Traumatic Brain Injury Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes in the Young

Web Pages Compiled by Ellie Church and Rachel Mahon Bosmon

Statistics

Populations Most at Risk

Trends

Risk Factors for Vehicle Crashes

Risk Factors for TBI Outcomes

The Cost of TBI

Prevention and Control

Legislation and Policy Strategies

Barriers to Improvement

Resources for Parents

Resources for Kids

References

Appendix A

Appendix B


Statistics

Motor vehicle crashes are a major cause of death and injury in the United States and unfortunately, children are not excluded from these statistics. In fact, 2004 data show that motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children between the ages of three and fourteen. In 2004, an average of six children under the age of fourteen were killed every day and another 694 were injured due to motor vehicle crashes. (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2004). For 2003, information from Safe Kids Worldwide indicates that 1,591 child occupants under age fourteen died in motor vehicle crashes and an estimated 220,000 children were injured (n.d.).

Although the defined population is somewhat different, including those younger than thirteen, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety “Fatality Facts 2004: Children” report shows that 1,643 children died in 2003 - a rate of 31.5 deaths per one million children. This report also provides more specific information pertinent to our study by delineating deaths within this category to bicyclist deaths, pedestrian death, and finally our interest, passenger vehicle occupants. This figure in 2004 was 1,165 deaths at a rate of 22.3 per one million children. Motor vehicle crash deaths largely occur to passenger vehicle occupants; they comprise seventy-one percent of these deaths.

The following two graphs demonstrate how different age groups are impacted by motor vehicle crashes. The first, Figure 1, shows the highest number of fatalities among those eight to fourteen. However, the following graph, Figure 2, shows that this is at least partially a function of population size in this group; although age groupings are different between the graphs, rates show that children under one are actually the most severely impacted group.

Figure 1


Breakdown by age of traffic fatalities, from the NHTSA website. “Traffic Safety Facts”, 2004 Data

Figure 2

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety; “Fatality Facts 2004: Children”

While fatality rates have decreased due to motor vehicle crashes, deaths are still high due to increasing population size. Also the number of miles Americans travel has nearly doubled in the past twenty years (NHTSA, 2004). That deaths on Friday, Saturday and Sunday are higher than on weekdays may indicate that increased travel may mean increased motor vehicle crash occurrence and death. Still, it is notable that in 1975 there were 1,384 passenger vehicle occupant deaths and 2,078 combined pedestrian and bicyclist deaths and in 2004, 1,165 passenger vehicle occupant deaths and 372 combined pedestrian and bicyclist deaths. Passenger vehicle occupant deaths appear to be less easily eradicated. (Insurance Institute, 2004)

Populations Most at Risk

Certain groups of children are more at risk for motor vehicle occupant death. Specifically, American Indian and Alaska Native children under the age of fourteen have death rates almost one and a half times that of white children. Also, Hispanic children under the age of four have death rates one and a half times that of non-Hispanic children (Safe Kids Worldwide, n.d.).

Among children aged four to fourteen, motor vehicle crashes are the number one cause of brain injury. It is second major cause of pediatric brain injury, specifically with children as passengers (Brain Injury Association of America, n.d., “Brain Injury…”). A study by Langlois, et. al. indicates that between the years 1995 and 2001 an average of 9,000 (figure rounded) children under fourteen were reported to have been traumatically brain injured due to motor vehicle crashes. 1,481 children died from these injuries. A large disparity was noted between white and black children. For black children, the rate of traumatic brain injury (TBI) related deaths occurring due to motor vehicle crashes was 3.0 as compared to that of white children, 2.4. Again, for TBIs not only resulting in death but also injuries, the rate for black children is 20.3 as compared with 10.3 in white children. Differences are also observed in how subsets of the zero through fourteen age group experience brain injury. Black children die more frequently due to this cause in the age range of zero to four and for white children, in the ten to fourteen age range. For both injury and death, black children's rates are highest in the five to nine age group, and for white children rates are highest in the ten to fourteen age range. I found no explanation for these differences in the literature, but it is clear that different risk factors are at play.

For more information on types and levels of brain injury, select Appendix A.
For more information on the effects of brain injury, select Appendix B.

Trends

Information on trends in TBI due to motor vehicle crashes is difficult to find. However, we can tentatively predict that as populations continue to grow and Americans continue their typical pattern of high miles driven, TBIs in youth may worsen or simply continue to be the persistent problem that they are today. Obviously, in light of the apparent differences in incidence between ethnic groups, significant work is needed (Langlois, Rutland-Brown and Thomas, 2005).

Risk Factors for Vehicle Crashes

As mentioned earlier, day of travel is a risk factor for motor vehicle crash deaths. Most deaths of those younger than thirteen occurred on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays in 2004 according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. There was also a slight increase in these deaths in the months of May, June, and July. Additionally, most deaths occurred between three P.M. and nine P.M.

Alcohol use is another obvious risk factor for vehicle crashes and TBI in youth. In 2004, alcohol use was a factor in 442 or twenty-one percent of fatalities due to crashes. Approximately half of those fatalities occurred to passengers in vehicles with a driver who had been drinking and had a BAC level of at least .01 (NHTSA, 2004).

Other well known causes or contributing factors of motor vehicle crashes include excessive speed, distraction while driving, and drowsiness while driving. Legislation is an additional factor and is discussed under Legislation & Policy Strategies.

Risk Factors for TBI Outcomes

Despite increased use of restraints over the last few decades, use of restraints in motor vehicles continues to be a risk factor for TBI in youth. In a Brain Injury Association of America report, “Brain Injury: The Abc Years”, it is noted that eighty-five percent of infants (children under one) were restrained in motor vehicles in 1997, but only sixty percent of kids aged one to four were restrained. In general, restraint use appears to go down as a child grows older. Children who are unrestrained are more likely to be injured or die than those restrained in vehicles. Even those children who are restrained are often restrained improperly. The National Safe Kids Campaign reports that eighty percent of children who are placed in child safety seats are being improperly restrained. Finally, it is important to note that driver seat belt use is positively associated with child restraint use. In one study, forty percent of children riding with unrestrained drivers were also completely unrestrained themselves (Safe Kids Worldwide, n.d.).

For children under twelve seating placement in the vehicle is also important. Safe Kids Worldwide notes that children under the age of twelve are thirty-six percent less likely to die in a crash if they are seated in the back of a passenger vehicle rather than the front. The also estimate that one-third of children ride in the front. Children are more likely to ride in front if they traveling with unbelted drivers, riding along as sole passengers or are over the age of six.

The Cost of TBI

In the CDC's report prepared for Congress, a study is quoted which states that the 1985 annual economic burden of TBI in the United States was approximately $37.8 billion. That amount included $4.5 billion in direct expenditures for hospital care, extended care, and other medical care and services; $20.6 billion in injury-related work loss and disability; and $12.7 billion in lost income from premature death. A 1992 study estimated the total cost of TBI to be $48.3 billion annually, with hospitalization accounting for $31.7 billion. Fatal brain injuries that year ran up to $16.6 billion each year (Brain Injury Association of North Carolina, n.d.). Most would certainly agree that today's figures would be even more astronomical and worth the effort on many different levels to ameliorate the situation. Information on the costs of TBI in children due to motor vehicle collisions was not available.

Prevention and Control

Haddon's Matrix

The following is a representation of Haddon's matrix with each factor (Human, Vehicle & Equiptment, Physical Environment, Socio-Economic Factors) divided into each of his phases (Pre-Injury, Injury, Post-Injury) and the corresponding interventions or risk factors.

Human

Pre-Injury

  • Reaction time
  • Alcohol and other drug use
  • Age
  • Cell phone use
  • Driving experience
  • Sight and hearing abilities

Injury

  • Age
  • Seating position
  • Use of seat belt/other safety equipment
  • Physical Factors such as skull and bone strength
Post-Injury
  • Physical condition
  • Self-efficacy
Vehicle & Equipment
Pre-Injury
  • Ban motor vehicle
  • Require helmets while riding in cars
  • Require seat belts/child restraints be worn
  • Condition of the car, i.e. brakes, steering, horn, etc
Injury
  • Breakaway steering columns
  • Front & side airbags in cars
Post-Injury
  • Condition of hospital equipment
  • Condition of rehabilitation equipment
Physical Environment
Pre-Injury
  • Hazards on the side of the road
  • Good signage
  • Amount of noise/distractions
  • Number of people in the car
Injury
  • Put barriers around hard objects to soften the impact
  • Less resistant materials in the environment
Post-Injury
  • Safe place for recovery
  • Ease of navigation
  • Access to rehabilitation services
Socio-Economic Factors
Pre-Injury
  • Access to vehicles with safety equipment
  • Driving skills
Injury
  • Possibly physical condition of host
Post-Injury
  • Access to good medical care
  • Access to support services/people
  • Employer willing to accommodate disability
  • Access to rehabilitation services

William Haddon proposed ten strategies that can be used by injury prevention specialists to prevent and control injuries. They are listed here:

Haddon's 10 Strategies (Haddon, 1970)

  1. To prevent the creation of the hazard in the first place.
  2. To reduce the amount of the hazard brought into being.
  3. To prevent the release of the hazard that already exists.
  4. To modify the rate or spatial distribution of release of the hazard from its source.
  5. To separate, in time or in space, the hazard and that which is to be protected.
  6. To separate the hazard and that which is to be protected by interposition of a material “barrier.”
  7. To modify relevant basic qualities of the hazard.
  8. To make what is to be protected more resistant to damage from the hazard.
  9. To begin to counter the damage already done by the environmental hazard.
  10. To stabilize, repair, and rehabilitate the object of the damage.

Ultimately, the strategy that keeps children safest is the first of Haddon's Strategies: to prevent to creation of the hazard in the first place. This is not feasible in this case because it would involve banning cars, something that would not go over well with the American public. As a culture, we are very dependant on our automobiles to get around.

There are many strategies already in place to prevent brain injuries in children under 14 in motor vehicle crashes. For example, airbags are a passive restraint that would fall under Haddon's strategy four and six, and are required on the front driver and passenger side of all cars sold in the United States. The strategies that we can affect with policy regarding traffic safety are to prevent the release of the hazard and to modify the release of the hazard. Preventing the release of the hazard involves making sure vehicles do not crash into each other while on the roads, and modifying the release of the hazard involves technology such as seat belts, air bags, and car seats.

Legislation and Policy Strategies

Legislation plays a part in several means of reducing injuries and crashes. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, whose organization is dedicated to reducing deaths and injuries from crashes on the nation's highways, has rated all states on various types of legislation pertaining to the prevention of crashes and injuries. Legislation is rated either “Poor”, “Marginal”, “Fair” or “Good”. Examples of what qualifies “good” ratings for several categories of legislation follow (direct excerpts):

Safety belt use laws

GOOD: an administrative license revocation law that mandates at least a 30-day revocation for a violation with few or no exceptions for hardship; a law under which it's illegal to drive with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at or above 0.08 percent; a readily enforceable law under which it's illegal for anyone younger than 21 to drive with any measurable BAC (enforcement is impeded in some states because police must suspect that a young driver has a high BAC before administering an alcohol test to check for any measurable BAC); and sobriety checkpoints must be permitted

Alcohol Laws

GOOD: law allows primary enforcement (police may stop and ticket motorists for belt law violations alone); fines and/or license points are imposed for violations; and law applies to occupants in rear as well as front seats

Child restraint use laws

GOOD: all children younger than 13 in all vehicle seats are required to ride in infant restraints, child seats, or safety belts; enforcement is primary (see above for definition of primary enforcement)

Red light camera enforcement laws

GOOD: law grants specific statewide authority for camera enforcement

Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, How State Laws Measure Up, 2000

Many of these legislative approaches have been shown to be effective. For example, an Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study showed that primary enforcement reduced annual passenger vehicle driver death rates by seven percent (Farmer and Williams, 2005). Additionally, Minnesota’s high blood alcohol concentration (BAC) law, which imposes stiffer penalties on drivers found to have BACs above .20, has been found to successfully lower rates of recidivism (NHTSA, 2004, “Enhanced Sanctions…). While laws like these may be tough to pass, they would go a long way in reducing vehicle crashes and protection children from TBIs.

Since a child under 14 is rarely the driver of the vehicle involved in a crash that results in a head injury, policies should be focused on the driver of the car who is often a parent. Parents and other adults can keep kids safe by making sure they are buckled up and in the proper car seat, and by making sure licensed drivers are driving safely. Some laws that reinforce this behavior are child passenger safety laws, which stipulate that children under a certain weight and/or height need to be in a certain type of seat designed for their size. Disobeying this law can result in fines for the parent. Child passenger seats are very important to protect young children from head injuries. Most states have laws that require use of child passenger restraints, but these laws vary from state to state. Minnesota’s law requires that children under four be properly restrained in the proper child passenger restraint system.

Policies that prevent head injuries in young people due to motor vehicle crashes are numerous because any policy that prevents a crash from occurring would apply in this situation. We have to determine which of those strategies are most important.

Some studies have shown that interventions can be effective in increasing booster seat use. (Ehiri, 2006) These interventions include offering coupons or discounts on booster seats, free booster seats for low-income families, and educational programs. Incentive programs combined with education showed the most effect.

We can look to other municipalities to see how their policy strategies have affected seatbelt use. In Japan, seat belts are required, but there is an exemption for pregnant women. Ichikawa studied attitudes of pregnant Japanese women towards this law. (2003) They found that seatbelt use declined at 20 weeks gestation, but that pregnant women who were aware of the health benefits of wearing their seatbelt were more likely to wear their seatbelt, and women who knew about the exemption were less likely to wear their seatbelt. Although Minnesota does not have an exemption for pregnant women, we do have a secondary law, meaning that the law is only enforceable if a car has violated another traffic law. The results of the Japanese study could indicate that Minnesotans have similar attitudes towards seat belt use. Those who are aware of the benefits of wearing seat belts may be more likely to use them, while those who are aware of the secondary status of the law may be less likely to wear their seat belt.

One final technology that is relatively new is GPS (Global Positioning Systems) in new vehicles. These systems can automatically or manually alert emergency medical services (EMS) when a crash has occurred. These systems may reduce the time between the crash and the response of emergency services, possibly improving outcomes for someone who has suffered a TBI during a crash. Since these systems are so new, no research results are available about the effects on response times of emergency services for vehicles with these systems, but GPS system and its effect on EMS response time would be worth looking into more thoroughly.

Barriers to Improvement

Several barriers to improving the situation exist. First, many of the risk and contributing factors that could be changed are behavioral and very difficult to affect. These include drinking behaviors and restraint use. Another difficulty is in changing legislation to in turn affect these behaviors. Changes in legislation can be especially effective, but they also take a large investment of time and energy on the part of governmental bodies, non-profits and lobbyists. For example, a primary seat belt law has been in the works for at least six years in Minnesota. Finally, a less complicated barrier is the cost of child restraint systems. Lack of access to affordable car seats contributes to low use among low-income families. However, ninety-five percent of those families who do own a car seat utilize them.

If policies mandating seat belt use are so effective in increasing use, why are they so hard to get passed? Decision-makers are often not looking at problems from a public health perspective. A study done with Colorado legislators showed that 96% of legislators knew that seat belts reduced the risk of death, and 87% believed they saved lives, yet this knowledge was not enough for them to vote for a primary seat belt law (Lowenstein 1993). Legislators who voted for a law were likely to believe that their constituents favored the law and that the fact that seat belts saved lives was “extremely” important. A strong predictor of a “no” vote was the perception that a seat belt law was an imposition on personal freedom. When advocating for a seat belt laws and other policies that prevent injuries in general, advocates need to consider how supportive the general public is of a policy and frame the issue in ways that emphasize the public’s health over individual freedoms.

Resources For Parents

Kids Health for Parents. http://kidshealth.org/parent/firstaid_safe/travel/auto.html.

American Academy of Pediatrics. Car Safety Seats. http://www.aap.org/family/carseatguide.htm.

Resources For Kids

Safe-A-Rooni is a web site that sends young people on a “Safety Safari” where they learn about the importance of buckling up. The web site is http://www.safe-a-rooni.org.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving has a program about staying safe while riding in a car with adults called Protecting You/Protecting Me. The web site is http://www.pypm.org.

The Minnesota Safety Council has a web site for kids that can be found at http://www.mnsafetycouncil.org/kids/index.htm.

Additional Resources

The following contribution was made by Susan Jordan on December 13, 2011 who found this website very helpful as she did research for a special presentation. Through her research, she also discovered additional websites that complemented and provided further resources on this important topic; she has shared these below. Our thanks to Susan who has a major commitment to further enhance awareness about car safety and hopefully prevent adverse consequences to others in the future.

http://kidshealth.org/parent/firstaid_safe/outdoor/auto.html

http://www.cheapcarinsurance.net/car-safety-child-safety-seats

http://www.nhtsa.gov/Safety/CPS


Return to Top of Page