• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

车辆类型与行人受伤的来源及严重程度之间关联的评估。

An evaluation of the association between vehicle type and the source and severity of pedestrian injuries.

作者信息

Roudsari Bahman S, Mock Charles N, Kaufman Robert

机构信息

Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.

出版信息

Traffic Inj Prev. 2005 Jun;6(2):185-92. doi: 10.1080/15389580590931680.

DOI:10.1080/15389580590931680
PMID:16019404
Abstract

To evaluate the effect of vehicle type (passenger vehicle vs. light truck vehicle) on crash trajectory and on the consequent source and severity of pedestrian injury, we analyzed data from the Pedestrian Crash Data Study (PCDS), conducted by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) from 1994 to 1998. While 62% of the adults in PV (passenger vehicle)-related crashes were carried by the vehicle, such pedestrian-vehicle interaction was observed only in 28% of LTV (light truck vehicle)-adult crashes. Being thrown forward or knocked down were the most common (65%) type of pedestrian-vehicle interactions for LTV-adult crashes. For children, 93% of those struck by LTVs and 46% of those struck by PVs were thrown forward or knocked down. For adults, LTVs were more likely than PVs to cause thorax (37% vs. 20%) and abdomen injuries (33% vs. 18%). For children, LTVs were more likely than PVs to cause injuries to the upper extremity (71% vs. 56%) and abdomen (14% vs. 8%). For adults struck by PVs the most common sources of injury were windshield for head injuries (63%), hood surface for thorax (67%), abdomen (58%), spine (30%), and upper extremity (36%) injuries, and bumper for the lower extremity injuries (60%). The leading causes of injury for adult-LTV crashes were ground for head (39%) and upper extremity (37%) injuries, hood edge for thorax (48%) and abdomen (56%) injuries, hood surface for spine injuries (36%), and bumper for lower extremity injuries (45%). For child-PV crashes, ground was the most common source of face (37%) abdomen (83%), spine (43%), and upper extremity injuries (54%). For children hit by LTVs, 52% of face, 67% of abdomen, 100% of spine, and 60% of upper extremity injuries were attributed to ground contacts. Altogether, the major sources of injury were hood surface and windshield for PV-pedestrian crashes and hood surface and hood edge for LTV-pedestrian crashes. Changes in design, such as altering the geometry and stiffness of front-end structures, might be associated with considerable decrease in the frequency and severity of pedestrian injury.

摘要

为评估车辆类型(乘用车与轻型卡车)对碰撞轨迹以及对随后行人受伤的来源和严重程度的影响,我们分析了美国国家公路交通安全管理局(NHTSA)在1994年至1998年开展的行人碰撞数据研究(PCDS)中的数据。在与乘用车相关的碰撞事故中,62%的成年行人被车辆拖拽,而在轻型卡车与成年行人的碰撞事故中,这种行人与车辆的相互作用仅在28%的事故中被观察到。被向前抛出或撞倒,是轻型卡车与成年行人碰撞事故中最常见(65%)的行人与车辆相互作用类型。对于儿童而言,被轻型卡车撞击的儿童中有93%、被乘用车撞击的儿童中有46%被向前抛出或撞倒。对于成年人,轻型卡车比乘用车更有可能导致胸部受伤(37%对20%)和腹部受伤(33%对18%)。对于儿童,轻型卡车比乘用车更有可能导致上肢受伤(71%对56%)和腹部受伤(14%对8%)。对于被乘用车撞击的成年人,最常见的受伤来源是:头部受伤时为挡风玻璃(63%),胸部受伤时为发动机罩表面(67%)、腹部受伤时为发动机罩表面(58%)、脊柱受伤时为发动机罩表面(30%)以及上肢受伤时为发动机罩表面(36%),下肢受伤时为保险杠(60%)。成年行人与轻型卡车碰撞事故的主要致伤原因是:头部受伤时为地面(39%)和上肢受伤时为地面(37%),胸部受伤时为发动机罩边缘(48%)和腹部受伤时为发动机罩边缘(56%),脊柱受伤时为发动机罩表面(36%),下肢受伤时为保险杠(45%)。对于儿童与乘用车碰撞事故,地面是面部(37%)、腹部(83%)骨折、脊柱(43%)和上肢受伤(54%)最常见的受伤来源。对于被轻型卡车撞击的儿童,52%的面部受伤、67%的腹部受伤、100%的脊柱受伤和60%的上肢受伤归因于与地面接触。总体而言,乘用车与行人碰撞事故的主要受伤来源是发动机罩表面和挡风玻璃,轻型卡车与行人碰撞事故的主要受伤来源是发动机罩表面和发动机罩边缘。设计上的改变,如改变前端结构的几何形状和刚度,可能会使行人受伤的频率和严重程度大幅降低。

相似文献

1
An evaluation of the association between vehicle type and the source and severity of pedestrian injuries.车辆类型与行人受伤的来源及严重程度之间关联的评估。
Traffic Inj Prev. 2005 Jun;6(2):185-92. doi: 10.1080/15389580590931680.
2
Vehicle mismatch: injury patterns and severity.车辆不匹配:损伤模式与严重程度
Accid Anal Prev. 2004 Sep;36(5):761-72. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2003.07.001.
3
Pedestrian crashes: higher injury severity and mortality rate for light truck vehicles compared with passenger vehicles.行人碰撞事故:与乘用车相比,轻型卡车的伤害严重程度和死亡率更高。
Inj Prev. 2004 Jun;10(3):154-8. doi: 10.1136/ip.2003.003814.
4
Effects of vehicle bumper height and impact velocity on type of lower extremity injury in vehicle-pedestrian accidents.车辆保险杠高度和碰撞速度对车辆与行人事故中下肢损伤类型的影响。
Accid Anal Prev. 2005 Jul;37(4):633-40. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.03.005. Epub 2005 Apr 7.
5
The association between passenger-vehicle front-end profiles and pedestrian injury severity in motor vehicle crashes.乘用车前端形状与机动车事故中行人伤害严重程度的关系。
J Safety Res. 2024 Sep;90:115-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2024.06.007. Epub 2024 Jun 20.
6
United States pedestrian fatality rates by vehicle type.按车辆类型划分的美国行人死亡率。
Inj Prev. 2005 Aug;11(4):232-6. doi: 10.1136/ip.2005.008284.
7
Effects of vehicle impact velocity, vehicle front-end shapes on pedestrian injury risk.车辆碰撞速度、车辆前端形状对行人受伤风险的影响。
Traffic Inj Prev. 2012 Sep;13(5):507-18. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2012.661111.
8
Pedestrian head impact conditions depending on the vehicle front shape and its construction--full model simulation.取决于车辆前部形状及其结构的行人头部碰撞条件——全模型模拟
Traffic Inj Prev. 2003 Mar;4(1):74-82. doi: 10.1080/15389580309856.
9
Application of electronic surveillance and global information system mapping to track the epidemiology of pediatric pedestrian injury.应用电子监测和全球信息系统绘图来追踪儿童行人伤害的流行病学情况。
J Trauma. 2009 Mar;66(3 Suppl):S10-6. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181937bc8.
10
How to decrease pedestrian injuries: conceptual evolutions starting from 137 crash tests.如何减少行人受伤:始于137次碰撞测试的概念演变
J Trauma. 2007 Feb;62(2):512-9; discussion 519. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000229985.33611.df.

引用本文的文献

1
Effectiveness of road safety interventions: An evidence and gap map.道路安全干预措施的有效性:证据与差距图。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 3;20(1):e1367. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1367. eCollection 2024 Mar.
2
Factors Influencing Fatalities or Severe Injuries to Pedestrians Lying on the Road in Japan: Nationwide Police Database Study.影响日本道路上躺卧行人死亡或重伤的因素:全国警察数据库研究
Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Oct 24;9(11):1433. doi: 10.3390/healthcare9111433.
3
Parameter sensitivity analysis of pedestrian head dynamic response and injuries based on coupling simulations.
基于耦合模拟的行人头部动态响应和损伤的参数灵敏度分析。
Sci Prog. 2020 Jan-Mar;103(1):36850419892462. doi: 10.1177/0036850419892462. Epub 2019 Dec 23.
4
Non-operative management of blunt splenic injury: is it really so extensively feasible? a critical appraisal of a single-center experience.钝性脾损伤的非手术治疗:真的如此广泛可行吗?对单中心经验的批判性评估。
Pan Afr Med J. 2019 Jan 30;32:52. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2019.32.52.15022. eCollection 2019.
5
A Study on Influence of Minivan Front-End Design and Impact Velocity on Pedestrian Thorax Kinematics and Injury Risk.小型货车前端设计与碰撞速度对行人胸部运动学及损伤风险影响的研究
Appl Bionics Biomech. 2018 Sep 3;2018:7350159. doi: 10.1155/2018/7350159. eCollection 2018.
6
Pedestrian injury patterns and risk in minibus collisions in China.中国小型巴士碰撞事故中行人的损伤模式与风险
Med Sci Monit. 2015 Mar 10;21:727-34. doi: 10.12659/MSM.893622.
7
Pedestrian Injuries By Source: Serious and Disabling Injuries in US and European Cases.按致伤源分类的行人损伤:美国和欧洲案例中的严重及致残性损伤
Ann Adv Automot Med. 2012;56:13-24.
8
Pedestrian injury patterns according to car and casualty characteristics in france.法国行人损伤模式与汽车及伤亡特征的关系
Ann Adv Automot Med. 2011;55:137-46.
9
Crashes involving motorised rickshaws in urban India: characteristics and injury patterns.印度城市中机动三轮车事故:特征和损伤模式。
Injury. 2011 Jan;42(1):104-11. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.10.049.
10
A methodology for the geometric standardization of vehicle hoods to compare real-world pedestrian crashes.一种用于车辆发动机罩几何标准化以比较现实世界中行人碰撞事故的方法。
Ann Adv Automot Med. 2008 Oct;52:193-8.