| Literature DB >> 30458715 |
Gift G Lukumay1, Menti L Ndile2, Anne H Outwater2, Dickson A Mkoka2, Mojgan Padyab3, Britt-Inger Saveman3, Susann Backteman-Erlanson3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The availability of prehospital trauma care is an important means of reducing serious injuries and fatalities associated with road traffic injuries (RTIs). Lay responders such as traffic police play an important role in the provision of prehospital trauma care to RTI victims, especially where there is no established prehospital care system. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to investigate knowledge, self-reported practice, and attitudes toward post-crash first aid among traffic police officers in Tanzania.Entities:
Keywords: Post-crash care; Road traffic injury; Traffic police
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30458715 PMCID: PMC6247529 DOI: 10.1186/s12873-018-0199-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Emerg Med ISSN: 1471-227X
Demographic characteristics of the study participants (N = 340)
| Characteristics |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Male | 248 | 72.9 |
| Female | 92 | 27.1 |
| Age group (years) | ||
| 20–29 | 66 | 19.4 |
| 30–39 | 115 | 33.8 |
| 40–49 | 109 | 32.1 |
| 50–59 | 50 | 14.7 |
| Highest educational attainment | ||
| Primary | 34 | 10.0 |
| Ordinary secondary | 239 | 70.3 |
| Advance secondary | 23 | 6.8 |
| College | 33 | 9.7 |
| University | 11 | 3.2 |
| Work experience (years) | ||
| 1–4 | 47 | 13.8 |
| 5–9 | 72 | 21.2 |
| 10–14 | 57 | 16.8 |
| 15–19 | 44 | 12.9 |
| 20–24 | 49 | 14.4 |
| 25–29 | 61 | 17.9 |
| ≥ 30 | 10 | 2.9 |
| Previous on-the job first aid training | ||
| Yes | 222 | 65.3 |
| No | 118 | 34.7 |
| Number of RTI victims cared for, previous 12 months | ||
| 0 | 99 | 29.1 |
| 1–2 | 53 | 15.6 |
| 3–5 | 54 | 15.9 |
| ≥ 6 | 134 | 39.4 |
Note RTI = road traffic injury
Fig. 1Knowledge of traffic police about managing road traffic injury (RTI) victim at the scene. Responses of traffic police officers on asked priority condition when caring for RTI victims and recommended ways of managing those conditions
Fig. 2Knowledge about post-crash first aid for road traffic injury (RTI) victims. Knowledge categories of traffic police officers during provision of post-crash care to RTI victims
Traffic police officers’ levels of knowledge about post-crash first aid (N = 340)
| Officer characteristics | Level of knowledge | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age group, years ( | Good | Fair | Low |
| 20–29 ( | 2 (3.0%) | 42 (63.6%) | 22 (33.3%) |
| 30–39 ( | 5 (4.3%) | 72 (62.6%) | 38 (33.0%) |
| 40–49 ( | 2 (1.8%) | 63 (57.8%) | 44 (40.4%) |
| 50–59 ( | 1 (2.0%) | 27 (54.0%) | 22 (44.0%) |
| Highest educational attainment ( | |||
| Primary school ( | 0 (0%) | 1(4.8%) | 20(95.2%) |
| Ordinary secondary school ( | 6 (2.5%) | 144 (60.3%) | 89 (37.2%) |
| Advanced secondary school ( | 0 (0%) | 17 (73.9%) | 6 (26.1%) |
| College ( | 3 (9.1%) | 20 (60.6%) | 10 (30.3%) |
| University ( | 1 (9.1%) | 9 (81.8%) | 1 (9.1%) |
| Work experience, years ( | |||
| < 5 ( | 1 (2.1%) | 32 (68.1%) | 14 (29.8%) |
| 5–9 ( | 3 (4.2%) | 43 (59.7%) | 26 (36.1%) |
| 10–14 ( | 3 (5.3%) | 37 (64.9%) | 17 (29.8%) |
| 15–19 ( | 0 (0%) | 30 (68.2%) | 14 (31.8%) |
| 20–24 ( | 0 (0%) | 24 (49.0%) | 25 (51.0%) |
| 25–29 ( | 3 (4.9%) | 33 (54.1%) | 25 (41.0%) |
| ≥ 30 ( | 0 (0%) | 5 (50.0%) | 5 (50.0%) |
| Previous on-the-job first aid training ( | |||
| Yes ( | 4 (1.8%) | 133 (59.9%) | 85 (38.3%) |
| No ( | 6 (5.1%) | 71 (60.2%) | 41 (34.7%) |
Post-crash first aid practices among traffic police officers reported singly or multiply in a given scenario
| Question | Responses | Officers’ responses n (%) |
|---|---|---|
| How would you ensure personal safety during RTI victim care | Put on glovesa | 241(70.9) |
| Put on plastic bags | 37(10.9) | |
| Cordon off the scene | 15(4.4) | |
| I don’t know | 63(18.5) | |
| How would you initially manage a compromised airway | Mouth to mouth breath | 45(13.2) |
| Chin lift head tilta | 16(4.7) | |
| Loosen belt | 51(15) | |
| Decongest the area | 92(27.1) | |
| Uncover the victim’s chest | 64(18.8) | |
| Pour water on the victim | 5(1.5) | |
| Fan the victim | 74(21.8) | |
| Compress the chest | 46(13.5) | |
| Rush victim to hospital | 29(8.5) | |
| Place victim on back | 66(19.4) | |
| I don’t know | 37(10.9) | |
| How would you control bleeding from an injured site | Applying pressure with cloth/bandagea | 278(81.8) |
| Pour cold water to injured site | 4(1.2) | |
| Cover bleeding area with cloth/bandage | 22(6.5) | |
| Rush victim to hospital | 20(5.9) | |
| I don’t know | 17(5.0) | |
| How would you initially manage a fractured bone | Applying splinta | 158(46.5) |
| Stretch bone | 41(12.1) | |
| Tie bone with bandage/cloth | 76(22.4) | |
| Rush victim to hospital | 107(31.5) | |
| I don’t know | 28(8.2) |
a Recommended practice
Associations between recommended post-crash first aid practice and demographic characteristics
| Characteristic | Use of gloves | Chin lift/head tilt | Apply pressure | Apply splint | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correct | Incorrect | Correct | Incorrect | Correct | Incorrect | Correct | Incorrect | |||||
| Age in years | ||||||||||||
| 20–29 | 47(71.2) | 19(28.8) | 5 (7.6) | 61(92.4) | 42(63.6) | 24(36.4) | 27(40.9) | 39(59.1) | ||||
| 30–39 | 82(71.3) | 33(28.7) | .971 | 3 (2.6) | 112(97.4) | .283 | 99(86.1) | 16(13.9) | .000* | 58(50.4) | 57(49.6) | .561 |
| 40–49 | 78(71.6) | 31(28.4) | 4 (3.7) | 105(96.3) | 95(87.2) | 14(12.8) | 48(44.0) | 61(56.0) | ||||
| 50–59 | 34(68.0) | 16(32.0) | 4 (8.0) | 46 (92.0) | 42(84.0) | 8 (16.0) | 25(50.0) | 25(50.0) | ||||
| Educational attainment | ||||||||||||
| Primary | 23(67.6) | 11(32.4) | 0 (0) | 34 (100) | 25(73.5) | 9 (26.5) | 14(41.2) | 20(58.8) | ||||
| O-level | 166(69.5) | 73(30.5) | 13(5.4) | 226(94.6) | 192(80.3) | 47(19.7) | 110(46.0) | 129(54.0) | ||||
| A-level | 19 (82.6) | 4 (17.4) | .621 | 1 (4.3) | 22 (95.7) | .618 | 22 (95.7) | 1 (4.3) | .111 | 10 (43.5) | 13 (56.5) | .197 |
| College | 24 (72.7) | 9 (27.3) | 2 (6.1) | 31 (93.9) | 28 (84.8) | 5 (15.2) | 15 (45.5) | 18 (54.5) | ||||
| University | 9 (81.8) | 2 (18.2) | 0 (0) | 11 (100) | 11 (100) | 0 (0) | 9 (81.8) | 2 (18.2) | ||||
| Work experience | ||||||||||||
| < 5 | 34 (72.3) | 13(27.7) | 5(10.6) | 42 (89.4) | 33 (70.2) | 14(29.8) | 24 (51.1) | 23 (48.9) | ||||
| 5–9 | 55 (76.4) | 17(23.6) | 1 (1.4) | 71 (98.6) | 58 (80.6) | 14(19.4) | 33 (45.8) | 39 (54.2) | ||||
| 10–14 | 41 (71.9) | 16(28.1) | 1 (1.8) | 56 (98.2) | 46 (80.7) | 11(19.3) | 25 (43.9) | 32 (56.1) | ||||
| 15–19 | 31 (70.5) | 13(29.5) | .344 | 2 (4.5) | 42 (95.5) | .188 | 40 (90.9) | 4 (9.1) | .143 | 22 (50.0) | 22 (50.0) | .687 |
| 20–24 | 36 (73.5) | 13(26.5) | 2 (4.1) | 47 (95.9) | 40 (81.6) | 9 (18.4) | 19 (38.8) | 30 (61.2) | ||||
| 25–29 | 40 (65.6) | 21(34.4) | 5 (8.2) | 56 (91.8) | 54 (88.5) | 7 (11.5) | 32 (52.5) | 29 (47.5) | ||||
| ≥ 30 | 4 (40.0) | 6 (60.0) | 0 (0) | 10 (100) | 7 (70.0) | 3 (30.0) | 3 (3.00) | 7 (70.0) | ||||
O-level = ordinary secondary level. A-level = advanced secondary level
Participants attitude towards provision of post-crash first aid to RTI victims
| Attitudinal statement | Officers responses n (%) |
|---|---|
| I believe it’s my responsibility to provide post-crash first aid | |
| Strongly agree | 185 (54.4) |
| Agree | 152 (44.7) |
| Disagree | 1 (0.3) |
| Strongly disagree | 2 (0.6) |
| I believe post-crash first aid should be initiated by lay responders | |
| Strongly agree | 180 (52.9) |
| Agree | 146 (42.9) |
| Disagree | 8 (2.4) |
| Strongly disagree | 6 (1.8) |
| I’m willing to provide post-crash first aid | |
| Strongly agree | 175 (51.5) |
| Agree | 152 (44.7) |
| Disagree | 9 (2.6) |
| Strongly disagree | 4 (1.2) |
| I believe providing post-crash first aid will increase survival chance | |
| Strongly agree | 196 (57.6) |
| Agree | 135 (39.7) |
| Disagree | 4 (1.2) |
| Strongly disagree | 5 (1.5) |