Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (12)
- Buch (Monographie) (10)
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (6)
- Arbeitspapier (1)
Schlagworte
- Schutzhelm (29) (entfernen)
Institut
Anhand von zwei verschiedenen Versuchskonfigurationen wurde das Schutzpotential von Kopfschutzsystemen (Fahrradhelm und airbagbasiertes System) untersucht. Hierbei wurden die resultierende Kopfbeschleunigung als Messwert sowie das Kopfverletzungskriterium HIC bei Versuchen ohne und mit Kopfschutzsystem vergleichend gegenübergestellt.
Nach wie vor ist die Anzahl von Unfällen motorisierter Einspurfahrzeuge (MESFz) mit sehr schweren Verletzungsfolgen oder tödlichem Ausgang für die Aufsassen im Vergleich zu allen anderen getöteten Verkehrsteilnehmern alarmierend hoch. Im Jahr 2013 wurden bei insgesamt 42.427 Unfällen MESFz 641 Aufsassen getötet und 12.034 schwer verletzt. Um dieser hohen Zahl schwerverletzter und getöteter Aufsassen von MESFz entgegenzuwirken, hat die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (BASt) das vorliegende Projekt initiiert. Zielsetzung des Projektes war es, durch eine Analyse von Unfalldaten von MESFz, durch ergänzende computergestützte FEM-Simulationen und durch eine kritische Bewertung der UN-Regelung UN-R 22/05 (vormals ECE-R 22/05) hinsichtlich verletzungs-biomechanischer Inhalte (Versuche und Prüfwerte) Erkenntnisse zu erarbeiten, Handlungsbedarf festzustellen und Änderungs- und Ergänzungsvorschläge zur Überarbeitung der UN-R 22/05 sowie hinsichtlich allgemeiner Maßnahmen zu formulieren. Auf der Grundlage der amtlichen Unfalldaten des Statistischen Bundesamtes, Wiesbaden (DESTATIS) erfolgte eine Unfalldatenauswertung im Allgemeinen. Für eine detaillierte Analyse wurden Daten der "German In-Depth Accident Study" (GIDAS, Dresden und Hannover) ausgewählt. Bei etwa der Hälfte der im Teilumfang (n=199) untersuchten Unfälle von MESFz kam es zu Kopfverletzungen, überwiegend bei benutztem Schutzhelm. In 18 % lagen die führenden Verletzungen am Kopf; in 48 % blieb der Kopf unverletzt bei sonstigen schweren bis schwersten und tödlichen Verletzungen am Körper. Etwa 10 % der Aufsassen benutzten ein MESFz ohne bzw. mit absolut ungeeignetem Helm. Eine kritische Bewertung und Alternativvorschläge der derzeitigen Fassung der UN-R 22/05 wurden bezüglich der Punkte Prüfumfang, Prüfausstattung, Prüfdurchführung, Prüfkriterien und eine fälschungssicheren Homologations-Kennzeichnung erarbeitet.
Within the COST Action TU1101 the working group WG 1 is dealing with acceptance criteria and problems in helmet use while bicycling concerning conspicuity, thermal stress, ventilation deficits and other potential confounding. To analyze the helmet usage practice of bicyclists in Europe a questionnaire was developed in the scope of working group 1 to collect relevant information by means of a field study. The questionnaire consists of some 66 questions covering the fields of personal data of the cyclist, riding und helmet usage habits, information concerning the helmet model and the sensation of the helmet, as well as information on previous bicycle accidents. A second complementary study is conducted to analyze if the use of a bicycle helmet influences the seating geometry and the posture of cyclists when riding a bicycle and if the if the helmet vertically limits the vision. For this purpose cyclists with and without helmets were photographed in real world situations and relevant geometrical values such as the decline of the torso, the head posture of the upper vertical vision limit due to the helmet were established from the photos. The interim results of the field studies which were conducted in Germany by the Hannover Medical School are presented in this study. Some 227 questionnaires were filled out, of which 67 participants had used a helmet and 42 of the 227 participants have had a bicycle accident before. For the analysis of the riding position and posture of the cyclist over 40 pictures of riders with a helmet and over 240 pictures of riders without a helmet were measured concerning the seating geometry to describe the influence of using a bicycle helmet. Some results in summary: From the riders interviewed with the questionnaire only 11% of the city bike riders and 12% of the mountain bike riders always used the helmet, while 38% of the racing bike riders and 88% of the e-bike-riders always used the helmet. The helmet use seems not to change the sensation of safety of cycling compared to the use of a car. The arguments for not wearing a helmet are mostly stated to be the short distance of a trip, high temperatures or carelessness and waste of time. The reasons for using a helmet are stated to be the feeling of safety and being used to using a helmet. Being a role model for others was also stated to be a reason for helmet use. Concerning the sensation of the helmet 9% of the riders reported problems with the field of vision when using a helmet, 57% saw the problem of sweating too much, and 10% reported headaches or other unpleasant symptoms like pressure on the forehead when using the helmet. The analysis of the seating posture from the pictures taken of cyclists revealed that older cyclists generally have a riding position where the handle bar is higher than the seat (0-° to 10-° incline from seat to handlebar), while younger riders had a higher variance (between -10-° decline and 20-° incline). Further, elderly riders and riders with helmets seem to have a more upright position of the upper body when cycling. The vertical vision limit due to the helmet is determined by the front rim of the helmet (mostly the sun shade). Typical values here range from 0-° (horizontal line from the eye to the sun shade) to 75-° upwards, in which elderly riders tend to have a slightly higher vertical vision limit possibly due to the helmet being worn more towards the face.
Cycle helmets have continued to increase in popularity since their introduction half a century ago. Many studies indicate that overall, head injury can be significantly reduced by wearing them. This study was conducted using two distinct sets of real-world cycling collision data from Ireland, namely cases involving police collision reports and cases involving admission to a hospital emergency department. The analyses sought to simulate and analyse the protective performance of cycle helmets in such collision scenarios, by comparing the Head Injury Criterion score and peak head accelerations, both linear and angular. Cycle collisions were simulated using the specialised commercial software MADYMO. From the simulation results, these key metrics were compared between the same-scenario helmeted and unhelmeted cyclist models. Results showed that the inclusion of bicycle helmets reduced linear accelerations very significantly, but also increased angular accelerations significantly compared to unhelmeted situations. Given the modest protective performance of cycle helmets against angular accelerations, it is recommended that cycle helmet manufacturers and international test standards need to pay more attention to head angular accelerations.
Recent accident statistics from the German national database state bicyclists being the second endangered group of vulnerable road users besides pedestrians. With 399 fatalities, more than 14.000 seriously injured and more than 61.000 slightly injured persons on german roads in the year 2011, the group of bicyclists is ranked second of all road user groups (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2012). While the overall bicycle helmet usage frequency in Germany is very low, evidence is given that its usage leads to a significant reduction of severe head injuries. After an estimation of the benefit of bicycle helmet usage as well as an appropriate test procedure for bicyclists, this paper describes two different approaches for the improvement of bicyclist safety. While the first one is focusing on the assessment of the vehicle based protection potential for bicyclists, the second one is concentrating on the safety assessment of bicycle helmets. Within the first part of the study the possible revision of the existing pedestrian testing protocols is being examined, using in depth accident data, full scale simulation and hardware testing. Within the second part of the study, the results of tests according to supplemental test procedures for the safety assessment of bicycle helmets developed by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) are presented. An additional full scale test performed at reduced impact speed proves that measures of active vehicle safety as e.g. braking before the collision event do not necessarily always lead to a reduction of injury severity.
An increased use of bicycles comes along with an increased number of bicycle accidents. Bicycle accidents are more frequent than recorded by the police. To evaluate the real number of bicycle accidents during 12 months in Münster, Germany, injuries were collected by the Police and in each emergency unit anonymously. 2,153 patients had to be treated in a hospital, nearly triple the number of accidents that were registered by the police. Beside fractures of the upper extremities with major surgery, traumatic brain injuries were the leading cause for hospital admission. Bicycle helmet use can reduce traumatic brain injuries and the related number of deaths and hospital admissions. Laws on bicycle helmet might decrease the use of bicycles and therefore the reduction of positive health benefits. Other methods of accident prevention may lead to positive effects as helmet legislation as well, while having no reduction in bicycle use.
Accidents involving two wheels vehicles represent one of the more important types of accidents in Europe. These accidents are usually not easy to reconstruct specially for the analysis of the injuries and its correlation with accident dynamics and evidences. Different methodologies are applied in this work for the reconstruction of two wheeler accidents, especially accident involving motorcycles. From the typologies of road evidences like skid marks, to the use of Pc-Crash and the use of Madymo models, different reconstruction of real accidents are presented. One of the questions that sometimes arise for legal purposes when some type of head injuries arise is if the occupant was wearing or not a helmet. The correlation of head injuries with the use of the helmet is a very important issue, therefore an important legal aspect. One of the key questions for the reconstructions that is difficult to analyze, is if the vehicle occupant, was or not, wearing the helmet. Based on the previously collected information, a generic model of a helmet was developed on CAD 3D, followed by its conversion into finite elements, all in order to perform impact tests using the Madymo software that would help improve the helmet- safety, but that also can be used as a tool in accident reconstruction.
Aim of the study was to evaluate the protective effect of bicycle helmets particularly considering injuries to the head and to the face. Accidents with the participation of bicyclists which occurred from 2000 to 2007 were chosen from GIDAS. We observed that injuries to the head and face were more severe in the group of non-helmeted riders. There seems to be no significant difference in injuries with AIS 3-6. Altogether 26 cyclists were killed. 2 of them wore a helmet (1% of helmeted cyclists), 24 did not (1% of non-helmeted cyclists). Only one killed rider (without helmet) did not suffer from polytrauma (only head injuries recorded). The findings seem to support the thesis of a preventive effect of the bicycle helmet, however the two groups are different in their characteristics related to riding speed. Necessarily we need a multivariate model to evaluate the effect of helmets.
The purpose of this study was to analyse the actual injury situation of bicyclists regarding accidents involving more than one bicyclist. Bicyclists were included in a medical and technical analysis to create a basis for preventive measures and discovered repeating accident patterns and circumstances such as daytime, environment, helmet use rate. Technical and medical data were collected at the scene, shortly after accident. The population was compared focusing on bicycle versus bicycle accidents. Technical analysis included speed at crash, type of collision, impact angle, environment, used lane and relative velocity. Medical analysis included injury pattern and severity (AIS, ISS). Included were 578 injured bicyclists in 289 accidents from years 1999 to 2008, 61 percent were male (n=350) and 39 percent female (n=228). Sixty-seven percent ranged between 18 to 64 years of age, twelve percent each between 13 to 17 years of age and older than 65 years, eight percent between 6 to 12 years and one percent between 2 to 5 years.. Crashes took place in urban areas in 92 percent, in rural areas in 8 percent. Weather conditions were dry lanes in 97 percent and wet conditions in 3 percent. Eighty-three percent of all accidents happened during daytime, ten percent during night, and seven percent during dawn. The helmet use rate was only 7,5 percent in all involved bicyclists. The mean Maximum Abbreviated injury scale, Injury severity score was 1,31. Bicyclists are still minimally- or unprotected road users. The helmet use rate is unsatisfactorily low. The incidence of bicycle to bicycle crashes is high. Most of these accidents take place in urban areas. The level and pattern of injuries is moderate. Most of the more severe injuries occur to the head and could have been avoided by frequent helmet use.
Die vorliegende Studie betrachtet Profile von Kindern und Jugendlichen im Zusammenhang mit Verkehrsunfällen. Diese Profile werden aus psychologischen, medizinischen und soziodemographischen Merkmalen gebildet. Grundlage der vorliegenden Analyse bildet ein vom Robert-Koch-Institut durchgeführter Gesundheitssurvey ("KiGGS"-Studie), der repräsentativ für die Wohnbevölkerung der 0- bis 17-Jährigen in Deutschland ist. In drei Untersuchungsjahren (2003 - 2006) haben insgesamt 17.641 Kinder und Jugendliche an dieser Studie teilgenommen. Erfasst wurde lediglich der letzte Unfall, der sich innerhalb eines Zeitraumes von 12 Monaten ereignet hat und ärztlich behandelt wurde. Dabei war der Verkehrsunfall nur eine von mehreren möglichen Unfallarten wie zum Beispiel ein Sturz, eine Verbrennung oder eine Verletzung mit einem scharfen Gegenstand. Von dieser Voraussetzung ausgehend, sind die berechneten Unfallprävalenzen als Mindestprävalenzen zu interpretieren. Zum Unfallereignis selbst liegen Angaben zur Verkehrsteilnahme (zum Beispiel als Pkw-Insasse, Radfahrer), zur Art der Verletzung und zu Krankenhausaufenthalten vor. Darüber hinaus enthält der Datensatz Angaben über die Helmbenutzung beim Radfahren, Skaten oder Rollerfahren sowie über das Tragen von Knie- und Armschonern beim Fahren von Inline-Skates. Die Analyse ergab, dass mindestens 0,6 % der Kinder von 1 - 14 Jahren pro Jahr bei einem Verkehrsunfall auf einem öffentlichen Verkehrsweg verletzt werden. Mindestens 0,4 % der Kinder von 1 - 14 Jahren werden pro Jahr bei einem Verkehrsunfall auf einem öffentlichen Verkehrsweg durch Eigenmobilität verletzt. Das ist mehr als doppelt so hoch als durch die amtliche Unfallstatistik ausgewiesen. Knapp 57 % der Kinder tragen nach Angaben der Eltern einen Fahrradhelm. Bei den 11- bis 17-Jährigen sind es lediglich 27 %. Nach eigenen Angaben der befragten 11- bis 17-Jährigen tragen lediglich 23,5 % einen Fahrradhelm. Die in der "KiGGS"-Studie des Robert-Koch-Instituts ermittelten Helmtragequoten liegen erheblich höher als die im Realverkehr erhobenen Quoten der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (BASt). Dies spiegelt möglicherweise den grundsätzlichen Unterschied zwischen Verhaltensbereitschaft (KiGGS) und tatsächlichem Verhalten in einer konkreten Situation (BASt) wider. Bei den Profilen verunglückter Kinder und Jugendlicher ergaben sich durch eine Clusteranalyse 4 Gruppen von Kindern/Jugendlichen, die sich hinsichtlich psychologischer, medizinischer sowie sozioökonomischer und demographischer Merkmale signifikant von einander unterscheiden. Ein Unterschied besteht ebenfalls im Hinblick auf die Unfallgefährdung bei Eigenmobilität. Die Gruppen wurden folgendermaßen benannt: "Der Teenager" (der ältere Unauffällige): 34 % der Kinder und Jugendlichen mit einer Unfallbeteiligung von 1,1 %; "Der Ausgeglichene" (der jüngere Unauffällige): 30 % der Kinder und Jugendlichen mit einer Unfallbeteiligung von 0,5 %; "Der Gebremste" (der jüngere Auffällige): 21 % der Kinder und Jugendlichen mit einer Unfallbeteiligung von 1,1 %; Der "Ungezügelte" (der ältere Auffällige): 15 % der Kinder und Jugendlichen mit einer Unfallbeteiligung von 1,6 %. Die Ergebnisse dieser Studie begründen die generelle Empfehlung, die zukünftige Forschung und Verkehrssicherheitsarbeit vermehrt auf die unterschiedlichen Gruppen von Kindern und Jugendlichen auszurichten. Darüber hinaus fügen sich diese Ergebnisse als ein wichtiger Baustein in eine komplexe, gesamtgesellschaftliche Strategie zur Erhöhung der Kindergesundheit ein.