Chase J, Donaldson L, Duflou J, Gorrie C
University College London, London, UK.
Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2007 Dec;3(4):258-63. doi: 10.1007/s12024-007-0040-3.
The presence of an apparent seat belt mark (SBM) on a car crash occupant is often used as evidence for use of a seat belt at the time of the crash and, conversely, the lack of a SBM is used as an indication that no seat belt was used. This study examined whether there are clear indications of seat belt use to be found at autopsy and evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of apparent SBM and whether the use of a seat belt and seating location affects the type and severity of injuries sustained. Information on the type of injuries sustained and seatbelt use was retrieved from autopsy reports and police reports, respectively, for cases of fatal motor vehicle collisions occurring in Sydney, Australia over a 5-year period. In this study, a SBM was only found on restrained occupants. The proportion of restrained occupants with evidence of a SBM was 36% (sensitivity), whilst unrestrained occupants showed no evidence of a SBM (100% specificity). A SBM was also found to reliably reflect the seating position of the occupant. We conclude that restrained occupants can be expected to show evidence of the seat belt in just over one third of cases and that the absence of a SBM is not necessarily an indication that no seat belt was used. Spurious SBM is very unlikely to be present if the occupant was unrestrained.
车祸中驾乘人员身上出现明显的安全带痕迹（SBM）通常被用作车祸发生时使用安全带的证据，相反，没有SBM则被用作未使用安全带的迹象。本研究调查了尸检时是否能找到使用安全带的明确迹象，评估了明显SBM的敏感性和特异性，以及安全带的使用和座位位置是否会影响所受伤害的类型和严重程度。分别从澳大利亚悉尼5年内发生的致命机动车碰撞事故的尸检报告和警方报告中获取了所受伤害类型和安全带使用情况的信息。在本研究中，仅在系安全带的驾乘人员身上发现了SBM。有SBM证据的系安全带驾乘人员比例为36%（敏感性），而未系安全带的驾乘人员未显示出SBM证据（特异性为100%）。还发现SBM能可靠地反映驾乘人员的座位位置。我们得出结论，预计只有略多于三分之一的系安全带驾乘人员会有安全带使用的证据，且没有SBM不一定表明未使用安全带。如果驾乘人员未系安全带，极不可能出现假的SBM。
