Seatbelt use and risk of major injuries sustained by vehicle occupants during motor-vehicle crashes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

BackgroundIn 2004, a World Health Report on road safety called for enforcement of measures such as seatbelt use, effective at minimizing morbidity and mortality caused by road traffic accidents. However, injuries caused by seatbelt use have also been described. Over a decade after publication of the World Health Report on road safety, this study sought to investigate the relationship between seatbelt use and major injuries in belted compared to unbelted passengers.MethodsCohort studies published in English language from 2005 to 2018 were retrieved from seven databases. Critical appraisal of studies was carried out using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist. Pooled risk of major injuries was assessed using the random effects meta-analytic model. Heterogeneity was quantified using I-squared and Tau-squared statistics. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used to investigate publication bias. This review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015020309).ResultsEleven studies, all carried out in developed countries were included. Overall, the risk of any major injury was significantly lower in belted passengers compared to unbelted passengers (RR 0.47; 95%CI, 0.29 to 0.80; I-2=99.7; P=0.000). When analysed by crash types, belt use significantly reduced the risk of any injury (RR 0.35; 95%CI, 0.24 to 0.52). Seatbelt use reduces the risk of facial injuries (RR=0.56, 95% CI=0.37 to 0.84), abdominal injuries (RR=0.87; 95% CI=0.78 to 0.98) and, spinal injuries (RR=0.56, 95% CI=0.37 to 0.84). However, we found no statistically significant difference in risk of head injuries (RR=0.49; 95% CI=0.22 to 1.08), neck injuries (RR=0.69: 95%CI 0.07 to 6.44), thoracic injuries (RR 0.96, 95%CI, 0.74 to 1.24), upper limb injuries (RR=1.05, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.34) and lower limb injuries (RR=0.77, 95%CI 0.58 to 1.04) between belted and non-belted passengers.ConclusionIn sum, the risk of most major road traffic injuries is lower in seatbelt users. Findings were inconclusive regarding seatbelt use and susceptibility to thoracic, head and neck injuries during road traffic accidents. Awareness should be raised about the dangers of inadequate seatbelt use. Future research should aim to assess the effects of seatbelt use on major injuries by crash type

Prevalence, Clinical Presentation, and Factors Associated With Diabetic Foot Ulcer in Two Regional Hospitals in Cameroon

This study aimed to determine the prevalence of diabetic foot ulcer and high risk for ulceration, describe the clinical presentation, and identify factors associated with diabetic foot ulcer in the Southwest regional hospitals of Cameroon. In this cross-sectional study, data were collected using a structured questionnaire administered to consecutive patients with diabetes. Findings from detailed foot examination were recorded. Diabetic foot ulcer was diagnosed according to the International Working Group on Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) definition. Data were analyzed with Stata IC version 12. Of the 203 participants included, 63.1% were females. Age ranged from 26 to 96 years. The median duration of diabetes was 4.0 years (interquartile range 1.0-8.0 years). The prevalence of diabetic foot ulcer was 11.8% (24), of whom 29.2% (7) had high grade (grades 2 to 4), and most of the ulcers 58.3% (14) were located at the plantar region. The prevalence of high risk for ulceration was 21.8% (39). Loss of protective sensation (OR = 3.73, 95% CI = 1.43-9.71; P =.007), and peripheral arterial disease (OR = 3.48, 95% CI = 1.14-10.56; P =.028) were independently associated with diabetic foot. Diabetic foot ulcer is a common complication among patients with diabetes attending these regional hospitals. Loss of protective sensation, and peripheral arterial disease increase the odds of having diabetic foot ulcer, and we suggest them as the main target of interest for prevention

Assessing independence in mobility activities in trauma care: Validity and reliability of the Activity Independence Measure-Trauma (AIM-T) in humanitarian settings.

The importance of measuring outcomes after injury beyond mortality and morbidity is increasingly recognized, though underreported in humanitarian settings. To address shortcomings of existing outcome measures in humanitarian settings, the Activity Independence Measure-Trauma (AIM-T) was developed, and is structured in three subscales (i.e., core, lower limb, and upper limb). This study aimed to assess the AIM-T construct validity (structural validity and hypothesis testing) and reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater reliability and measurement error) in four humanitarian settings (Burundi, Iraq, Cameroon and Central African Republic). Patients with acute injury (n = 195) were assessed using the AIM-T, the Barthel Index (BI), and two pain scores. Structural validity was assessed through confirmatory factor analysis. Hypotheses were tested regarding correlations with BI and pain scores using Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) and differences in AIM-T scores between patients' subgroups, using standardized effect size Cohen's d (d). Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's alpha (α). AIM-T was reassessed by a second rater in 77 participants to test inter-rater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The results showed that the AIM-T structure in three subscales had an acceptable fit. The AIM-T showed an inverse weak to moderate correlation with both pain scores (PCC<0.7, p≤0.05), positive strong correlation with BI (PCC≥0.7, p≤0.05), and differed between all subgroups (d≥0.5, p≤0.05). The inter-rater reliability in the (sub)scales was good to excellent (ICC 0.86-0.91) and the three subscales' internal consistency was adequate (α≥0.7). In conclusion, this study supports the AIM-T validity in measuring independence in mobility activities and its reliability in humanitarian settings, as well as it informs on its interpretability. Thus, the AIM-T could be a valuable measure to assess outcomes after injury in humanitarian settings