Ouellet James V, Kasantikul Vira
Head Protection Research Laboratory, Paramount, California 90723, USA.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2006 Mar;7(1):49-54. doi: 10.1080/15389580500338652.
To compare the effectiveness of motorcycle helmets seen in prospective on-the-street motorcycle accident investigations. The data are drawn from two detailed, in-depth studies of motorcycle accidents, in which trained investigators collected extensive accident evidence on-scene immediately after the crash. This article compares helmeted and unhelmeted motorcycle riders on a per-accident basis for fatality rates, the rate of serious (AIS > 2) brain injuries among survivors, or an outcome that involved either of the two.
Nine hundred motorcycle crashes in Los Angeles and 969 crashes in Thailand were investigated in detail at the accident scenes, including photos of vehicles, skids, damage, and sometimes the rider. Helmets were collected and injury information was obtained from riders and care providers. This evidence was then used to reconstruct collision events to identify speeds, precrash motions, collision contacts, injury causation, and helmet performance.
In both studies, approximately 6% of riders were killed and 20-25% were hospitalized. Overall, unhelmeted riders were two to three times as likely to be killed, and three times as likely to suffer either death or survival with AIS > 2 brain injury. Unhelmeted survivors had three to four times as many AIS > 2 brain injuries as helmeted riders on a per-crash basis. Nearly 100% of riders with AIS > 4 somatic injuries died. Such injuries were 30% of Thailand fatalities and 57% of L.A. fatalities, but only about 2-3% of the overall accident population. Among the 97-98% of riders with AIS < 5 somatic injuries, helmet use could prevent about three-fourths of fatalities and brain injuries.
Helmets were extremely effective in preventing brain injury and death in 97% of the accident population in less-than-extreme crashes. Helmet use cannot prevent all fatalities because many of those killed succumb to below-the-neck injuries that a helmet cannot prevent.
比较在街头摩托车事故前瞻性调查中所观察到的摩托车头盔的有效性。数据来自两项关于摩托车事故的详细、深入研究，在这些研究中，训练有素的调查人员在事故发生后立即在现场收集了大量事故证据。本文在每次事故的基础上，比较了佩戴头盔和未佩戴头盔的摩托车骑手的死亡率、幸存者中严重（AIS>2）脑损伤的发生率，或涉及这两者之一的结果。
对洛杉矶的900起摩托车事故和泰国的969起事故在事故现场进行了详细调查，包括车辆、刹车痕迹、损坏情况的照片，有时还包括骑手的照片。收集了头盔，并从骑手和护理人员处获取了伤害信息。然后利用这些证据重建碰撞事件，以确定速度、碰撞前的动作、碰撞接触、伤害原因和头盔性能。
在两项研究中，约6%的骑手死亡，20%-25%的骑手住院。总体而言，未佩戴头盔的骑手死亡可能性是佩戴头盔骑手的两到三倍，因AIS>2脑损伤导致死亡或存活的可能性是佩戴头盔骑手的三倍。在每次碰撞中，未佩戴头盔的幸存者发生AIS>2脑损伤的次数是佩戴头盔骑手的三到四倍。AIS>4躯体损伤的骑手几乎100%死亡。此类损伤在泰国死亡事故中占30%，在洛杉矶死亡事故中占57%，但仅占事故总数的约2%-3%。在97%-98%的AIS<5躯体损伤的骑手中，佩戴头盔可预防约四分之三的死亡和脑损伤。
在不太严重的碰撞事故中，头盔在预防97%的事故人群脑损伤和死亡方面极其有效。佩戴头盔不能预防所有死亡，因为许多死亡者死于头盔无法预防的颈部以下损伤。
