Wu Dan, Dufournet Marine, Martin Jean-Louis
Univ Lyon, Université Lyon 1, IFSTTAR, UMRESTTE UMR_T 9405, 25 Avenue François Mitterrand, 69675 Bron Cedex, France.
2Clinical and Research Memory Centre of Lyon (CMRR); Geriatrics Unit, Lyon Institute For Elderly, Hospices civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Inj Epidemiol. 2019 Jun 1;6:19. doi: 10.1186/s40621-019-0197-8. eCollection 2019.
The effectiveness of helmet use in preventing or reducing the severity of head injuries has been largely demonstrated. However, the effectiveness of different types of helmets in reducing facial or non-facial head injuries has received much less attention.
A postal survey on motorized two-wheeler crashes was conducted in 2016. 7148 riders of motorized two-wheelers (MTW) injured in a crash between 2010 and 2014 and identified in the Rhône Trauma Registry were invited to complete a questionnaire in order to collect detailed information about their accidents. The analysis was based on a population of 405 helmeted riders who declared having received an impact on the head. Facial and non-facial head injury risks were estimated according to helmet type (full face or other) by logistic regression, controlled for type of object hit by the head (and gender for risk of non-facial head injury), and weighted to take nonresponse into account.
Three-quarter of helmeted MTW drivers were wearing a full-face helmet at the time of the accident. Victims wearing a full-face helmet were about three times less likely to have sustained injury to the face, compared to victims wearing another type of helmet (adjusted OR = 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11-0.83). On the other hand, the presence of non-facial head injury did not vary significantly according to whether a full-face or other helmet was worn (adjusted OR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.33-2.13).
Our study suggests that full-face helmets provide better facial protection for MTW users compared to other types of helmets, whereas there is no evidence of any difference in protection afforded the skull or the brain.
头盔在预防或减轻头部损伤严重程度方面的有效性已得到充分证明。然而,不同类型头盔在减少面部或非面部头部损伤方面的有效性却很少受到关注。
2016年开展了一项关于机动两轮车事故的邮寄调查。邀请了2010年至2014年间在事故中受伤并在罗纳创伤登记处登记的7148名机动两轮车(MTW)骑手填写问卷,以收集有关其事故的详细信息。分析基于405名宣称头部受到撞击的戴头盔骑手群体。根据头盔类型(全脸式或其他),通过逻辑回归估计面部和非面部头部损伤风险,并控制头部撞击物体的类型(以及非面部头部损伤风险的性别因素),并进行加权以考虑无回应情况。
四分之三的戴头盔MTW驾驶员在事故发生时佩戴的是全脸式头盔。与佩戴其他类型头盔的受害者相比,佩戴全脸式头盔的受害者面部受伤的可能性要低约三倍(调整后的比值比[OR]=0.31;95%置信区间[CI]:0.11-0.83)。另一方面,无论佩戴的是全脸式头盔还是其他头盔,非面部头部损伤的发生率并无显著差异(调整后的OR=0.84;95%CI:0.33-2.13)。
我们的研究表明,与其他类型头盔相比,全脸式头盔为MTW使用者提供了更好的面部保护,而没有证据表明在保护颅骨或大脑方面存在任何差异。