International Journal of Academic Medicine

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2018  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 98--104

Postcollision safety device compliance in trauma patients


Irina Catanescu1, Meredith Meyer2, M Chance Spalding3, M Shay O'Mara4 
1 OhioHealth Grant Medical Center; OhioHealth Doctors West Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, USA
2 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
3 OhioHealth Grant Medical Center; OhioHealth Doctors West Hospital, Columbus; Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Athens, Ohio, USA
4 OhioHealth Grant Medical Center, Columbus; Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Athens, Ohio, USA

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Irina Catanescu
Trauma Services at Grant Medical Center, 111 S Grant Ave., Columbus, OH, 43215
USA

Background: Noncompliance with established prevention measures (seat belts/helmets) continues to be prevalent. Research has shown three primary methods of increasing compliance: legislation, education, and postcollision intervention. We hypothesized that after a motor vehicle collision (MVC) or motorcycle crash (MCC), there are higher rates of safety device noncompliance and this behavior will not align with the benefits of prevention. The study of these patterns will, therefore, provide insight for interventions and education. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, survey-based study of 165 patients performed during June–July 2016 at a Level 1 trauma center. Inclusion criteria consisted of adults involved in either MCC or MVC. Study groups consisted of the MVC and MCC cohorts and those compliant and noncompliant with safety devices. Outcomes were analyzed by comparison of demographics, injury severity score, self-reported safety device use, and substance abuse. Answers given to the final open-ended question of the survey were sorted based on subject matter as it related to reasoning of safety device use. Results: Seat belt users (71.3%) were older (46 vs. 39 years, P = 0.038) and had fewer passengers (1.5 vs. 2.2, P = 0.012). Helmet wearers (30.6%) were more likely women (odds ratio: 9.6, P = 0.009) and less likely to have a positive blood alcohol concentration (BAC) (59.1% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.01). Primary reasons for seat belt use were habit, safety, and law, while primary reasons for helmet use were safety and habit. Overall noncompliant individuals from both MCC and MVC cohorts were more likely to have a positive BAC. Conclusions: Noncompliant patients' reasoning was contradictory to the known benefit of safety restraints. Primary prevention device use relies on establishing habit and perceived safety. Through the postcollision survey, we were able to gather more insight for lack of compliance and this behavioral pattern. Immediate intervention allowed for an opportunity in safety education. Benefit was noted in patients' opportunity for self-reflection and willingness to change behavior. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Patient care, Practice-based learning and improvement.


How to cite this article:
Catanescu I, Meyer M, Spalding M C, O'Mara M S. Postcollision safety device compliance in trauma patients.Int J Acad Med 2018;4:98-104


How to cite this URL:
Catanescu I, Meyer M, Spalding M C, O'Mara M S. Postcollision safety device compliance in trauma patients. Int J Acad Med [serial online] 2018 [cited 2022 May 25 ];4:98-104
Available from: https://www.ijam-web.org/article.asp?issn=2455-5568;year=2018;volume=4;issue=2;spage=98;epage=104;aulast=Catanescu;type=0