Sonstige
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (5) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (5) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Wirksamkeitsuntersuchung (5) (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.
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.
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.
Accident data shows that the vast majority of pedestrian accidents involve a passenger car. A refined method for estimating the potential effectiveness of a technology designed to support the car driver in mitigating or avoiding pedestrian accidents is presented. The basis of the benefit prediction method consists of accident scenario information for pedestrian-passenger car accidents from GIDAS, including vehicle and pedestrian velocities. These real world pedestrian accidents were first reconstructed and the system effectiveness was determined by comparing injury outcome with and without the functionality enabled for each accident. The predictions from Volvo Cars" general Benefit Estimation Model are refined by including the actual system algorithm and sensing models for a relevant car in the simulation environment. The feasibility of the method is proven by a case study on a authentic technology; the Auto Brake functionality in Collision Warning with Full Auto Brake and Pedestrian Detection (CWAB-PD). Assuming the system is adopted by all vehicles, the Case Study indicates a 24% reduction in pedestrian fatalities for crashes where the pedestrians were struck by the front of a passenger car.
An eCall device has been mounted on some vehicles in France since 2003. It is an integrated car radio/GSM/GPS system that can be used with a SIM card. When an accident occurs, a call can be sent manually or automatically made to a telephone call centre. Knowing the geographic location, the vehicle identity and the possibility of a direct communication with the people involved enables the nearest emergency services to be called out. In this context, the LAB / CEESAR have set up a study aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of this system. The purpose of this paper is to detail the E-call system evaluation method of effectiveness used and give a global synthesis of the results.