Unintentional Injuries: Magnitude, Prevention, and Control
ABSTRACT The World Health Organization estimates injuries accounted for more than 5 million deaths in 2004, significantly impacting the global burden of disease. Nearly 3.9 million of these deaths were due to unintentional injury, a cause also responsible for more than 138 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost in the same year. More than 90% of the DALYs lost occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), highlighting the disproportionate burden that injuries place on developing countries. This article examines the health and social impact of injury, injury data availability, and injury prevention interventions. By proposing initiatives to minimize the magnitude of death and disability due to unintentional injuries, particularly in LMICs, this review serves as a call to action for further investment in injury surveillance, prevention interventions, and health systems strengthening.
- SourceAvailable from: sciencedirect.com[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Injuries are the ninth leading cause of death in the world and disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries. Head injury is the leading cause of trauma death. This study examines the epidemiology and outcomes of traumatic head injury presenting to a tertiary hospital in Malawi, in order to determine effective triage in a resource limited setting. Methods: The study was conducted at Kamuzu Central Hospital (KCH) in Lilongwe Malawi during a three-month period. Vital signs and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) were prospectively collected for all patients that presented to the casualty department secondary to head injury. All head injury admissions were followed until death or discharge. Results: During the three-month study period, 4411 patients presented to KCH secondary to trauma and 841 (19%) had a head injury. A multivariate logistic regression model revealed that GCS and heart rate changes correlated strongly with mortality. There is a four-fold increase in the odds of mortality in moderate versus mild head injury based on GCS. Conclusion: In a resource limited setting, basic trauma tools such as GCS and heart rate can effectively triage head injury patients, who comprise the most critically ill trauma patients. Improvements in head injury outcome require multifaceted efforts including the development of a trauma system to improve pre-hospital care.International Journal of Surgery (London, England) 02/2013; 11(3). DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.01.011 · 1.53 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Low- and middle-income countries have a higher burden of fatal and non-fatal injuries. The lack of evidence-based information hampers efforts for injury prevention. The aim of this study was to calculate non-fatal injury incidence rates and to investigate causes and risk factors for non-fatal injuries in Khartoum state. Information was gathered in a community-based survey using a stratified two-stage cluster sampling technique. Methods of data collection were face-to-face interviews during October and November 2010. The total number of individuals included was 5661, residing in 973 households. The overall injury incidence rate was 82.0/1000 person-years-at-risk. The three leading causes were falls, mechanical forces and road traffic crashes. Low socio-economic status was a risk factor for injuries in urban areas. Males had a significantly higher risk of being injured in both urban and rural areas. Our findings can contribute to the planning of prevention programmes.International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 05/2013; 21(2). DOI:10.1080/17457300.2013.792283 · 0.67 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Quality assurance practices are structured performance improvement and patient safety processes designed to continuously monitor, evaluate, and improve the performance of a trauma program. These practices are integral in the provision of quality injury care, and yet no comprehensive description of existing quality improvement practices used by pediatric trauma centers is available. Therefore, we compared the quality improvement programs used in adult and pediatric trauma centers by performing a reanalysis of our recent survey of trauma quality improvement practices in Canada, United States, Australia, and New Zealand. Prospective observational study. Pediatric and adult trauma centers in United States, Canada, and Australasia. None. None. We surveyed 184 trauma centers verified by professional trauma organizations in the United States, Canada, and Australasia regarding their quality improvement programs. Centers were classified according to population served (adult, adult and pediatric, or pediatric patients), and quality improvement programs were compared using descriptive statistics. Most of the trauma centers reported engagement in quality improvement activities. Adult centers devoted a larger percentage of their quality indicators to the measurement of safety (adult 50% vs adult and pediatric 53% vs pediatric 38%, p < 0.001), whereas pediatric centers placed a greater emphasis on the timeliness of care (20% vs 24% vs 30%, p < 0.001). Few centers used quality indicators to measure the patient-centered nature of care, long-term outcomes, or secondary injury prevention. Opportunities for the improvement of pediatric quality improvement programs exist including a need to determine the optimal structure for trauma quality improvement, develop patient-centered quality indicators of injury care, measure long-term outcomes, and create measures of secondary injury prevention.Pediatric Critical Care Medicine 07/2013; 14(8). DOI:10.1097/PCC.0b013e3182917a4c · 2.34 Impact Factor