Minton R, Murray P, Stephenson W, Galasko C S
Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, Berkshire, UK.
Accid Anal Prev. 2000 Mar;32(2):177-85. doi: 10.1016/s0001-4575(99)00092-5.
It is generally accepted that the incidence of whiplash associated disorders is increasing in all industrialised countries, despite the almost universal fitment of head restraints in at least the front seats of cars. This is usually attributed to the fact that few people can be observed to follow the standard recommendations as regards head restraint positioning, that is, level with the head vertically and as close to the head as possible horizontally. This study set out to determine whether any other factors, in addition to head restraint adjustment, could be found which would influence the severity of whiplash injury. This was done by linking medical assessment of real-world accident victims with engineering assessment of the accident vehicles. A random sample of road accident victims suffering from whiplash associated disorder was studied. The vehicles they had been travelling in were examined to assess impact severity and, where possible, measurements were made of seat and head restraint adjustment with the subject sitting in the vehicle. All subjects were interviewed to assess the disability resulting from their injuries, and their progress was followed for 12 months. The results were subjected to statistical analysis to try to determine relationships between severity of injury (as measured by resultant disability) and a number of occupant- and vehicle-related factors. A significant proportion of the sample had suffered lumbar strain injury in addition to whiplash, and these were excluded from the present analysis. Frontal impact victims suffered symptoms indistinguishable from those of rear impact victims. The beneficial effects of good head restraint adjustment could not be clearly demonstrated, and some trends, especially in rear impacts, where the benefits of a well-adjusted restraint should have been very clear, indicated that larger distances from head to restraint were associated with lower disability. The paper discusses these counter-intuitive results and their implications.
人们普遍认为,尽管在所有工业化国家,至少汽车前排座椅几乎都普遍安装了头枕,但挥鞭样相关疾病的发病率仍在上升。这通常归因于这样一个事实,即很少有人能遵循关于头枕位置的标准建议,也就是说,头枕在垂直方向上与头部齐平,在水平方向上尽可能靠近头部。本研究旨在确定除了头枕调节之外,是否还能找到其他会影响挥鞭样损伤严重程度的因素。这是通过将现实世界中事故受害者的医学评估与事故车辆的工程评估联系起来实现的。对患有挥鞭样相关疾病的道路交通事故受害者进行了随机抽样研究。检查他们所乘坐的车辆,以评估撞击的严重程度,并在可能的情况下,让受试者坐在车内,对头枕和座椅的调节情况进行测量。对所有受试者进行访谈,以评估其损伤造成的残疾情况,并对他们的恢复情况进行了12个月的跟踪。对结果进行了统计分析,试图确定损伤严重程度(以由此导致的残疾来衡量)与一些与乘客和车辆相关的因素之间是否存在关联。相当一部分样本除了挥鞭样损伤外还患有腰部扭伤,这些样本被排除在本次分析之外。正面碰撞的受害者所出现的症状与追尾碰撞受害者的症状难以区分。头枕调节良好的有益效果无法得到明确证明,而且一些趋势,特别是在追尾碰撞中,本应很明显能看到调节良好的头枕的益处,但结果却表明头部与头枕之间的距离越大,残疾程度越低。本文讨论了这些与直觉相悖的结果及其影响。