Filtern
Schlagworte
- Conference (3) (entfernen)
Who doesn't wear seat belts?
(2009)
Using real world accident data, seat belts were estimated to be 61% effective at preventing fatalities, and 32% effective at preventing serious injuries. They were most effective for drivers with an airbag. Seat belts were estimated as having prevented 57,000 fatalities and 213,000 seriously injured casualties in the UK since 1983. Seat belt legislation was estimated to have prevented 31,000 fatalities and 118,000 seriously injured casualties. A future increase in effective seat belt wearing rate (which takes into account seating position) in the UK from 92.5% to 93% may prevent casualties valued at a societal cost of over -£18 million per year. To target a seat belt campaign, the question "who doesn"t wear seat belts?" must be answered. Seat belt wearing rates and the number of unbelted casualties were analysed. It was primarily young adult males who didn"t wear seat belts, and they made up the majority of unbelted fatalities and seriously injured casualties.
Impact severity is a fundamental measure for all in-depth crash investigation projects. One methodology used in the UK is based on the US Calspan software package CRASH3. The UK- in-depth crash investigation studies routinely use AiDamage3 a software package which is based on an updated version of the original CRASH3 algorithm, including enhancements to the vehicle stiffness coefficients. Real world accident-damaged vehicles are measured and their crush is correlated with a library of stiffness coefficients. These measurements are then used, along with other parameters, to calculate the crash energy and equivalent changes of velocity of the vehicles (delta-v), which is a measure of the impact severity. UK in-depth accident studies routinely validate the crash severity methodologies applied as the vehicle fleet changes. This is achieved by analysing crash test data and using the appropriate residual crush damage and other inputs to AiDamage3 and checking the program- outputs with the known crash severity parameters. This procedure checks, at least in part, the default stiffness values in the data libraries and the reconstruction methods used.
The aim of this study is to investigate the differences in car occupant injury severity recorded in AIS 2005 compared to AIS 1990 and to outline the likely effects on future data analysis findings. Occupant injury data in the UK Cooperative Crash Injury Study Database (CCIS) were coded for the period February 2006 to November 2007 using both AIS 1990 and AIS 2005. Data for 1,994 occupants with over 6000 coded injuries were reviewed at the AIS and MAIS level of severities and body regions to determine changes between the two coding methodologies. Overall there was an apparent general trend for fewer injuries to be coded at the AIS 4+ severity and more injuries to be coded at the AIS 2 severity. When these injury trends were reviewed in more detail it was found that the body regions which contributed the most to these changes in severity were the head, thorax and extremities. This is one of the first studies to examine the implications for large databases when changing to an updated method for coding injuries.