Injury-related mortality among adolescents: findings from a teaching hospital's post mortem data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Injuries are noted to be an important cause of death among adolescents. There is however limited data on the injury related deaths among adolescents in Ghana.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>Using data from post-mortem records derived from the Department of Pathology of the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH), Accra Ghana from 2001 to 2003, the causes of injury related deaths among adolescents 10 to 19 years were analyzed by gender and age groups 10 to 14 and 15 to 19 years. There were 151 injury-related deaths constituting 17% of the autopsies performed among adolescents in the study period. The male-to-female ratio was 2.1:1. Drowning was the most common cause of death (37%) in the study population. This was followed by road traffic accidents (RTA) (33%). Over 70% of the RTA victims were pedestrians knocked downed by a vehicle. Deaths from electrocution, poisoning, burns, stab/gunshot, hanging and other miscellaneous causes (example blast injury, traumatic injury from falling debris, fall from height) made up the remaining 30% of the injury related mortality. Among males and in both age categories, drowning was the leading cause of death. In females, the highest mortality was from road traffic accidents accounting for almost half (49%) of the deaths; significantly more than that occurring in males (25%, p = .004).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Findings from Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital post-mortem data on adolescents show that drowning and road traffic accidents are the leading causes of injury-related mortality. Appropriate injury reducing interventions are needed to facilitate a decrease in these preventable deaths.</p

Homicide and geographic access to gun dealers in the United States

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Firearms are the most commonly used weapon to commit homicide in the U.S. Virtually all firearms enter the public marketplace through a federal firearms licensee (FFL): a store or individual licensed by the federal government to sell firearms. Whether FFLs contribute to gun-related homicide in areas where they are located, in which case FFLs may be a homicide risk factor that can be modified, is not known.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Annual county-level data (1993–1999) on gun homicide rates and rates of FFLs per capita were analyzed using negative binomial regression controlling for socio-demographic characteristics. Models were run to evaluate whether the relation between rates of FFLs and rates of gun homicide varied over the study period and across counties according to their level of urbanism (defined by four groupings, as below). Also, rates of FFLs were compared against FS/S – which is the proportion of suicides committed by firearm and is thought to be a good proxy for firearm availability in a region – to help evaluate how well the FFL variable is serving as a way to proxy firearm availability in each of the county types of interest.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In major cities, gun homicide rates were higher where FFLs were more prevalent (rate ratio [RR] = 1.70, 95% CI 1.03–2.81). This association increased (p < 0.01) from 1993 (RR = 1.69) to 1999 (RR = 12.72), due likely to federal reforms that eliminated low-volume dealers, making FFL prevalence a more accurate exposure measure over time. No association was found in small towns. In other cities and in suburbs, gun homicide rates were significantly lower where FFLs were more prevalent, with associations that did not change over the years of the study period. FFL prevalence was correlated strongly (positively) with FS/S in major cities only, suggesting that the findings for how FFL prevalence relates to gun homicide may be valid for the findings pertaining to major cities but not to counties of other types.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Modification of FFLs through federal, state, and local regulation may be a feasible intervention to reduce gun homicide in major cities.</p

Queering Brexit: what’s in Brexit for sexual and gender minorities?

On 24 June 2016, many people had the feeling that they had gone to bed the night before in the United Kingdom and had woken up in Little Britain – a country prone to isolationism and protectionism, risking hurting its economic and social development for the sake of imperial nostalgia and moral panic about ‘loss of sovereignty’ and ‘mass migration’. That feeling inevitably affected many individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, queer and other (LGBTIQ+). Although the possible impact of Brexit seems to have been scrutinised from most angles, there has been limited analysis of how it may affect LGBTIQ+ individuals. This contribution assesses Brexit in relation to the situation of LGBTIQ+ individuals. This is particularly timely in the light of the recent UK Supreme Court decision in Walker v Innospec Limited, where the Court relied on European Union (EU) law to hold a provision of the Equality Act 2010 unlawful for violating pension rights of same-sex couples