Suppr超能文献

车辆碰撞后自动碰撞通知的可用性及应急响应时间——对2017年碰撞事故调查抽样系统的分析

Automatic collision notification availability and emergency response times following vehicle collision-an analysis of the 2017 crash investigation sampling system.

作者信息

Griffin Russell L, Carroll Shannon, Jansen Jan O

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.

Center for Injury Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.

出版信息

Traffic Inj Prev. 2020 Oct 12;21(sup1):S135-S139. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2020.1817418.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether occupants of collisions involving at least one vehicle with an available Automatic Collision Notification (ACN) system have quicker times from collision to 1) Emergency Medical Services (EMS) notification and 2) arrival to a medical center.

METHODS

Using data from the 2017 Crash Investigation Sampling System, vehicles were categorized as whether ACN was available using data from the CISS's dataset of crash avoidance system availability (in which ACN is included though notably not a crash avoidance system). A Cox proportional hazards model-overall and stratified by urbanization-was used to compare the time from collision to both EMS notification and EMS arrival to a medical center.

RESULTS

A total of 2,034 collisions (weight n: 2,775,512) involving 4235 occupants (weighted n: 4,987,669) were included. An estimated 259,021 (9.3%) and 546,223 occupants (11.0%) were in a collision in which one vehicle had ACN equipped. The median time to EMS notification was longer for collisions in which no involved vehicles had ACN available (median 4, IQR 2-9 minutes) than ACN-exposed collisions (median 2, IQR 1-5 minutes). There was a marginally significant higher hazard (i.e., instantaneous risk) of EMS notification for collisions with at least one vehicle having ACN available (HR 1.77, 95% CI 0.99-3.15). Likewise, there was a higher instantaneous risk of medical center arrival for occupants (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.41-2.30) involved in collisions in which at least one vehicle had ACN available. ACN was associated with quicker EMS notification only in urban areas (HR 3.06, 95% CI 1.57-5.97) and associated with a greater reduction in time to medical facility in less urban areas (median 36 vs 45 minutes, HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.22-3.63).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to directly compare EMS response-related times between collisions involving vehicles with and without ACN available. The current data corroborate prior literature reporting quicker EMS notification times among collisions involving ACN-equipped vehicles. This is the first study to find that ACN is also associated to quicker times to medical center arrival, particularly for collisions occurring in less urban areas. Future research examining whether these decreased times are associated with better clinical outcomes are needed in order to fully assess ACN's ability to prevent trauma-related mortality and morbidity.

摘要

目的

确定涉及至少一辆配备自动碰撞通知(ACN)系统车辆的碰撞事故中的驾乘人员,从碰撞到以下两种情况的时间是否更短:1)紧急医疗服务(EMS)通知;2)抵达医疗中心。

方法

利用2017年碰撞调查抽样系统的数据,根据碰撞避免系统可用性数据集(其中包括ACN,尽管它显然不是碰撞避免系统)中的数据,将车辆分类为是否配备ACN。使用Cox比例风险模型——总体模型以及按城市化程度分层的模型——来比较从碰撞到EMS通知和EMS抵达医疗中心的时间。

结果

共纳入了2034起碰撞事故(加权n:2,775,512),涉及4235名驾乘人员(加权n:4,987,669)。估计有259,021名(9.3%)和546,223名驾乘人员(11.0%)遭遇了至少一辆车辆配备ACN的碰撞事故。对于没有涉事车辆配备ACN的碰撞事故,到EMS通知的中位时间(中位时间4分钟,四分位间距2 - 9分钟)比暴露于ACN的碰撞事故(中位时间2分钟,四分位间距1 - 5分钟)更长。对于至少有一辆车辆配备ACN的碰撞事故,EMS通知的风险(即瞬时风险)略高(风险比1.77,95%置信区间0.99 - 3.15)。同样,对于至少有一辆车辆配备ACN的碰撞事故中的驾乘人员,抵达医疗中心的瞬时风险更高(风险比1.80,95%置信区间1.41 - 2.30)。ACN仅在城市地区与更快的EMS通知相关(风险比3.06,95%置信区间1.57 - 5.97),并且在城市化程度较低的地区与到医疗机构时间的更大缩短相关(中位时间分别为36分钟和45分钟,风险比2.12,95%置信区间1.22 - 3.63)。

结论

这是第一项直接比较涉及配备和未配备ACN车辆的碰撞事故之间与EMS响应相关时间的研究。当前数据证实了先前文献报道的在涉及配备ACN车辆的碰撞事故中EMS通知时间更快。这是第一项发现ACN也与更快抵达医疗中心的时间相关的研究,特别是对于发生在城市化程度较低地区的碰撞事故。需要未来的研究来检验这些缩短的时间是否与更好的临床结果相关,以便全面评估ACN预防创伤相关死亡率和发病率的能力。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验