Whyte Thomas, Gibson Tom, Anderson Robert, Eager David, Milthorpe Bruce
1 Human Impact Engineering, University of Technology Sydney , Sydney, NSW, Australia .
2 The University of Adelaide , Centre for Automotive Safety Research, Adelaide, SW, Australia .
J Neurotrauma. 2016 Oct 1;33(19):1802-1807. doi: 10.1089/neu.2015.4208. Epub 2016 Feb 24.
Despite an improved understanding of traumatic head and neck injury mechanisms, the impact tests required by major motorcycle helmet standards have remained unchanged for decades. Development of new test methods must reflect the specific impact loads causing injury in real crashes as well as test criteria appropriate for the observed injury profiles. This study analysed a collection of in-depth crash investigations of fatally injured helmeted riders in the Adelaide metropolitan region between 1983 and 1994 inclusive to review the head and neck injury patterns that resulted from specific types of impact. Inertial brain injury was sustained in 49% of examined cases, most often resulting from facial impacts but also in a large proportion of tangential, run over, and occipital impact cases. Focal brain and brainstem injury was also common (53%) and regularly associated with skull vault (11/12) and skull base fractures (22/31). Prevention of these fractures in impacts outside the area of required protection and in impacts with a straight edge would provide a significant increase in helmeted rider protection. Cervical spinal cord injury was sustained in facial, straight edge, and tangential impacts on the head. Motorcycle helmets are effective for preventing local skull fractures in impacts for which they are designed, whereas other serious injuries such as basilar skull fracture (BSF) and inertial brain injury persist despite helmet protection. Further impact test procedures should be developed for injurious impact types not currently assessed by major helmet standards, in particular facial impacts, and using test criteria based on commonly observed injuries. This study provides the necessary link, from impact load to injury, for guiding impact test development.
尽管对创伤性头部和颈部损伤机制的理解有所提高,但主要摩托车头盔标准所要求的撞击测试几十年来一直没有改变。新测试方法的开发必须反映实际碰撞中导致受伤的特定撞击负荷以及适用于观察到的损伤特征的测试标准。本研究分析了1983年至1994年(含)期间阿德莱德都会区致命受伤的戴头盔骑手的一系列深入碰撞调查,以回顾特定类型撞击导致的头部和颈部损伤模式。在49%的检查病例中发生了惯性脑损伤,最常见的是面部撞击导致,但在很大比例的切线撞击、碾压撞击和枕部撞击病例中也有发生。局灶性脑和脑干损伤也很常见(53%),并且经常与颅顶骨折(11/12)和颅底骨折(22/31)相关。在所需保护区域之外的撞击以及与直边物体的撞击中预防这些骨折,将显著提高戴头盔骑手的保护水平。颈椎脊髓损伤发生在头部的面部、直边和切线撞击中。摩托车头盔对于预防其设计所针对的撞击中的局部颅骨骨折是有效的,而尽管有头盔保护,其他严重损伤如颅底骨折(BSF)和惯性脑损伤仍然存在。应针对目前主要头盔标准未评估的有害撞击类型,特别是面部撞击,制定进一步的撞击测试程序,并使用基于常见观察到的损伤的测试标准。本研究提供了从撞击负荷到损伤的必要联系,以指导撞击测试的开发。