The Journal of surgical research · 2019
Unhelmeted Motorcycle Riders Have Increased Injury Burden: A Need to Revisit Universal Helmet Laws.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Patel Parth B, Staley Christopher A, Runner Robert, Mehta Samir, Schenker Mara L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare hospital outcomes for patients in a motorcycle collision with and without helmet use. The study was conducted as a retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank's 2013 data set, which included reported data from 100 hospitals across the United States.
METHODS: Inclusion criterion for this study is a motorcycle crash involving a driver or passenger. The total number of patients in motorcycle crashes as reported by the National Trauma Data Bank in 2013 was 10,345. Helmet use, hospital stay, ICU and ventilation days, mortality, Glasgow Coma Score, Injury Severity Score, patient payer mix, and complication data were obtained.
RESULTS: Patients were divided into two groups: those wearing a helmet (n = 6250) and those without (n = 4095). Patients not wearing a helmet had an increased risk of admission to the ICU (OR = 1.36, P < 0.001, CI 1.25-1.48), requiring ventilation support (OR = 1.55, P < 0.001, CI 1.39-1.72), presenting with a Glasgow Coma Score of eight or below (OR = 2.15, P < 0.001), and in-patient mortality (OR = 2.00, P < 0.001, CI 1.58-2.54). Unhelmeted patients were more likely to have government insurance or be uninsured than those patients wearing a helmet (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: It is not well understood why many states are repealing or have repealed universal helmet laws. Lack of helmet use increases the severity of injury in traumatized patients leading to a substantial financial impact on health care costs. Our analysis suggests the need to revisit the issue regarding laws that require protective headwear while riding motorcycles because of the individual and societal impact.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
METHODS: Inclusion criterion for this study is a motorcycle crash involving a driver or passenger. The total number of patients in motorcycle crashes as reported by the National Trauma Data Bank in 2013 was 10,345. Helmet use, hospital stay, ICU and ventilation days, mortality, Glasgow Coma Score, Injury Severity Score, patient payer mix, and complication data were obtained.
RESULTS: Patients were divided into two groups: those wearing a helmet (n = 6250) and those without (n = 4095). Patients not wearing a helmet had an increased risk of admission to the ICU (OR = 1.36, P < 0.001, CI 1.25-1.48), requiring ventilation support (OR = 1.55, P < 0.001, CI 1.39-1.72), presenting with a Glasgow Coma Score of eight or below (OR = 2.15, P < 0.001), and in-patient mortality (OR = 2.00, P < 0.001, CI 1.58-2.54). Unhelmeted patients were more likely to have government insurance or be uninsured than those patients wearing a helmet (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: It is not well understood why many states are repealing or have repealed universal helmet laws. Lack of helmet use increases the severity of injury in traumatized patients leading to a substantial financial impact on health care costs. Our analysis suggests the need to revisit the issue regarding laws that require protective headwear while riding motorcycles because of the individual and societal impact.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.