Al-Jazaeri Ayman, Zamakhshary Mohammad, Al-Omair Abdulrahma, Al-Haddab Yasser, Al-Jarallah Othman, Al-Qahtani Raied
Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ann Saudi Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;32(5):502-6. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2012.502.
Seating position in motor vehicle collisions (MVC) plays a major role in determining the injury pattern in mainly restrained children. However, compliance with child seating and restraint laws is still suboptimal. The role of seating position in predicting injury patterns among unrestrained children has not been previously studied.
Retrospective review based on the trauma registry of a level I trauma center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Data collection was restricted to unrestrained children involved in MVC.
Between July 2001 and March 2010, 274 records were identified. Detailed information about the collision, child seating position and the use of restraints was cross-verified using parental phone interviews.
Of the 274 identified records, cross-verification was possible for 89 (32.4%) unrestrained children, 64 boys and 25 girls, with a mean (SD) age of 83 (40) months. Of these children, 41 (46.1%) were front seated (FS), and 48 (53.9%) were back seated (BS). There were higher rates of rollover (52.1% vs 24.4%, P=.02), ejection (41.7% vs 22%, P=.05), and occupant death ratio (14.8 vs 4, P=.04) among BS children. However, the two groups did not differ in pediatric trauma scores, Glascow coma scale score, or age distribution. FS children were more likely to present with isolated head, neck or facial injuries (HNFI) (51.2% vs 25%, P=.01), whereas BS children were more likely to suffer long bone or pelvic fractures (LPF) (60.4% vs 36.6%, P=.025).
Injury pattern can vary according to seating position among unrestrained children presenting at trauma centers after MVC. While FS children are more likely to present with HNFI, BS children more often sustain LPF. BS children had similar trauma severity compared with FS children despite the higher-impact nature of their MVCs. While highlighting the value of proper restraints use and seating position, these results can be valuable in the initial assessment of traumatized children involved in MVC.
在机动车碰撞事故(MVC)中,座位位置在决定主要使用安全带的儿童的损伤模式方面起着重要作用。然而,儿童座椅和约束法律的遵守情况仍不尽人意。此前尚未研究过座位位置在预测未系安全带儿童损伤模式中的作用。
基于沙特阿拉伯利雅得一家一级创伤中心的创伤登记进行回顾性研究。数据收集仅限于参与机动车碰撞事故的未系安全带儿童。
在2001年7月至2010年3月期间,共识别出274条记录。通过对家长的电话访谈交叉核实了有关碰撞、儿童座位位置和安全带使用的详细信息。
在274条识别出的记录中,对89名(32.4%)未系安全带儿童进行了交叉核实,其中64名男孩,25名女孩,平均(标准差)年龄为83(40)个月。在这些儿童中,41名(46.1%)坐在前排(FS),48名(53.9%)坐在后排(BS)。后排儿童的翻车率(52.1%对24.4%,P = 0.02)、被弹出率(41.7%对22%,P = 0.05)和乘员死亡率(14.8对4,P = 0.04)更高。然而,两组在儿童创伤评分、格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分或年龄分布方面没有差异。前排儿童更有可能出现孤立的头部、颈部或面部损伤(HNFI)(51.2%对25%,P = 0.01),而后排儿童更有可能遭受长骨或骨盆骨折(LPF)(60.4%对36.6%,P = 0.025)。
在机动车碰撞事故后到创伤中心就诊的未系安全带儿童中,损伤模式可能因座位位置而异。前排儿童更有可能出现头部、颈部或面部损伤,而后排儿童更常遭受长骨或骨盆骨折。尽管后排儿童发生的机动车碰撞事故冲击力更大,但与前排儿童相比,他们的创伤严重程度相似。这些结果在强调正确使用安全带和座位位置的重要性的同时,对于参与机动车碰撞事故的受伤儿童的初步评估也具有重要价值。