Evaluation of military helmets and roof padding on head injury potential from vertical impacts

Objective: Soldiers in military vehicles subjected to underbelly blasts can sustain traumatic head and neck injuries due to a head impact with the roof. The severity of head and neck trauma can be influenced by the amount of head clearance available to the occupant as well as factors such as wearing a military helmet or the presence of padding on the interior roof. The aim of the current study was to examine the interaction between a Hybrid III headform, the helmet system, and the interior roof of the vehicle under vertical loading.

Methods: Using a head impact machine and a Hybrid III headform, tests were conducted on a rigid steel plate in a number of different configurations and velocities to assess helmet shell and padding performance, to evaluate different vehicle roof padding materials, and to determine the relative injury mitigating contributions of both the helmet and the roof padding. The resultant translational head acceleration was measured and the head injury criterion (HIC) was calculated for each impact.

Results: For impacts with a helmeted headform hitting the steel plate only, which represented a common scenario in an underbelly blast event, velocities of ≤6 m/s resulted in HIC values below the FMVSS 201U threshold of 1,000, and a velocity of 7 m/s resulted in HIC values well over the threshold. Roof padding was found to reduce the peak translational head acceleration and the HIC, with rigid IMPAXX foams performing better than semirigid ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) foam. However, the head injury potential was reduced considerably more by wearing a helmet than by the addition of roof padding.

Conclusions: The results of this study provide initial quantitative findings that provide a better understanding of helmet–roof interactions in vertical impacts and the contributions of the military helmet and roof padding to mitigating head injury potential. Findings from this study will be used to inform further testing with the future aim of developing a new minimum head clearance standard for occupants of light armored vehicles.     

Protective effect of different types of bicycle helmets

The effectiveness of bicycle helmets in preventing head injuries is well documented. There are different opinions about the effectiveness of helmets in preventing face injuries, and few studies have analyzed the effect of different types of helmets. This study was performed to examine the effect of different helmet types to head and face injuries. The use of helmets was analyzed in cyclists with head or face injuries and compared with two control groups. The main control group was cyclists that had injuries not including the head or neck, and another control group was cyclists that had been involved in an accident, regardless of whether they had sustained any injury. Cross-table and logistic regression analyses were applied to analyze the protective effect of helmets. A total of 991 injured patients served as a basis for this study. Most of the accidents, (82%) were single accidents with no other persons involved. Of patients with injuries to the head, excluding face, 11.4% had been using hard shell helmets, and 9.6% had been using foam helmets at the time of the accident. Among the emergency room controls, the proportion of hard shell helmet users and foam helmet users was 26.4% and 11.4%, respectively. Compared to non-helmet users, this gave an odds ratio of 0.36 (CI = 0.21-0.60) for getting head injuries if the cyclists had been using hard shell helmets at the time of the injury, and 0.83 (CI = 0.41-1.67) for users of foam helmets. The odds ratio for getting face injuries was 0.90 (CI = 0.58-1.41) among users of hard shell helmets, and 1.87 (CI = 1.03-3.40) for users of foam helmets. The use of hard shell helmets reduced the risk of getting injuries to the head. Children less than nine years old that used foam helmets had an increased risk of getting face injuries. All bicyclists should be recommended to use hard shell bicycle helmets while cycling.     

The effects of a mandatory motorcycle helmet law on helmet use and injury patterns among motorcyclist fatalities

BACKGROUND: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has found that motorcycle helmets are 37% effective in preventing death and 65% effective in preventing brain injuries in a crash. Unfortunately, in 1995 Congress lifted federal sanctions against states without helmet laws and since then there have been a number of primary motorcycle helmet laws repealed or weakened. More lives could be saved and serious injuries avoided if there was increased helmet use throughout the United States. METHODS: This study analyzed helmet use and injury patterns among motorcycle riders in the United States involved in fatal crashes from 1995 through 2003 and compared the results between states with and without a primary helmet law. Age, sex, injury severity and helmet use are some of the variables obtained from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). RESULTS: In the 20 states and the District of Columbia, which currently have a primary helmet law, 84.0% of fatally injured riders were wearing a helmet. In the 27 states with a secondary helmet law, 36.2% of fatalities used a helmet, and in the remaining three states with no law at all, helmet use dropped to 17.6%. In the two states (Arkansas and Texas) that changed from a primary helmet law to a secondary helmet law in 1997, helmet use decreased from 78.2% in 1996 to 31.7% in 2000. CONCLUSION: If all states were to enact a primary motorcycle helmet law, helmet use would dramatically increase while decreasing the number of motorcyclist head injuries and fatalities. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: The results of this study will hopefully persuade law makers to enact primary helmet laws in all states throughout the nation. Helmet manufacturers can use this data to design more comfortable helmets while also improving upon the protective qualities of these safety devices.     

Protective Effect of Different Types of Bicycle Helmets

The effectiveness of bicycle helmets in preventing head injuries is well documented. There are different opinions about the effectiveness of helmets in preventing face injuries, and few studies have analyzed the effect of different types of helmets. This study was performed to examine the effect of different helmet types to head and face injuries. The use of helmets was analyzed in cyclists with head or face injuries and compared with two control groups. The main control group was cyclists that had injuries not including the head or neck, and another control group was cyclists that had been involved in an accident, regardless of whether they had sustained any injury. Cross-table and logistic regression analyses were applied to analyze the protective effect of helmets. A total of 991 injured patients served as a basis for this study. Most of the accidents, (82%) were single accidents with no other persons involved. Of patients with injuries to the head, excluding face, 11.4% had been using hard shell helmets, and 9.6% had been using foam helmets at the time of the accident. Among the emergency room controls, the proportion of hard shell helmet users and foam helmet users was 26.4% and 11.4%, respectively. Compared to non-helmet users, this gave an odds ratio of 0.36 (CI = 0.21–0.60) for getting head injuries if the cyclists had been using hard shell helmets at the time of the injury, and 0.83 (CI = 0.41–1.67) for users of foam helmets. The odds ratio for getting face injuries was 0.90 (CI = 0.58–1.41) among users of hard shell helmets, and 1.87 (CI = 1.03–3.40) for users of foam helmets. The use of hard shell helmets reduced the risk of getting injuries to the head. Children less than nine years old that used foam helmets had an increased risk of getting face injuries. All bicyclists should be recommended to use hard shell bicycle helmets while cycling.     

Head and neck injuries in fatal motorcycle collisions as determined by detailed autopsy

Detailed layer-by-layer autopsy of the head and neck was performed on a prospective series of 73 fatally injured motorcyclists in order to identify occult injuries, particularly soft tissue neck injuries such as hemorrhage of vertebral and carotid arteries. The fatal cases were gathered as part of a larger study of 1,082 on-scene in-depth motorcycle crash investigations in Thailand. Detailed neck dissection was done on nearly all fatal cases. Injuries were coded using the 1990 revision of the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS 90) and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) was determined for each case. Additional AIS codes are proposed for neck injuries that were often identified during the detailed autopsy procedures, but which are not listed explicitly among existing AIS codes. Helmet use was determined based on analysis of injury patterns and helmet damage with consideration also given to witness statements. Both helmeted and unhelmeted motorcyclists showed a high frequency of occult neck injuries such as hemorrhages in the carotid sheath or surrounding the vertebral arteries, phrenic nerve, or brachial plexus. These soft tissue neck injuries sometimes accompanied more obvious injuries to cervical vertebrae or spinal cord, but about one-third of riders had no obvious injury to suggest the presence of occult neck injury. Twenty-eight motorcyclists had been wearing a helmet at the start of the collision sequence, but only nine helmets remained in place through the entire collision event. Helmeted riders showed more severe somatic (below-the-neck) injuries than unhelmeted riders, suggesting helmeted riders are less likely to die in low-threat accidents with somatic injuries below AIS-3. The most significant finding of this study was the identification of serious internal neck injuries despite the absence of external physical evidence of trauma to the neck. Virtually all riders with significant head injuries showed some of these soft tissue neck injuries. Approximately one-third of the critically injured riders who survived at least a few hours before death showed serious occult soft tissue neck injuries.     

Severity and patterns of injury in helmeted vs. non-helmeted motorcyclists in a rural state

Introduction: Under current law in our rural state, there is no universal requirement for motorcyclists to wear helmets. Roughly 500 motorcycle crashes are reported by the state each year and only a fraction of those riders wear helmets. We sought to determine the difference in injury patterns and severity in helmeted versus non-helmeted riders. Methods: Retrospective review (2014–2018) of a single level 1 trauma center’s registry was done for subjects admitted after a motorcycle collision. Demographic, injury and patient outcome data were collected. Patients were stratified by helmet use (n = 81), no helmet use (n = 144), and unknown helmet use (n = 194). Statistical analysis used Student’s t-test or Pearson’s χ² p-value ≤0.05 as significant. State Department of Transportation data registry for state level mortality and collision incidence over the same time period was also obtained. Results: Of the 2,022 state-reported motorcycle collisions, 419 individuals admitted to our trauma center were analyzed (21% capture). State-reported field fatality rate regardless of helmet use was 4%. Our inpatient mortality rate was 2% with no differences between helmet uses. Helmeted riders were found to have significantly fewer head and face injuries, higher GCS, lower face, neck, thorax and abdomen AIS, fewer required mechanical ventilation, shorter ICU length of stay, and had a greater number of upper extremity injuries and higher upper extremity AIS. Conclusions: Helmeted motorcyclists have fewer head, face, and cervical spine injuries, and lower injury severities: GCS and face, neck, thorax, abdomen AIS. Helmeted riders had significantly less mechanical ventilation requirement and shorter ICU stays. Non-helmeted riders sustained worse injuries. Practical Applications: Helmets provide safety and motorcycle riders have a 34-fold higher risk of death following a crash. Evaluating injury severities and patterns in motorcycle crash victims in a rural state with no helmet laws may provide insight into changing current legislation.     

Motorcycle helmets and spinal cord injury: helmet usage and type

The objective of this study was to assess the role of helmets and helmet type in relation to injury to the cervical spinal cord. It was based on a consecutive series of 110 motorcyclists with neurological damage to the spinal cord admitted alive (referred to as acute survivors) to a specialist spinal cord injuries unit at an Australian hospital. Cases were those with injury to the cervical spinal cord and controls were those with injury to the cord of other segments of the spine. The study showed that there was no significant difference in the odds of cervical spinal cord injury among unhelmeted and helmeted motorcyclist acute survivors. In addition, it confirmed the findings of a recently published Australian fatality study demonstrating no difference in the odds of cervical spinal cord injury among full-face and open-face helmet wearers. These results contrasted with the findings of earlier studies. In consideration of the limitations of existing research on the role of helmets in spinal cord injury, further study is required based on a larger series or a series having a higher proportion of non-wearers and open-face helmet wearers, including both survivors and those killed, and including assessment of cord and non-cord spinal injuries separately, helmet type, head impact, and helmet retention.     

Bicycle helmet effectiveness is not overstated

Objective: The objective of this study was to discuss the challenges in estimating bicycle helmet effectiveness from case–control studies of injured cyclists and to estimate helmet effectiveness from cases and available exposure data.

Methods: Data were extracted from studies of cyclists in Seattle; Victoria and New South Wales, Australia; and The Netherlands. Estimates of helmet use were used as exposure to compute relative risks for Seattle and Victorian data. Cycling distance data are routinely collected in The Netherlands; however, these data cannot be disaggregated by helmet use, which makes it unsuitable for estimating helmet effectiveness. Alternative controls were identified from larger cohorts for the Seattle and New South Wales cases.

Results: Estimates of helmet effectiveness were similar from odds ratios (ORs) using hospital controls or from relative risks (RRs) using helmet use estimates (Seattle: OR = 0.339, RR = 0.444; Victoria: OR = 0.500, RR = 0.353). Additionally, the odds ratios using hospital controls were similar when controls were taken from a larger cohort for head injury of any severity (Seattle: OR = 0.250, alt OR = 0.257; NSW: OR = 0.446, alt OR = 0.411) and for serious head injury (Seattle: OR = 0.135, alt OR = 0.139; NSW: OR = 0.335, alt OR = 0.308). Although relevant exposure data were unavailable for The Netherlands, the odds ratio for helmet effectiveness of those using racing, mountain, or hybrid bikes was similar to other estimates (OR = 0.371).

Conclusions: Despite potential weaknesses with case–control study designs, the best available evidence suggests that helmet use is an effective measure of reducing cycling head injury.     

The effect of the Swedish bicycle helmet law for children: An interrupted time series study

BackgroundPrevious population-based research has shown that bicycle helmet laws can reduce head injury rates among cyclists. According to deterrence theory, such laws are mainly effective if there is a high likelihood of being apprehended. In this study, we investigated the effect of the Swedish helmet law for children under the age of 15, a population that cannot be fined.MethodAn interrupted time series design was used. Monthly inpatient data on injured cyclists from 1998–2012, stratified by age (0–14, 15 +), sex, and injury diagnosis, was obtained from the National Patient Register. The main outcome measure was the proportion of head injury admissions per month. Intervention effect estimates were obtained using generalized autoregressive moving average (GARMA) models. Pre-legislation trend and seasonality was adjusted for, and differences-in-differences estimation was obtained using adults as a non-equivalent control group.ResultsThere was a statistically significant intervention effect among male children, where the proportion of head injuries dropped by 7.8 percentage points. There was no evidence of an intervention effect on the proportion of head injuries among female children.ConclusionAccording to hospital admission data, the bicycle helmet law appears to have had an effect only on male children.Practical applicationsThis study, while quasi-experimental and thus not strictly generalizable, can contribute to increased knowledge regarding the effects of bicycle helmet laws.     

Reality and risk of contact-type head injuries related to bicycle-mounted child seats

Objective

The authors have treated numerous children who have been injured by falling from bicycle-mounted child seats. Despite the greatly increased use of such seats, the understanding of their risk and the importance of helmet use remains alarmingly poor. The objective of this study was to confirm the risk of bicycle-mounted child seats and to evaluate the efficacy of helmets, seat belts, and back seat height in terms of preventing or mitigating contact-type head impacts that occur in falls from bicycle-mounted child seats.

Materials and methods

Biometrical dummy tests were performed to examine contact-type head injuries in falls from stationary bicycles. A bicycle with an anthropometric test dummy placed in a bicycle-mounted child seat was tipped over. Each test was repeated three times and three-dimensional acceleration was measured using accelerometer. Head Injury Criteria (HIC) were calculated and the respective influences of a helmet, a seat belt, and increased height of the back of the seat on such impacts were evaluated.

Results

Only helmets unequivocally lowered maximal acceleration and/or HIC values with statistical significance. The seat belt lowered HIC values as long as it was used with the high-back seat. Only when the dummy wore a helmet sitting in a high-back seat did the HIC show less than the threshold of 570 for three-year-old children. The HIC showed the lowest score of 161.5 when the dummy wore both a helmet and a seat belt sitting in a high-back seat.

Conclusions

Riders in bicycle-mounted child seats definitely have higher risks of contact-type head injuries. In transporting a child on a bicycle-mounted child seat, parents must use both a child-bicycle helmet and a high-back child seat at least; a seat belt is highly recommended as long as it is used with the other safety devices.

Impact on Industry

The bicycle-mounted child seat should have a high enough back and an appropriate seat belt to protect the head of the child from a contact-type injury.     

Predicting bicycle helmet wearing intentions and behavior among adolescents

INTRODUCTION: Cycling accidents in Australia, especially those resulting in head injuries, are a substantive cause of death and disability; but despite legislation and evidence that helmets reduce the risk of head injury, few adolescents wear them. METHOD: This study employed a revised version of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB; [Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211]) to investigate the determinants of helmet use among a sample of adolescents. Participants in the initial data collection were 294 high school students in Year 8 and Year 11, with 266 completing a follow-up questionnaire measuring behavior over the previous two weeks. RESULTS: Social norms, perceptions of control, and past behavior significantly predicted intentions to use helmets and perceptions of control and past behavior predicted actual helmet use. CONCLUSIONS: Strengthening the routine of helmet use and building young people's confidence that they can overcome any perceived barriers to helmet use will improve adherence to helmet wearing behavior.     

Influence of ATD versus PMHS reference sensor inputs on computational brain response in frontal impacts to advanced combat helmet (ACH)

ABSTRACT

Objective: This study analyzed the influence of reference sensor inputs from anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) versus postmortem human subjects (PMHSs) on simulations of frontal blunt impacts to the advanced combat helmet (ACH).

Methods: A rigid-arm pendulum was used to generate frontal impacts to ACHs mounted on ATDs and PMHS. An appropriately sized ACH was selected according to standard fitting guidelines. The National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) head was selected for ATD tests due to shape features that enabled a realistic helmet fit. A custom procedure was used to mount a reference sensor internally near the center of gravity (CG) of the PMHS. Reference sensor data from the head CG were used as inputs for the Simulated Injury Monitor (SIMon). Brain responses were assessed with the cumulative strain damage measure set at 10%, or CSDM(10).

Results: Compared to ATD tests, PMHS tests produced 18.7% higher peak linear accelerations and 5.2% higher peak angular velocities. Average times to peak for linear accelerations were relatively similar between ATDs (5.5?ms) and PMHSs (5.8?ms). However, times to peak for angular velocities were higher by a factor of up to 3.4 for PMHSs compared to ATDs. Values for were also higher by a factor of up to 13.1 when PMHS inputs were used for SIMon.

Conclusions: The preliminary findings of this work indicate that small differences in ATD versus PMHS head kinematics could lead to large differences in strain-derived brain injury metrics such as CSDM.     

A new laboratory rig for evaluating helmets subject to oblique impacts

Current requirements and regulations governing motorcycle helmets around the world are based on test results of purely radial impacts, which are statistically rare in real accidents. This study presents a new impact rig for subjecting test helmets to oblique impacts, which therefore is able to test impacts of increased statistical relevance to real motorcycle accidents. A number of different head-helmet interfaces have been investigated. A test rig was constructed to produce oblique impacts to helmets simulating those occurring in real motorcycle accidents. A Hybrid III dummy head was fitted with accelerometers to measure the accelerations arising during impact testing. The equipment used for data collection was validated in both translational and rotational acceleration. In order to better resemble the human head, an artificial scalp was fitted to the hybrid dummy. The same test rig was used to investigate the performance of a number of different helmets. Impact velocities ranging from 7.3 to 9.9 m/s were tested using a number of different impact angles and impact areas. This study shows that the new test rig can be used to provide useful data at speeds of up to 50 km/h and with impact angles varying from purely tangential to purely radial. The rotational accelerations observed differ greatly depending on both helmet and scalp designs. For example, a helmet with a sliding outer shell placed on an experimental head fitted with an artificial scalp (made to resemble the human scalp) reduces rotational accelerations of the head by up to 56%, compared with those of an experimental head fitted with a fixed scalp and conventional helmet. The degree of slippage between the skull and the scalp, and between the scalp and the helmet, leads to considerable variation in the results. This innovative test rig appears to provide an accurate method for measuring accelerations in an oblique impact to a helmet. In order to obtain a good level of repeatability in oblique impact testing, it is crucial that the helmet be fixed to the head in the exact same way in each individual test. Both the position and the angle of impact must be reproduced identically in each test. The test rig used here has shown that this type of rig can be used to compare different helmet designs, and it therefore is able to contribute to achieving safer helmets.     

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.     

Seat properties affecting neck responses in rear crashes: a reason why whiplash has increased

Whiplash has increased over the past two decades. This study compares occupant dynamics with three different seat types (two yielding and one stiff) in rear crashes. Responses up to head restraint contact are used to describe possible reasons for the increase in whiplash as seat stiffness increased in the 1980s and 1990s. Three exemplar seats were defined by seat stiffness (k) and frame rotation stiffness (j) under occupant load. The stiff seat had k=40 kN/m and j=1.8 degrees /kN representing a foreign benchmark. One yielding seat had k=20 kN/m and j=1.4 degrees /kN simulating a high-retention seat. The other had k=20 kN/m and j=3.4 degrees /kN simulating a typical yielding seat of the 1980s and 1990s. Constant vehicle acceleration for 100 ms gave delta-V of 6, 10, 16, 24, and 35 km/h. The one-dimensional model included a torso mass loading the seatback, head motion through a flexible neck, and head restraint drop and rearward displacement with seatback rotation. Neck displacement was greatest with the stiff seat due to higher loads on the torso. It peaked at 10 km/h rear delta-V and was lower in higher-severity crashes. It averaged 32% more than neck displacements with the 1980s yielding seat. The high-retention seat had 67% lower neck displacements than the stiff seat because of yielding into the seatback, earlier head restraint contact and less seatback rotation, which involved 16 mm drop in head restraint height due to seatback rotation in the 16 km/h rear delta-V. This was significantly lower than 47 mm with the foreign benchmark and 73 mm with the 1980s yielding seat. Early in the crash, neck responses are proportional to ky/mT, seat stiffness times vehicle displacement divided by torso mass, so neck responses increase with seat stiffness. The trend toward stiffer seats increased neck responses over the yielding seats of the 1980s and 1990s, which offers one explanation for the increase in whiplash over the past two decades. This is a result of not enough seat suspension compliance as stronger seat frames were introduced. As seat stiffness has increased, so have neck displacements and the Neck Injury Criterion (NIC). High-retention seats reduce neck biomechanical responses by allowing the occupant to displace into the seatback at relatively low torso loads until head restraint contact and then transferring crash energy. High-retention seats resolve the historic debate between stiff (rigid) and yielding seats by providing both a strong frame (low j) for occupant retention and yielding suspension (low k) to reduce whiplash.     

A methodology for assessing blast protection in explosive ordnance disposal bomb suits.

To reduce human casualties associated with explosive ordnance disposal, a wide range of protective wear has been designed to shield against the blast effects of improvised explosive devices and munitions. In this study, 4 commercially available bomb suits, representing a range of materials and armor masses, were evaluated against 0.227 and 0.567 kg of spherical C-4 explosives to determine the level of protection offered to the head, neck, and thorax. A Hybrid III dummy, an instrumented human surrogate [1], was tested with and without protection from the 4 commercially available bomb suits. 20 tests with the dummy torso mounted to simulate a kneeling position were performed to confirm repeatability and robustness of the dummies, as well as to evaluate the 4 suits. Correlations between injury risk assessments based on past human or animal injury model data and various parameters such as bomb suit mass, projected area, and dummy coverage area were drawn.     

A Methodology for Assessing Blast Protection in Explosive Ordnance Disposal Bomb Suits

To reduce human casualties associated with explosive ordnance disposal, a wide range of protective wear has been designed to shield against the blast effects of improvised explosive devices and munitions. In this study, 4 commercially available bomb suits, representing a range of materials and armor masses, were evaluated against 0.227 and 0.567 kg of spherical C-4 explosives to determine the level of protection offered to the head, neck, and thorax.

A Hybrid III dummy, an instrumented human surrogate [1], was tested with and without protection from the 4 commercially available bomb suits. 20 tests with the dummy torso mounted to simulate a kneeling position were performed to confirm repeatability and robustness of the dummies, as well as to evaluate the 4 suits. Correlations between injury risk assessments based on past human or animal injury model data and various parameters such as bomb suit mass, projected area, and dummy coverage area were drawn.     

Changes in motorcycle-related injuries and deaths after mandatory motorcycle helmet law in a district of Vietnam

Objective: Our study measured the change in head injuries and deaths among motorcycle users in Cu Chi district, a suburban district of Ho Chi Minh City.

Methods: Hospital records for road traffic injuries (RTIs) were collected from the Cu Chi Trauma Centre and motorcycle-related death records were obtained from mortality registries in commune health offices. Head injury severity was categorized using the Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS). Rate ratios (RRs) were used to compare rates pre- and post-law (2005/2006–2009/2010). Cu Chi's population, stratified by year, age, and sex, was used as the denominator.

Results: Of records identifying the transportation mode at the time of injury, motorcyclists accounted for most injuries (3,035, 87%) and deaths (238, 90%). Head injuries accounted for 70% of motorcycle-related hospitalizations. Helmet use was not recorded in any death records and not in 97% of medical records. Males accounted for most injuries (73%) and deaths (88%). The median age was 28 years and 32 years for injuries and deaths, respectively. Compared to the pre-law period, rates of motorcycle injuries (RR = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49–0.58), head injuries (RR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.31–0.39), severe head injuries (RR = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34–0.63), and deaths (RR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53–0.89) significantly decreased in the post-law period.

Conclusions: Rates of head injuries and deaths among motorcycle riders decreased significantly after implementation of the mandatory helmet law in Vietnam. To further examine the impact of the motorcycle helmet law, including compliance and helmet quality, further emphasis should be placed on gathering helmet use data from injured motorcyclists.     

Analysis of injury mechanism of the elderly and non-elderly groups in minor motor vehicle accidents

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to investigate the injury patterns of noncatastrophic accidents by individual age groups.

Methods: Data were collected from the Korean In-Depth Accident Study database based on actual accident investigation. The noncatastrophic criteria were classified according to U.S. experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendations for field triage guidelines of high-risk automobile crash criteria by vehicle intrusions more than 12 in. on occupant sites (including the roof) and more than 18 in. on any site. The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) was used to determine injury patterns for each body region. Severely injured patients were classified as Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) 3 or higher.

Results: In this study, the most significant injury regions were the head and neck, extremities, and thorax. In addition, the incidence of severe injury among elderly patients was nearly 1.6 times higher than that of non-elderly patients. According to age group, injured body regions among the elderly were the thorax, head and neck, and extremities, in that order. For the non-elderly groups, these were head and neck, extremities, and thorax. Severe injury rates were slightly different for the elderly group (head and neck, abdomen) and non-elderly group (thorax, head and neck).

Conclusions: In both age groups, the rate of severe injury is proportional to an increase in crush extent zone. Front airbag deployment may have a relatively significant relationship to severe injuries.     

Factors associated with motorcycle traffic crash fatalities among active duty U.S. Army personnel

Objective: Research on factors associated with motorcycle fatalities among active duty U.S. Army personnel is limited. This analysis describes motorcycle crash–related injuries from 1995 through 2014 and assesses the effect of alcohol use and helmet use on the risk of fatal injury among active duty U.S. Army motorcycle operators involved in a traffic crash, controlling for other factors shown to be potentially associated with fatality in this population.

Methods: Demographics, crash information, and injury data were obtained from safety reports maintained in the Army Safety Management Information System. Traffic crashes were defined as crashes occurring on a paved public or private roadway or parking area, including those on a U.S. Army installation. Analysis was limited to motorcycle operators. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) from a multivariable analysis estimated the effect of alcohol use and helmet use on the risk of a fatal injury given a crash occurred, controlling for operator and crash characteristics.

Results: Of the 2,852 motorcycle traffic crashes, most involved men (97%), operators aged 20–29 years of age (60%), and operators who wore helmets (95%) and did not use alcohol (92%). Two thirds of reported crashes resulted in injuries requiring a lost workday; 17% resulted in fatality. Controlling for operator and crash characteristics, motorcycle traffic crashes involving operators who had used alcohol had a 3.1 times higher odds of fatality than those who did not use alcohol (OR =3.14; 95% CI, 2.17–4.53). Operators who did not wear a helmet had 1.9 times higher odds of fatality than those who did wear a helmet (OR =1.89; 95% CI, 1.24–2.89).

Conclusions: Among U.S. Army motorcycle operators, alcohol use and not wearing a helmet increased the odds of fatality, given that a crash occurred, and additional modifiable risk factors were identified. Results will help inform U.S. Army motorcycle policies and training.