Sonstige
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (101)
- Buch (Monographie) (20)
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (4)
- Arbeitspapier (1)
Schlagworte
- Injury (126) (entfernen)
Institut
- Sonstige (126) (entfernen)
Bicyclists are minimally or unprotected road users. Their vulnerability results in a high injury risk despite their relatively low own speed. However, the actual injury situation of bicyclists has not been investigated very well so far. The purpose of this study was to analyze the actual injury situation of bicyclists in Germany to create a basis for effective preventive measures. Technical and medical data were prospectively collected shortly after the accident at the accident scenes and medical institutions providing care for the injured. Data of injured bicyclists from 1985 to 2003 were analyzed for the following parameters: collision opponent, collision type, collision speed (km/h), Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS), Maximum AIS (MAIS), incidence of polytrauma (Injury Severity Score >16), incidence of death (death before end of first hospital stay). 4,264 injured bicyclists were included. 55% were male and 45% female. The age was grouped to preschool age in 0.9%, 6 to 12 years in 10.8%, 13 to 17 years in 10.4%, 18 to 64 years in 64.7%, and over 64 years in 13.2%. The MAIS was 1 in 78.8%, 2 in 17.0%, 3 in 3.0%, 4 in 0.6%, 5 in 0.4%, and 6 in 0.2%. The incidence of polytrauma was 0.9%, and the incidence of death was 0.5%. The incidence of injuries to different body regions was as follows: head, 47.8%; neck, 5.2%, thorax, 21%; upper extremities, 46.3%; abdomen, 5.8%; pelvis, 11.5%, lower extremities, 62.1%. The accident location was urban in 95.2%, and rural in 4.8%. The accidents happened during daylight in 82.4%, during night in 12.2%, and during dawn/dusk in 5.3%. The road situation was as follows: straight, 27.3%; bend, 3.0%; junction, 32.0%; crossing, 26.4%; gate, 5.9%; others, 5.4%. The collision opponents were cars in 65.8%, trucks in 7.2%, bicycles in 7.4%, standing objects in 8.8%, multiple objects in 4.3%, and others in 6.5%. The collision speed was grouped <31 in 77.9%, 31-50 in 4.9%, 51-70 in 3.7%, and >70 in 1.5%. The helmet use rate was 1.5%. 68% of the registered head injuries were located in the effective helmet protection area. In bicyclists, head and extremities are at high risk for injuries. The helmet use rate is unsatisfactorily low. Remarkably, two thirds of the head injuries could have been prevented by helmets. Accidents are concentrated to crossings, junctions and gates. A significant lower mean injury severity was observed in victims using separate bicycle lanes. These results do strongly support the extension or addition of bicycle lanes and their consequent use. However, the lanes are frequently interrupted at crossings and junctions. This emphasizes also the important endangering of bicyclists coming from crossings, junctions and gates, i.e. all situations in which contact of bicyclists to motorized vehicles is possible. Redesigning junctions and bicycle traffic lanes to minimize the possibility of this dangerous contact would be preventive measures. A more consequent helmet use and use and an extension of bicycle paths for a better separation of bicyclists and motorized vehicle would be simple but very effective preventive measures.
Small overlap frontal crashes are defined by a damage pattern with most of the vehicle deformation concentrated outboard of the main longitudinal structures. These crashes are prominent among frontal crashes resulting in serious and fatal injuries, even among vehicles that perform well in regulatory and consumer information crash tests. One of the critical aspects of understanding these crashes is knowing the crash speeds that cause the types of damage associated with serious injuries. Laboratory crash tests were conducted using 12 vehicles in three small overlap test conditions: pole, vehicle-to-vehicle collinear, and vehicle-to-vehicle oblique (15-degree striking angle). Field reconstruction techniques were used to estimate the delta V for each vehicle, and these results were compared with actual delta V values based on vehicle accelerometer data. Estimated delta Vs were 50% lower than actual values. Velocity change estimates for small overlap frontal crashes in databases such as NASS-CDS significantly underestimate actual values.
The incidence and treatment of sternal fractures among traffic accidents are of increasing importance to ensure best possible outcomes. Analysis of technical indicators of the collision, preclinical and clinical data of patients with sterna fractures from 1985-2004 among 42,055 injured patients were assessed by an Accident Research Unit. Two time groups were categorized: 1985-1994 (A) vs. 1995-2004 (B). 267/42,055 patients (0.64%) suffered a sterna fracture. Regarding the vehicle type, the majority occurred after car accidents in 0.81% (251/31,183 pts), followed by 0.19% (5/2,633pts) driving motorbike, and 0.11% (4/3,258pts) driving a truck. 91% wore a safety belt. Only 13% of all passengers suffering a sternal fracture had an airbag on board (33/255 car/trucks), with an airbag malfunction in 18%. The steering column was deformed in 39%, the steering wheel in 36%. Cars in the recent years were significantly older (7.67-±5 years (B) vs. 5.88-±5 years (A), p=0.003). Cervical spine injuries are frequent (23% vs. 22%), followed by multiple rib fractures (14% vs. 12%) and lung injuries (12% vs. 11%). We found 9/146 (6%) and 3/121 patients (3%) with heart contusion among the 267 sternal fractures. MAIS was 2.56-±1.3 vs. 2.62-±1.3 (A vs. B, p=0.349). 18% of patients were polytraumatized, with 11.2% dying at the scene, 2.3% in the hospital. Sternal fractures occur most often in old cars to seat-belted drivers often without any airbag. Severe multiple rib fractures and lung contusion are concomitant injuries in more than 10% each indicating the severity of the crash. Over a twentyyear period, the injury severity encountered was not different with 18% polytrauma patients suffering sternal fractures.
The bicyclist accidents were analyzed to get better understanding of the occurrences and frequency of the accidents, injury distributions, as well as correlation of injury severity/outcomes with engineering and human factors in two different countries of China and Germany. The accident cases that occurred from 2001 to 2006 were collected from IVAC database in Changsha and GIDAS database in Hannover. Based on specified sampling criteria, 1,570 bicyclist cases were selected from IVAC database in Changsha, and 1806 cases were collected from Hannover, documented in GIDAS database. Statistical analyses were carried out by using these selected data. The results from the statistical analysis are presented and discussed in this study.
To elucidate the risk of pedestrians, bicycle and motorbike users, data of two accident research units from 1999 to 2014 were analysed in regard to demographic data, collision details, preclinical and clinical data using SPSS. 14.295 injured vulnerable road users were included. 92 out of 3610 pedestrians ("P", 2.5%), 90 out of 8307 bicyclists ("B", 1.1%) and 115 out of 4094 motorcycle users ("M", 2.8%) were diagnosed with spinal fractures. Thoracic fractures were most frequent ahead of lumbar and cervical fractures. Car collisions were most frequent mechanism (68, 62 and 36%). MAIS was 3.8, 2.8 and 3.2 for P, B and A with ISS 32, 16 and 23. AIS-head was 2.2, 1.3 and 1.5). Vulnerable road users are at significant risk for spine fractures. These are often associated with severe additional injuries, e.g. the head and a very high overall trauma severity (polytrauma).
Introduction: Spine injuries pose a considerable risk to life and quality of life. The total number of road deaths in developed countries has markedly decreased, e.g. in Germany from over 20000 in 1970 to less than 4000 in 2010, but little is known how this is reflected in the burden of spine fractures of motor vehicle users. In this study, we aimed to show the actual incidence of spine injuries among drivers and front passengers and elucidate possible dependencies between crash mechanisms and types of injuries.
Die Elektromobilität ist nicht erst seit dem Nationalen Entwicklungsplan Elektromobilität der Bundesregierung, der u.a. als Zielsetzung hat, dass eine Million Elektrofahrzeuge bis 2020 auf deutschen Straßen fahren sollen, ein allgegenwärtiges Thema. Eine zu lösende Aufgabe auf dem Weg zu diesem Ziel ist die Betrachtung der Abhängigkeiten der Systeme Elektrofahrzeug, Ladeverbindungseinheit und Ladesystem, welche bisher weitgehend autonom normiert sind. Um Personen- und Sachschäden beim Laden von Fahrzeugen zu vermeiden, ist es möglicherweise erforderlich, Anforderungen an die Sicherheit dieses Gesamtsystems zu definieren. Zu diesem Zweck beauftragte die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen die SGS-TÜV Saar GmbH, Competence Center Funktionale Sicherheit mit der Durchführung einer Risikoanalyse, mit dem Ziel die Sicherheitsaspekte beim Laden eines Elektrofahrzeuges zu untersuchen. Bisher nicht bzw. unzureichend betrachtete Gefährdungen während des Ladevorganges sollten aufgezeigt werden. Nötige Maßnahmen sollten definiert und punktuell mittels Tests validiert werden, um identifizierte Risiken auf ein ausreichend geringes Maß zu senken. Im Kern wurde untersucht, welche potenziellen Risiken (Das Risiko definiert sich als die Beschreibung eines Ereignisses mit der Möglichkeit negativer Auswirkungen. Das Risiko wird allgemein als Produkt aus Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit eines Ereignisses und dessen Konsequenz angesehen. (Quelle: Wikipedia)) beim Laden eines Elektrofahrzeugs auftreten. Auf Basis einer Normenrecherche wurde die Frage beantwortet, an welchen Stellen normativer und gesetzlicher Handlungsbedarf besteht. Dazu wurden die nachfolgenden Schwerpunkte erarbeitet: - Darstellung möglicher sicherheitskritischer Bedingungen beim Laden; - Zuordnung der sicherheitskritischen Bedingungen zu den Subsystemen Infrastruktur, Kabel und Fahrzeug; - Definition von Maßnahmen zur Erhöhung der Sicherheit beim Laden; - Aufzeigen der Zuständigkeiten für die Gewährleistung der Sicherheit; - Offenlegung des regelungsseitigen Bedarfs. Im ersten Schritt wurde eine Risikoanalyse durchgeführt, um die potenziellen Risiken beim Laden eines Elektrofahrzeugs aufzuzeigen. Die Risikoanalyse wurde zunächst ohne Berücksichtigung bereits normativ oder gesetzlich festgelegter Schutzmaßnahmen durchgeführt. Anschließend erfolgte eine iterative Weiterführung der Betrachtung der Risiken in zweierlei Hinsicht: a) Berücksichtigung existierender normativer und/ oder gesetzlicher Anforderungen, welche parallel zur Risikoanalyse recherchiert wurden; b) Beschreibung ergänzender technischer und/ oder organisatorischer Maßnahmen, um nicht abgedeckte Risiken weiter zu reduzieren. Danach wurde eine erneute Beurteilung der Risiken vorgenommen, um aufzuzeigen, ob die vorhandenen bzw. neu definierten Maßnahmen in der Lage sind, das identifizierte Risiko in ausreichendem Maß zu reduzieren. Generell zeigte sich im Rahmen der Risikoanalyse eine breite, durch Normen und Richtlinien bzw. gesetzlichen Regelungen, vorhandene Abdeckung der möglichen Risiken. Derzeit nicht abgedeckte Risiken konnten adressiert und wirksame Lösungsmöglichkeiten vorgeschlagen werden. Bei Umsetzung aller aufgezeigten Lösungsansätze bleiben somit keine relevanten Risiken offen. Jedoch zeigt sich auch, dass zu bestimmten Themen dringender Handlungsbedarf besteht. Als Ergebnis ließ sich zu folgenden Punkten ein konkreter Handlungsbedarf ableiten: - Als eines der Hauptrisiken wurde das Laden an einer haushaltsüblichen Schukosteckdose, ohne die Nutzung einer zusätzlichen in der Ladeleitung integrierten Schutzeinrichtung, identifiziert. Bei Ladeleitungen mit Schutzeinrichtung hängt deren Schutzwirkung nicht zuletzt von einer regelmäßigen technischen Überprüfung ab; - Als relevant wurden weiterhin die elektromagnetischen Felder, die von einer Ladeleitung bei hohen Strömen ausgehen (zukünftige Schnellladesysteme), identifiziert, hier sind tiefergehende Untersuchungen erforderlich; Im Sinne der Risikominimierung sollte auch das maximal zulässige Gewicht der Ladegarnitur limitiert sein; - Auch Risiken, die sich durch die Bedienung ergeben, wurden untersucht. Mit entsprechenden Hinweisen im Bedienungshandbuch des Elektrofahrzeuges kann hier bereits einigen möglichen Gefahren begegnet werden. Dies betrifft unter anderem die Handhabung der Ladegarnitur beim Laden im öffentlichen Raum. Aus den ermittelten, noch umzusetzenden Maßnahmen geht hervor, dass der derzeitige Stand der Normung und gesetzlichen Regelungen noch nicht vollkommen ausreichend ist, um alle ermittelten und aufgezeigten Risiken in ausreichendem Maße zu reduzieren. Aus den Ergebnissen der Studie wird aber auch deutlich, dass die Sicherheit nicht alleine von einem Teilsystem alleine, sondern vielmehr durch das sichere Zusammenwirken aller Teile, auch in Kombination mit dem Verhalten der Nutzer und partizipierender Personen, gewährleistet wird.
The so-called "seat-belt injuries" or "seat-belt syndromes", described as 2-point seat-belt injuries, contain heavy inflection injuries of the lumbal spinal column, combined with heavy abdominal injuries as rupture of the upper intestinal bold or heavy injuries of the upper entrails. With "playing" children in the font of the car, with inappropriate plant of 3-point belts, identical injuries can occur.
In Germany averagely two million traffic accidents happen each year and emergency medical services are called to more than 400 000 patients. Even though this number is decreasing continuously (due to improvements in the fields of vehicle safety, road construction, and accident prevention) every case is yet a challenge for the rescuers and requires improvements in emergency medicine as well. Especially during diagnostics right at the accident scene, there are only limited instruments available to gain the necessary knowledge of the injuries suffered, to come to essential decisions about treatment or transport. To provide an additional diagnostic aid by scouting and estimating the situation, a software-tool calculating the likeliness of the most frequent severe injuries (AIS 3-6) of front occupants in passenger cars has been developed to deliver this necessary information about particular accident scenarios. To achieve this, logistic likelihood functions have been calculated in a multivariate regression analysis analysing all AIS 3+ injuries in the GIDAS database of the years 1999-2006 that happened more than four times
In most of developed countries, the progress made in passive safety during the last three decades allowed to drastically reduce the number of killed and severely injured especially for occupants of passenger cars. This reduction is mainly observed for frontal impacts for which the AIS3+ injuries has been reduced about 52% for drivers and 38% for front passengers. The stiffening of the cars' structure coupled with the generalization of airbags and the improvement of the seatbelt restraint (load limiter, pretension, etc.) allowed to protect vital body regions such as head, neck and thorax. However, the abdomen did not take advantage with so much success of this progress. The objective of this study is to draw up an inventory on the abdominal injuries of the belted car occupants involved in frontal impact, to present adapted counter-measures and to assess their potential effectiveness. In the first part the stakes corresponding to the abdominal injuries will be defined according to types of impact, seat location, occupants' age and type of injured organs. Then, we shall focus on the abdominal injury risk curves for adults involved in frontal impact and on the comparisons of the average risks according to the seat location. In the second part we will list counter-measures and we shall calculate their effectiveness. The method of case control will be used in order to estimate odds ratio, comparing two samples, given by occupants having or not having the studied safety system. For this study, two type of data sources are used: national road injured accident census and retrospective in-depth accident data collection. Abdominal injuries are mainly observed in frontal impact (52%). Fatal or severe abdominal occupant- injuries are observed at least in 27% of cases, ranking this body region as the most injured just after the thorax (51%). In spite of a twice lower occupation rate in the back seats compared to the front seats, the number of persons sustaining abdominal injuries at the rear place is higher than in the front place. In recent cars, the risk of having a serious or fatal abdominal injury in a frontal impact is 1.6% for the driver, 3.6% for the front passenger and 6.3% for the rear occupants. The most frequently hurt organs are the small intestine (17%), the spleen (16%) and the liver (13%). The most common countermeasures have a good efficiency in the reduction of the abdominal injuries for the adults: the stiffness of the structure of the seats allows decreasing the abdominal injury risk from 54% (driver) to 60% (front occupant), the seatbelt pretensioners decrease also this risk from 90% (driver) to 83% (front passenger).