The road to recovery for vulnerable road users hospitalised for orthopaedic injury following an on-road crash.

Clicks: 284
ID: 38803
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #16 of 46 articles by views in accident; analysis and prevention

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists are vulnerable to serious injury due to limited external protective devices. Understanding the level of recovery, and differences between these road user groups, is an important step towards improved understanding of the burden of road trauma, and prioritisation of prevention efforts. This study aimed to characterise and describe patient-reported outcomes of vulnerable road users at 6 and 12 months following orthopaedic trauma.A registry-based cohort study was conducted using data from the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry (VOTOR) and included pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists who were hospitalised for an orthopaedic injury following an on-road collision that occurred between January 2009 and December 2016. Outcomes were measured using the 3-level EuroQol 5 dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D-3 L), Glasgow Outcome Scale - Extended (GOS-E) and return to work questions. Outcomes were collected at 6 and 12 months post-injury. Multivariable generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusted for confounders, were used to compare outcomes between the road user groups over time.6186 orthopaedic trauma patients met the inclusion criteria during the 8-year period. Most patients were motorcyclists (42.8%) followed by cyclists (32.6%) and pedestrians (24.6%). Problems were most prevalent on the usual activities item of the EQ-5D-3 L at 6-months post-injury, and the pain/discomfort item of the EQ-5D-3 L at 12 months. The adjusted odds of reporting problems on all EQ-5D-3 L items were lower for cyclists when compared to pedestrians. Moreover, an average cyclist had a greater odds of a good recovery on the GOS-E, (AOR 2.75, 95% CI 2.33, 3.25) and a greater odds of returning to work (AOR = 3.13, 95% CI 2.46, 3.99) compared to an average pedestrian.Pedestrians and motorcyclists involved in on-road collisions experienced poorer patient-reported outcomes at 6 and 12 months post-injury when compared to cyclists. A focus on both primary injury prevention strategies, and investment in ongoing support and treatment to maximise recovery, is necessary to reduce the burden of road trauma for vulnerable road users.
Reference Key
devlin2019theaccident Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Devlin, Anna;Beck, Ben;Simpson, Pam M;Ekegren, Christina L;Giummarra, Melita J;Edwards, Elton R;Cameron, Peter A;Liew, Susan;Oppy, Andrew;Richardson, Martin;Page, Richard;Gabbe, Belinda J;
Journal accident; analysis and prevention
Year 2019
DOI
S0001-4575(19)30376-8
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.