OBJECTIVE: To compare injury case fatality rates in the United States (US) with New Zealand (NZ) to guide future information collection, research, and evaluation. DESIGN: Using NZ (1992-96) and US (1996-98) mortality censuses, NZ national 1992-96 hospital discharge censuses, and US 1996-98 National Hospital Discharge Survey data, the authors compared case fatality rates by mechanism and intent of injury and age group. The analysis was restricted to severe injuries (AIS> or =3). SUBJECTS: NZ (1992-96) and US (1996-98) populations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ratio of case fatality rates in NZ versus the US (RCFR(NZ:US)). RESULTS: Overall, among cases meeting the study criteria, unintentional injuries were 1.57 times more likely fatal in NZ and intentional assault injuries were 1.14 times more likely to be fatal in the US. Firearms were involved in 50% of US assaults versus 8% of NZ assaults. By mechanism, cutting/piercing injuries were 1.86, firearm injuries were 1.41, and motor vehicle injuries were 1.44 times more to be likely fatal in NZ. Natural/environmental injuries (RCFR(NZ:US) = 0.57), unintentional poisonings (RCFR(NZ:US) = 0.26), and unintentional suffocations (RCFR(NZ:US) = 0.67) were significantly more likely to be fatal in the US. CONCLUSIONS: Possible reasons for the observed results include: differences in geography and proportion of population in rural areas, trauma system differences, road design and vehicle types, seat belt use, larger role of firearms in US assaults, coding practices, policies, and environmental factors. Disparities evoke hypotheses to test in future research that will guide priority setting and intervention.
OBJECTIVE: To compare injury case fatality rates in the United States (US) with New Zealand (NZ) to guide future information collection, research, and evaluation. DESIGN: Using NZ (1992-96) and US (1996-98) mortality censuses, NZ national 1992-96 hospital discharge censuses, and US 1996-98 National Hospital Discharge Survey data, the authors compared case fatality rates by mechanism and intent of injury and age group. The analysis was restricted to severe injuries (AIS> or =3). SUBJECTS: NZ (1992-96) and US (1996-98) populations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ratio of case fatality rates in NZ versus the US (RCFR(NZ:US)). RESULTS: Overall, among cases meeting the study criteria, unintentional injuries were 1.57 times more likely fatal in NZ and intentional assault injuries were 1.14 times more likely to be fatal in the US. Firearms were involved in 50% of US assaults versus 8% of NZ assaults. By mechanism, cutting/piercing injuries were 1.86, firearm injuries were 1.41, and motor vehicle injuries were 1.44 times more to be likely fatal in NZ. Natural/environmental injuries (RCFR(NZ:US) = 0.57), unintentional poisonings (RCFR(NZ:US) = 0.26), and unintentional suffocations (RCFR(NZ:US) = 0.67) were significantly more likely to be fatal in the US. CONCLUSIONS: Possible reasons for the observed results include: differences in geography and proportion of population in rural areas, trauma system differences, road design and vehicle types, seat belt use, larger role of firearms in US assaults, coding practices, policies, and environmental factors. Disparities evoke hypotheses to test in future research that will guide priority setting and intervention.
Authors: Kai Oliver Jensen; Michel Paul Johan Teuben; Rolf Lefering; Sascha Halvachizadeh; Ladislav Mica; Hans-Peter Simmen; Roman Pfeifer; Hans-Christoph Pape; Kai Sprengel Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 2.374
Authors: Christopher Stephen Crowe; Benjamin Ballard Massenburg; Shane Douglas Morrison; James Chang; Jeffrey Barton Friedrich; Gdiom Gebreheat Abady; Fares Alahdab; Vahid Alipour; Jalal Arabloo; Malke Asaad; Maciej Banach; Ali Bijani; Antonio Maria Borzì; Nikolay Ivanovich Briko; Chris D Castle; Daniel Youngwhan Cho; Michael T Chung; Ahmad Daryani; Gebre Teklemariam Demoz; Zachary V Dingels; Hoa Thi Do; Florian Fischer; Jack T Fox; Takeshi Fukumoto; Abadi Kahsu Gebre; Berhe Gebremichael; Juanita A Haagsma; Arvin Haj-Mirzaian; Demelash Woldeyohannes Handiso; Simon I Hay; Chi Linh Hoang; Seyed Sina Naghibi Irvani; Jacek Jerzy Jozwiak; Rohollah Kalhor; Amir Kasaeian; Yousef Saleh Khader; Rovshan Khalilov; Ejaz Ahmad Khan; Roba Khundkar; Sezer Kisa; Adnan Kisa; Zichen Liu; Marek Majdan; Navid Manafi; Ali Manafi; Ana-Laura Manda; Tuomo J Meretoja; Ted R Miller; Abdollah Mohammadian-Hafshejani; Reza Mohammadpourhodki; Mohammad A Mohseni Bandpei; Ali H Mokdad; Mukhammad David Naimzada; Duduzile Edith Ndwandwe; Cuong Tat Nguyen; Huong Lan Thi Nguyen; Andrew T Olagunju; Tinuke O Olagunju; Hai Quang Pham; Dimas Ria Angga Pribadi; Navid Rabiee; Kiana Ramezanzadeh; Kavitha Ranganathan; Nicholas L S Roberts; Leonardo Roever; Saeed Safari; Abdallah M Samy; Lidia Sanchez Riera; Saeed Shahabi; Catalin-Gabriel Smarandache; Dillon O Sylte; Berhe Etsay Tesfay; Bach Xuan Tran; Irfan Ullah; Parviz Vahedi; Amir Vahedian-Azimi; Theo Vos; Dawit Habte Woldeyes; Adam Belay Wondmieneh; Zhi-Jiang Zhang; Spencer L James Journal: Inj Prev Date: 2020-03-13 Impact factor: 2.399