this difference should be reflected in severity metrics. The MR-based data-driven determination of injury severity in pediatric occupants of different age cohorts provides a supplement or an alternative to AIS severity classification for pediatric occupants in MVCs.     

Improving the Chest Protection of Elderly Occupants in Frontal Crashes Using SMART Load Limiters

Objective: To determine whether varying the seat belt load limiter (SBL) according to crash and occupant characteristics could have real-world injury reduction benefits in frontal impacts and, if so, to quantify those benefits.

Methods: Real-world UK accident data were used to identify the target population of vehicle occupants and frontal crash scenarios where improved chest protection could be most beneficial. Generic baseline driver and front passenger numerical models using a 50th percentile dummy were developed with MADYMO software. Simulations were performed where the load limiter threshold was varied in selected frontal impact scenarios. For each SBL setting, restraint performance, dummy kinematics, and injury outcome were studied in 5 different frontal impact types. Thoracic injury predictions were converted into injury probability values using Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2+ age-dependent thoracic risk curves developed and validated based on a methodology proposed by Laituri et al. (2005). Real-world benefit was quantified using the predicted AIS 2+ risk and assuming that an appropriate adaptive system was fitted to all the cars in a real-world sample of recent frontal crashes involving European passenger cars.

Results: From the accident data sample the chest was the most frequently injured body region at an AIS 2+ level in frontal impacts (7% of front seat occupants). The proportion of older vehicle front seat occupants (>64 years) with AIS 2+ injury was also greater than the proportion of younger occupants. Additionally, older occupants were more likely to sustain seat belt–induced serious chest injury in low- and moderate-speed frontal crashes. In both front seating positions, the low SBL provided the best chest injury protection, without increasing the risk to other body regions. In severe impacts, the low SBL allowed the driver to move dangerously close to the steering wheel. Compared to the driver side, greater ride-down space on the passenger side gave a higher potential for using the low SBLs. When applying the AIS 2+ risk reduction findings to the weighted accident data sample, the risk of sustaining an AIS 2+ seat belt injury changed to 0.9, 4.9, and 8.1% for young, mid, and older occupants, respectively, from their actual injury risk of 1.3, 7.6, and 13.1%.

Conclusions: These results suggest the potential for improving the safety of older occupants with the development of smarter restraint systems. This is an important finding because the number of older users is expected to increase rapidly over the next 20 years. The greatest benefits were seen at lower crash severities. This is also important because most real-world crashes occur at lower speeds.     

Driver injury in near- and far-side impacts: Update on the effect of front passenger belt use

Purpose: This is a study that updates earlier research on the influence of a front passenger on the risk for severe driver injury in near-side and far-side impacts. It includes the effects of belt use by the driver and passenger, identifies body regions involved in driver injury, and identifies the sources for severe driver head injury.

Methods: 1997–2015 NASS-CDS data were used to investigate the risk for Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) 4 + F driver injury in near-side and far-side impacts by front passenger belt use and as a sole occupant in the driver seat. Side impacts were identified with GAD1 = L or R without rollover (rollover ≤ 0). Front-outboard occupants were included without ejection (ejection = 0). Injury severity was defined by MAIS and fatality (F) by TREATMNT = 1 or INJSEV = 4. Weighted data were determined. The risk for MAIS 4 + F was determined using the number of occupants with known injury status MAIS 0 + F. Standard errors were determined.

Results: Overall, belted drivers had greater risks for severe injury in near-side than far-side impacts. As a sole driver, the risk was 0.969 ± 0.212% for near-side and 0.313 ± 0.069% for far-side impacts (P < .005). The driver's risk was 0.933 ± 0.430% with an unbelted passenger and 0.596 ± 0.144% with a belted passenger in near-side impacts. The risk was 2.17 times greater with an unbelted passenger (NS). The driver's risk was 0.782 ± 0.431% with an unbelted passenger and 0.361% ± 0.114% with a belted passenger in far-side impacts. The risk was 1.57 times greater with an unbelted passenger (P < .10). Seat belt use was 66 to 95% effective in preventing MAIS 4 + F injury in the driver. For belted drivers, the head and thorax were the leading body regions for Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 4+ injury. For near-side impacts, the leading sources for AIS 4+ head injury were the left B-pillar, roof, and other vehicle. For far-side impacts, the leading sources were the other occupant, right interior, and roof (8.5%).

Conclusions: Seat belt use by a passenger lowered the risk of severe driver injury in side impacts. The reduction was 54% in near-side impacts and 36% in far-side impacts. Belted drivers experienced mostly head and thoracic AIS 4+ injuries. Head injuries in the belted drivers were from contact with the side interior and the other occupant, even with a belted passenger.     

New Methodology for an Expert-Designed Map From International Classification of Diseases (ICD) to Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 3+ Severity Injury

Objective: There has been a longstanding desire for a map to convert International Classification of Diseases (ICD) injury codes to Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codes to reflect the severity of those diagnoses. The Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine (AAAM) was tasked by European Union representatives to create a categorical map classifying diagnoses codes as serious injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] 3+), minor/moderate injury (AIS 1/2), or indeterminate. This study's objective was to map injury-related ICD-9-CM (clinical modification) and ICD-10-CM codes to these severity categories.

Methods: Approximately 19,000 ICD codes were mapped, including injuries from the following categories: amputations, blood vessel injury, burns, crushing injury, dislocations/sprains/strains, foreign body, fractures, internal organ, nerve/spinal cord injury, intracranial, laceration, open wounds, and superficial injury/contusion. Two parallel activities were completed to create the maps: (1) An in-person expert panel and (2) an electronic survey. The panel consisted of expert users of AIS and ICD from North America, the United Kingdom, and Australia. The panel met in person for 5 days, with follow-up virtual meetings to create and revise the maps. Additional qualitative data were documented to resolve potential discrepancies in mapping. The electronic survey was completed by 95 injury coding professionals from North America, Spain, Australia, and New Zealand over 12 weeks. ICD-to-AIS maps were created for: ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM. Both maps indicated whether the corresponding AIS 2005/Update 2008 severity score for each ICD code was AIS 3+, 1/2, or indeterminable. Though some ICD codes could be mapped to multiple AIS codes, the maximum severity of all potentially mapped injuries determined the final severity categorization.

Results: The in-person panel consisted of 13 experts, with 11 Certified AIS specialists (CAISS) with a median of 8 years and an average of 15 years of coding experience. Consensus was reached for AIS severity categorization for all injury-related ICD codes. There were 95 survey respondents, with a median of 8 years of injury coding experience. Approximately 15 survey responses were collected per ICD code. Results from the 2 activities were compared, and any discrepancies were resolved using additional qualitative and quantitative data from the in-person panel and survey results, respectively.

Conclusions: Robust maps of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM injury codes to AIS severity categories (3+ versus <3) were successfully created from an in-person panel discussion and electronic survey. These maps provide a link between the common ICD diagnostic lexicons and the AIS severity coding system and are of value to injury researchers, public health scientists, and epidemiologists using large databases without available AIS coding.     

Field investigation of child restraints in side impact crashes

OBJECTIVE: Various test procedures have been suggested for assessing the protection afforded by child restraints (CRS) in lateral collisions. Analyses of real world crashes can be used to identify relevant characteristics of the child, restraint, collision, and injury mechanisms that should be incorporated into the design of the test procedures as well as in the design of related ATDs and injury metrics. The objective of this work is to use in-depth crash investigations of children restrained in CRS in side impacts to elucidate specific sources and mechanisms of injuries and explore the role of crash severity variables such as magnitude and location of intrusion and specific impact angle. METHODS: Real world crashes involving children restrained in forward facing CRS in side impacts were analyzed from Partners for Child Passenger Safety, an on-going child specific crash surveillance system in which insurance claims are used to identify cases. In-depth crash investigations using standardized protocols were used to calculate the crash severity and determine the mechanisms and sources of the injuries sustained. RESULTS: Cases of 32 children restrained in CRS in 30 side impact crashes were examined. Twenty-five percent sustained AIS 2+ injuries. The most common injuries sustained by children restrained in CRS in side impact crashes were to the face, head, and lower extremity. Characteristics of the crashes that appeared related to injury were intrusion that entered the child's occupant space or caused an interior part of the vehicle to enter the child's occupant space, forward component of the crash, and the rotation of the CRS, restrained by a seat belt, towards the side of the impact. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to assess the injury potential in a laboratory setting for the body regions of common injury, the head, face, and lower extremity, must be explored. Characteristics of a regulatory-based test procedure to assess injury risk should include a frontal component to the crash and intrusion into the occupant's seating position. Design enhancements of the CRS should address rotation during lateral impacts. These results provide guidance to current efforts to design and regulate these restraints for the safety of child passengers in side impacts.     

Crash-Pulse Recorders in Real-Life Accidents: Influence of Change of Velocity and Mean and Peak Acceleration on Injury Risk in Frontal Impacts

Several parameters based on acceleration levels, such as mean or peak acceleration, may correlate with injury risk, or may together with change of velocity, explain the risk of injury, and thus may form the risk function for different kind of injuries. The aim was to study the influence on injury risk for mean and peak acceleration and change of velocity as well as how these correlate with each other. The results from 144 crash-pulse recorders and the diagnoses from driver injuries in real-life frontal impacts were analysed. Change of velocity and mean and peak acceleration were calculated from each recorded crash-pulse. The results and conclusions were that Δv, mean and peak accelerations influence the injury risk, where either high Δv, high mean or high peak acceleration may lead to severe injuries. Mean and peak accelerations together may explain the risk of injury in the studied impacts. When these parameters were combined, a limit could be drawn, above which there was an 89% risk of receiving a moderate or severe injury, while the risk was only 5.5% below that line. The different combinations of impact severity parameters shown in this study are helpful when crash pulses are created for crash tests and computer simulations.     

Intervertebral neck injury criterion for prediction of multiplanar cervical spine injury due to side impacts

OBJECTIVE: Intervertebral Neck Injury Criterion (IV-NIC) is based on the hypothesis that dynamic three-dimensional intervertebral motion beyond physiological limits may cause multiplanar injury of cervical spine soft tissues. Goals of this study, using a biofidelic whole human cervical spine model with muscle force replication and surrogate head in simulated side impacts, were to correlate IV-NIC with multiplanar injury and determine IV-NIC injury threshold for each intervertebral level. METHODS: Using a bench-top apparatus, side impacts were simulated at 3.5, 5, 6.5, and 8 g horizontal accelerations of the T1 vertebra. Pre- and post-impact flexibility testing in three-motion planes measured the soft tissue injury, i.e., significant increase (p < 0.05) in neutral zone (NZ) or range of motion (RoM) at any intervertebral level, above corresponding physiological limit. RESULTS: IV-NIC in left lateral bending correlated well with total lateral bending RoM (R = 0.61, P < 0.001) and NZ (R = 0.55, P < 0.001). Additionally, the same IV-NIC correlated well with left axial rotation RoM (R = 0.50, P < 0.001). IV-NIC injury thresholds (95% confidence limits) varied among intervertebral levels and ranged between 1.5 (0.6-2.4) at C3-C4 and 4.0 (2.4-5.7) at C7-T1. IV-NIC injury threshold times were attained beginning at 84.5 ms following impact. CONCLUSIONS: Present results suggest that IV-NIC is an effective tool for determining multiplanar soft tissue neck injuries by identifying the intervertebral level, mode, time, and severity of injury.     

Motor vehicle restraint system use and risk of spine injury

OBJECTIVE: Motor vehicle collision (MVC)-related spinal injury is a severe and often permanently disabling injury. In addition, strain injuries have been reported as a common outcome of MVCs. Although advances in automobile crashworthiness have reduced both fatalities and severe injuries, the impact of varying occupant restraint systems (seatbelts and airbags) on thoracolumbar spine injuries is unknown. This study examined the relationship between the occurrence of mild to severe cervical and thoracolumbar spine injury and occupant restraint systems among front seat occupants involved in frontal MVCs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among subjects obtained from the 1995-2004 National Automotive Sampling System. Cases were identified based on having sustained a spine injury of >/=1 on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS), 1990 Revision. Risk risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed comparing occupant restraint systems with unrestrained occupants. RESULTS: We found an overall incidence of AIS1 cervical (11.8%) and thoracolumbar (3.7%) spinal injury. Seatbelt only restraints were associated with increased cervical AIS1 injury (RR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.04-1.88). However, seatbelt only restraints showed the greatest risk reduction for AIS2 spinal injuries. Airbag only restraints reduced thoracolumbar AIS1 injuries (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.08-1.04). Seatbelt combined with airbag use was protective for cervical AIS3+ injury overall (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.14-0.58), cervical neurological injury (RR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.05-0.81), and thoracolumbar AIS3+ injury overall (RR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.05-0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that seatbelts alone or in combination with an airbag increased the incidence of AIS1 spinal injuries, but provide protection against more severe injury to all regions of the spine. Airbag deployment without seatbelt use did not show increased protection relative to unrestrained occupants.     

Analysis of the biomechanical response of kidneys under blunt impact

OBJECTIVE: This study addresses the biomechanical response of isolated kidneys to traumatic insult. METHODS: Kidneys were subjected to blunt impact by using a freely swinging right cylindrical pendulum. Force-deformation characteristics were derived for 65 impacted adult pig kidneys. Renal injuries were classified by autopsy, and an injury risk analysis was performed. In addition a finite element model that simulated the experiments was implemented. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: The kidneys showed a viscoelastic response. An energy-based injury threshold was identified, with a strain energy density of 21 kJ/m(3) corresponding to a 50-percent risk of renal injury level AIS3 or higher. Finally, the impact tests were simulated using a finite element model of the kidney to investigate relevant injury mechanisms. The model predicted the renal capsule and underlying parenchyma to first fail at an impact energy level of 4.0 J, consistent with experimental results.     

Influence of seat geometry and seating posture on NIC(max) long-term AIS 1 neck injury predictability

OBJECTIVE: Validated injury criteria are essential when developing restraints for AIS 1 neck injuries, which should protect occupants in a variety of crash situations. Such criteria have been proposed and attempts have been made to validate or disprove these. However, no criterion has yet been fully validated. The objective of this study is to evaluate the influence of seat geometry and seating posture on the NIC(max) long-term AIS 1 neck injury predictability by making parameter analyses on reconstructed real-life rear-end crashes with known injury outcomes. METHODS: Mathematical models of the BioRID II and three car seats were used to reconstruct 79 rear-end crashes involving 110 occupants with known injury outcomes. Correlations between the NIC(max) values and the duration of AIS 1 neck injuries were evaluated for variations in seat geometry and seating posture. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were also calculated to evaluate the NIC(max) predictability. RESULTS: Correlations between the NIC(max) values and the duration of AIS 1 neck injuries were found and these relations were used to establish injury risk curves for variations in seat geometry and seating posture. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values showed that the NIC(max) predicts long-term AIS 1 neck injuries also for variations in seat geometry and seating postures. CONCLUSION: The NIC(max) can be used to predict long-term AIS 1 neck injuries.