A Comprehensive Review of Low-Speed Rear Impact Volunteer Studies and a Comparison to Real-World Outcomes

Cormier, Joseph M.; Gwin, Lisa; Reinhart, Lars; Wood, Rawson L.; Bain, Charles E.

doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000002622

Cited by 18 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Low speed or minimal damage rear impact crashes can be generally categorized as collisions with a delta V of <13 km/h (8 mph), as significant vehicle damage is unusual below this speed change in bumper to bumper impacts [ 20 ]. The risk of injury from such crashes has been described in the literature as ranging variously from a low of 12% (for <8 km/h [5 mph] delta V) to 47% for an 11 km/h (7 mph) delta V [ 60 , 61 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most recently (2018), Cormier and colleagues (all employees of Biodynamic Research Corporation), described a review of crash testing literature and an analysis of national crash injury data pertaining to rear impact crashes, noting that the latter indicated a 12% and 22% rate of cervical spine injury at <8 km/h and 8–16 km/h, respectively [ 60 ]. Despite this finding, the authors discussed the similarity between the forces of ADLs and the crashes, and concluded that an 18 km/h rear impact crash test is a safe event.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is Acceleration a Valid Proxy for Injury Risk in Minimal Damage Traffic Crashes? A Comparative Review of Volunteer, ADL and Real-World Studies

Nolet

Nordhoff

Kristman

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Injury claims associated with minimal damage rear impact traffic crashes are often defended using a “biomechanical approach,” in which the occupant forces of the crash are compared to the forces of activities of daily living (ADLs), resulting in the conclusion that the risk of injury from the crash is the same as for ADLs. The purpose of the present investigation is to evaluate the scientific validity of the central operating premise of the biomechanical approach to injury causation; that occupant acceleration is a scientifically valid proxy for injury risk. Data were abstracted, pooled, and compared from three categories of published literature: (1) volunteer rear impact crash testing studies, (2) ADL studies, and (3) observational studies of real-world rear impacts. We compared the occupant accelerations of minimal or no damage (i.e., 3 to 11 kph speed change or “delta V”) rear impact crash tests to the accelerations described in 6 of the most commonly reported ADLs in the reviewed studies. As a final step, the injury risk observed in real world crashes was compared to the results of the pooled crash test and ADL analyses, controlling for delta V. The results of the analyses indicated that average peak linear and angular acceleration forces observed at the head during rear impact crash tests were typically at least several times greater than average forces observed during ADLs. In contrast, the injury risk of real-world minimal damage rear impact crashes was estimated to be at least 2000 times greater than for any ADL. The results of our analysis indicate that the principle underlying the biomechanical injury causation approach, that occupant acceleration is a proxy for injury risk, is scientifically invalid. The biomechanical approach to injury causation in minimal damage crashes invariably results in the vast underestimation of the actual risk of such crashes, and should be discontinued as it is a scientifically invalid practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Acceleration a Valid Proxy for Injury Risk in Minimal Damage Traffic Crashes? A Comparative Review of Volunteer, ADL and Real-World Studies

Nolet

Nordhoff

Kristman

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In MVCs, the vehicle's impact-related change in velocity is known as the delta-V (Dv), a quantity that is widely accepted as a general estimate of impact severity (72,73). Another key concept is the principal direction of force (PDOF) and typically is referenced to a horizontal clock face oriented at the impact location ( Figure 2).…”

Section: Underlying Biomechanical Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Significance of the Seat Belt Sign as Evidence of a Compromised Occupant–Seat Belt Relationship

Greenston

Wood

Reinhart

2019

The Journal of Emergency Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It should be noted that the ideal design solution for anthropometric dummies intended for crash tests would be a design that would not require frequent calibration and at the same time ensure the durability of the joint and the repeatability of the results [28][29][30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Head Displacement during a Frontal Collision at a Speed of 20 km/h—Experimental Studies

Frej

2023

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the research is to compare the head displacements of volunteers with the head displacements of the KPSIT C50 dummy, taking into account the change of vehicle seat belts. Unfortunately, sudden braking or collisions between vehicles is becoming more and more common, especially during traffic jams. There is considerable ignorance in the literature on the behavior of the human body during a low-speed collision, which motivates the development of low-speed crash test procedures in order to reduce the risk of cervical spine injuries. The tests were carried out at a teaching station designed to measure the forces in seat belts and the displacements of individual body elements (dummy or volunteer) during a low-speed crash test. The article is part of extensive research on crash tests using volunteers and KPSIT physical dummies. The study involved 150 volunteers who were divided into specific percentile groups. The article compares the head displacements of the constructed KPSIT C50 dummy with the head displacements of volunteers representing the 50th percentile group of the male population. The study conducted with volunteers was under control and was completely safe for people participating in the study. The research shows that the use of a bucket sports seat equipped with four-point or five-point seat belts significantly reduces the movement of the head during a low-speed collision. This type of vehicle seat is safer and provides a reduced risk of injury from hitting the head on the steering column in a low-speed collision when the airbag has not deployed. Moreover, research shows that standard seat belts placed in passenger vehicles allow the head to move freely forward in the event of an accident or low-speed collision. Therefore, if the speed is too low to deploy the airbag, there is a high probability that the driver and passengers will hit their heads against the cockpit of the passenger vehicle during a collision at a speed of 20 km/h.

show abstract

A Comprehensive Review of Low-Speed Rear Impact Volunteer Studies and a Comparison to Real-World Outcomes

Cited by 18 publications

References 39 publications

Is Acceleration a Valid Proxy for Injury Risk in Minimal Damage Traffic Crashes? A Comparative Review of Volunteer, ADL and Real-World Studies

Is Acceleration a Valid Proxy for Injury Risk in Minimal Damage Traffic Crashes? A Comparative Review of Volunteer, ADL and Real-World Studies

Clinical Significance of the Seat Belt Sign as Evidence of a Compromised Occupant–Seat Belt Relationship

Analysis of Head Displacement during a Frontal Collision at a Speed of 20 km/h—Experimental Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About