Departments of Epidemiology and Health Policy and Management, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
New York State Department of Health, Bureau of Occupational Health and Injury Prevention, Albany, NY 12237, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Oct 21;19(20):13674. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192013674.
There are reports that historically higher mortality observed for front- compared to rear-seated adult motor vehicle (MV) occupants has narrowed. Vast improvements have been made in strengthening laws and restraint use in front-, but not rear-seated occupants suggesting there may be value in expanding the science on rear-seat safety.
A linked 2016-2017 hospital and MV crash data set, the Crash Outcomes Data Evaluation System (CODES), was used to compare characteristics of front-seated ( = 115,939) and rear-seated ( = 5729) adults aged 18 years and older involved in a MV crash in New York State (NYS). A primary enforced seat belt law existed for front-seated, but not rear-seated occupants. Statistical analysis employed SAS 9.4.
Compared to front-seated occupants, those rear-seated were more likely to be unrestrained (21.2% vs. 4.3%, < 0.0001) and to have more moderate-to-severe injury/death (11.9% vs. 11.3%, < 0.0001). Compared to restrained rear-seated occupants, unrestrained rear-seated occupants had higher moderate-to-severe injury/death (21.5% vs. 7.5%, < 0.0001) and 4-fold higher hospitalization. More than 95% of ejections were unrestrained and had 7-fold higher medical charges. Unrestrained occupants' hospital stays were longer, charges and societal financial costs higher.
These findings extend the science of rear-seat safety in seriously injured rear-seated occupants, document increased medical charges and support the need to educate consumers and policy makers on the health and financial risks of adults riding unrestrained in the rear seat. The lack of restraint use in adult rear-seated motor vehicle occupants consumes scarce health care dollars for treatment of this serious, but largely preventable injury.
有报道称，与成年汽车（MV）后排乘客相比，前排乘客的死亡率历来较高，但这一差距正在缩小。在前排乘客中，加强法律和约束使用方面取得了巨大进展，但后排乘客没有得到改善，这表明在后座安全方面扩展科学研究可能具有价值。
利用 2016-2017 年的医院和 MV 碰撞数据集——碰撞结果数据评估系统（CODES），比较了纽约州（NYS）发生 MV 碰撞中 18 岁及以上的前排（n=115939）和后排（n=5729）成年乘客的特征。前排乘客有主要强制执行的安全带法律，但后排乘客没有。统计分析采用 SAS 9.4 进行。
与前排乘客相比，后排乘客未系安全带的可能性更大（21.2%对 4.3%，<0.0001），中度至重度受伤/死亡的可能性也更高（11.9%对 11.3%，<0.0001）。与系安全带的后排乘客相比，未系安全带的后排乘客的中度至重度受伤/死亡的比例更高（21.5%对 7.5%，<0.0001），住院率也高 4 倍。超过 95%的弹射是未系安全带的，医疗费用也高 7 倍。未系安全带的乘客住院时间更长，费用和社会财务成本更高。
这些发现扩展了后排座椅安全的科学研究，记录了严重受伤后排乘客的更高医疗费用，并支持了对消费者和政策制定者进行教育的必要性，让他们了解在后排座椅上不系安全带对成年人健康和财务的风险。在成年汽车后排乘客中缺乏约束使用，消耗了治疗这种严重但主要可预防伤害的稀缺医疗保健资金。
