The Effect of All-Terrain Vehicle Crash Location on Emergency Medical Services Time Intervals

Over 100,000 all-terrain vehicle (ATV)-related injuries are evaluated in U.S. emergency departments each year. In this study, we analyzed the time intervals for emergency medical services (EMS) providers responding to ATV crashes in different location types. Data from the Iowa State Trauma Registry and a statewide ATV crash/injury database was matched with Iowa EMS Registry records from 2004–2014. Ground ambulance responses to 270 ATV crashes were identified, and response characteristics and time intervals were analyzed. Off-road crashes had a longer median patient access interval (p < 0.001) and total on scene interval (p = 0.002) than roadway crashes. Crashes in remote locations had a longer median patient access interval (p < 0.001) and total on scene interval (p < 0.001), but also a longer median on scene with patient interval (p = 0.004) than crashes in accessible locations. Fifteen percent of remote patient access times were >6 min as compared to 3% of accessible crashes (p = 0.0004). There were no differences in en route to scene or en route to hospital time. Comparisons by location type showed no differences in injury severity score or number of total procedures performed. We concluded that responding EMS providers had an increased length of time to get to the patient after arriving on scene for off-road and remote ATV crashes relative to roadway and accessible location crashes, respectively

Enforcement of Off-Road Vehicle Laws in Iowa

Safety laws are among the most successful means of reducing injuries, but their effectiveness is strongly influenced by the level of enforcement. To characterize enforcement of off-road vehicle (ORV) laws statewide, analyses of citations were performed using Iowa Court Information System data. From 2005–2015, 5173 individuals were charged with 5643 citations issued. Citations averaged <5/county/year, decreased dramatically over time, and varied by county when normalized to registered all-terrain vehicles (ATVs). Over 90% of operators cited were male and Caucasian. One-fifth were <18 years old. The top five violations were: operation on a highway/snowmobile trail (51%), registration/identification number not documented/displayed (19%), prohibited use in a park/preserve (5.5%), and operation with more persons than the vehicle is designed to carry (4.4%). The Department of Natural Resources issued the highest percentage of citations, followed in decreasing order by Sheriff, Police, State Patrol, and Conservation officers. Significant differences were identified when citations were compared by sex, age, race, enforcement agency, disposition (guilty vs. not guilty), and when comparing counties with or without an ORV park. These characteristics suggest limited and variable enforcement of laws statewide that may reduce their potential to prevent deaths and injuries, and that improved strategies to support ORV law enforcement are needed

Using Geospatial Mapping to Determine the Impact of All-Terrain Vehicle Crashes on Both Rural and Urban Communities

Introduction: Deaths and injuries from all-terrain vehicle (ATV) crashes result in approximately 700 deaths each year and more than 100,000 emergency department (ED) visits. Common misconceptions about ATV crashes are a significant barrier to injury prevention efforts, as is the lack of key information about where and how crashes occur. The purpose of this study was to determine ATV crash patterns within a state, and to compare and contrast characteristics of these crashes as a function of crash-site rurality. Methods: We performed descriptive, comparative, and regression analyses using a statewide off-road vehicle crash and injury database (2002–2013). Comparisons were performed by rurality as defined using the Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) coding system, and we used geographic information system (GIS) software to map crash patterns at the zip code and county levels. Results: ATV crashes occurred throughout the state; 46% occurred in urban and 54% in rural zip code areas. Comparisons of rider and crash characteristics by rurality showed similarities by sex, age, seating position, on vs. off the road, and crash mechanism. Conversely, helmet use was significantly lower among victims of isolated rural crashes as compared to other victims (p=0.004). Crashes in isolated rural and small rural areas accounted for only 39% of all crashes but resulted in 62% of fatalities. In both rural and urban areas, less than one-quarter of roadway injuries were traffic related. Relative crash rates varied by county, and unique patterns were observed for crashes involving youth and roadway riders. During the study period, 10% and 50% of all crashes occurred in 2% and 20% of the state’s counties, respectively. Conclusion: This study suggests that ATV crashes are a public health concern for both rural and urban communities. However, isolated rural ATV crash victims were less likely to be helmeted, and rural victims were over-represented among fatalities. Traffic was not the major factor in roadway crashes in either rural or urban areas. Unique crash patterns for different riding populations suggest that injury prevention experts and public policy makers should consider the potential impact of geographical location when developing injury prevention interventions

Using Geospatial Mapping to Determine the Impact of All-Terrain Vehicle Crashes on Both Rural and Urban Communities

Introduction: Deaths and injuries from all-terrain vehicle (ATV) crashes result in approximately700 deaths each year and more than 100,000 emergency department (ED) visits. Commonmisconceptions about ATV crashes are a significant barrier to injury prevention efforts, as is the lackof key information about where and how crashes occur. The purpose of this study was to determineATV crash patterns within a state, and to compare and contrast characteristics of these crashes as afunction of crash-site rurality.Methods: We performed descriptive, comparative, and regression analyses using a statewide off-roadvehicle crash and injury database (2002-2013). Comparisons were performed by rurality as defined usingthe Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) coding system, and we used geographic information system(GIS) software to map crash patterns at the zip code and county levels.Results: ATV crashes occurred throughout the state; 46% occurred in urban and 54% in rural zip codeareas. Comparisons of rider and crash characteristics by rurality showed similarities by sex, age, seatingposition, on vs. off the road, and crash mechanism. Conversely, helmet use was significantly loweramong victims of isolated rural crashes as compared to other victims (p=0.004). Crashes in isolatedrural and small rural areas accounted for only 39% of all crashes but resulted in 62% of fatalities. In bothrural and urban areas, less than one-quarter of roadway injuries were traffic related. Relative crash ratesvaried by county, and unique patterns were observed for crashes involving youth and roadway riders.During the study period, 10% and 50% of all crashes occurred in 2% and 20% of the state’s counties,respectively.Conclusion: This study suggests that ATV crashes are a public health concern for both rural and urbancommunities. However, isolated rural ATV crash victims were less likely to be helmeted, and rural victimswere over-represented among fatalities. Traffic was not the major factor in roadway crashes in eitherrural or urban areas. Unique crash patterns for different riding populations suggest that injury preventionexperts and public policy makers should consider the potential impact of geographical location whendeveloping injury prevention interventions. [West J Emerg Med. 2017;18(5)913-922.

Using Geospatial Mapping to Determine the Impact of All-Terrain Vehicle Crashes on Both Rural and Urban Communities

Introduction: Deaths and injuries from all-terrain vehicle (ATV) crashes result in approximately700 deaths each year and more than 100,000 emergency department (ED) visits. Commonmisconceptions about ATV crashes are a significant barrier to injury prevention efforts, as is the lackof key information about where and how crashes occur. The purpose of this study was to determineATV crash patterns within a state, and to compare and contrast characteristics of these crashes as afunction of crash-site rurality.Methods: We performed descriptive, comparative, and regression analyses using a statewide off-roadvehicle crash and injury database (2002-2013). Comparisons were performed by rurality as defined usingthe Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) coding system, and we used geographic information system(GIS) software to map crash patterns at the zip code and county levels.Results: ATV crashes occurred throughout the state; 46% occurred in urban and 54% in rural zip codeareas. Comparisons of rider and crash characteristics by rurality showed similarities by sex, age, seatingposition, on vs. off the road, and crash mechanism. Conversely, helmet use was significantly loweramong victims of isolated rural crashes as compared to other victims (p=0.004). Crashes in isolatedrural and small rural areas accounted for only 39% of all crashes but resulted in 62% of fatalities. In bothrural and urban areas, less than one-quarter of roadway injuries were traffic related. Relative crash ratesvaried by county, and unique patterns were observed for crashes involving youth and roadway riders.During the study period, 10% and 50% of all crashes occurred in 2% and 20% of the state’s counties,respectively.Conclusion: This study suggests that ATV crashes are a public health concern for both rural and urbancommunities. However, isolated rural ATV crash victims were less likely to be helmeted, and rural victimswere over-represented among fatalities. Traffic was not the major factor in roadway crashes in eitherrural or urban areas. Unique crash patterns for different riding populations suggest that injury preventionexperts and public policy makers should consider the potential impact of geographical location whendeveloping injury prevention interventions. [West J Emerg Med. 2017;18(5)913-922.