Comparing consequences of using two different definitions for body regions for the improvement of personal protective equipment for powered two-wheelers

Abstract

Objective: Various definitions and uses of the term body region can be found in the literature. A definition of body regions using the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codes not strictly aligned with AIS chapters was developed for use in the European Commission-funded PIONEERS project (Protective Innovations of New Equipment for Enhanced Rider Safety). This work aims to examine the consequences of differently defined body regions on injury priority ranking using the percentage of patients showing at least moderate injury severity (AIS 2þ) per regarded body region. Methods: Three different crash investigation data sets of injured riders and/or pillion riders of powered 2-wheelers (PTWs) were used for this analysis. The first contained data for 143 fatalities, the second contained data for 58 severely injured, and the last for contained data for 982 patients from a sample that was close to national representativeness. Frequency of injury was examined using body regions based on the AIS chapters (and first digit of the AIS Unique Identifier) and based on the PIONEERS definition. Results: Though different body region definitions did not result in different top-ranked body regions in terms of injury frequency, different definitions did provide different levels of information that impact priority within AIS chapter-defined regions. For PTW riders, cervical injuries are the highest priority spinal injuries. Thoracic and lumbar spinal injuries seem to occur together with other injuries in the thorax and abdominal region. Severe lower extremity injuries frequently involve the pelvis and the leg. Conclusions: Body regions need to be defined carefully to avoid misinterpretations. Publications that use body regions for their analysis to present injury frequencies should clearly define what they include in each region.