Thomas Kristiansen1, Hans Morten Lossius, Marius Rehn, Petter Kristensen, Hans Magne Gravseth, Jo Røislien, Kjetil Søreide. 1. Department of Research and Development, The Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation, PO Box 94, N-1441 Drøbak, Norway; University of Oslo, Faculty Division Oslo University Hospital, Kirkeveien 166, N-0450 Oslo, Norway; Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Department of Anaesthesiology, PO Box 23 Vinderen, N-0319 Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: thomas.kristiansen@norskluftambulanse.no.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Trauma is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Population-based studies identifying high-risk populations and regions may facilitate primary prevention and the development of optimal trauma systems. This study describes the epidemiology of adult trauma deaths in Norway and identifies high-risk areas by assessing different geographical measures of rurality. METHODS: All trauma-related deaths in Norway from 1998 to 2007 among individuals aged 16-66 years were identified by accessing national registries. Mortality data were analysed by linkage to population and geographical data at municipal, county and national levels. Three measures of rurality (centrality, population density and settlement density) were compared based on their association with trauma mortality rates. RESULTS: The study included 8466 deaths, of which 78% were males. The national annual trauma mortality rate was 28.7 per 100,000. Population density was the best predictor of high-risk areas, and there was a consistent inverse relationship between mortality rates and population density. The most rural areas had 52% higher trauma mortality rates compared to the most urban areas. This difference was largely due to deaths following transport-related injury. Seventy-eight per cent of all deaths occurred in the prehospital phase. Rural areas and death following self-harm had higher proportion of prehospital deaths. CONCLUSION: Rural areas, as defined by population density, are at a higher risk of deaths following traumatic injuries and have higher proportions of prehospital deaths and deaths following transport-related injuries. The heterogeneous characteristics of trauma populations with respect to geography and mode of injury should be recognised in the planning of preventive strategies and in the organisation of trauma care.
INTRODUCTION:Trauma is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Population-based studies identifying high-risk populations and regions may facilitate primary prevention and the development of optimal trauma systems. This study describes the epidemiology of adult trauma deaths in Norway and identifies high-risk areas by assessing different geographical measures of rurality. METHODS: All trauma-related deaths in Norway from 1998 to 2007 among individuals aged 16-66 years were identified by accessing national registries. Mortality data were analysed by linkage to population and geographical data at municipal, county and national levels. Three measures of rurality (centrality, population density and settlement density) were compared based on their association with trauma mortality rates. RESULTS: The study included 8466 deaths, of which 78% were males. The national annual trauma mortality rate was 28.7 per 100,000. Population density was the best predictor of high-risk areas, and there was a consistent inverse relationship between mortality rates and population density. The most rural areas had 52% higher trauma mortality rates compared to the most urban areas. This difference was largely due to deaths following transport-related injury. Seventy-eight per cent of all deaths occurred in the prehospital phase. Rural areas and death following self-harm had higher proportion of prehospital deaths. CONCLUSION: Rural areas, as defined by population density, are at a higher risk of deaths following traumatic injuries and have higher proportions of prehospital deaths and deaths following transport-related injuries. The heterogeneous characteristics of trauma populations with respect to geography and mode of injury should be recognised in the planning of preventive strategies and in the organisation of trauma care.
Authors: Vatsal Chikani; Maureen Brophy; Anne Vossbrink; Robyn N Blust; Mary Benkert; Chris Salvino; Conrad Diven; Rogelio Martinez Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2016-08-22 Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Rahul Raj; Stepani Bendel; Matti Reinikainen; Sanna Hoppu; Teemu Luoto; Tero Ala-Kokko; Sami Tetri; Ruut Laitio; Timo Koivisto; Jaakko Rinne; Riku Kivisaari; Jari Siironen; Markus B Skrifvars Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Jo Røislien; Pieter L van den Berg; Thomas Lindner; Erik Zakariassen; Karen Aardal; J Theresia van Essen Journal: Inj Prev Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 2.399
Authors: Lasse Raatiniemi; Janne Liisanantti; Suvi Niemi; Heini Nal; Pasi Ohtonen; Harri Antikainen; Matti Martikainen; Seppo Alahuhta Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2015-11-05 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: L Raatiniemi; T Steinvik; J Liisanantti; P Ohtonen; M Martikainen; S Alahuhta; T Dehli; T Wisborg; H K Bakke Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 2.105