QUICK QUESTION ABOUT MVAs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Hard24Get

The black sleepymed
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
4,762
Reaction score
3
If you get into an accident and your front airbag employs with some resulting chest pain, should pts go to the ED or just take some NSAIDS? What's the cut-ff criteria for asking them to come in? Thanks.
 
If you get into an accident and your front airbag employs with some resulting chest pain, should pts go to the ED or just take some NSAIDS? What's the cut-ff criteria for asking them to come in? Thanks.

To cover yourself, every patient should be seen. I NEVER tell anyone NOT to be seen. An important question is, was the victim wearing a seatbelt when the airbag deployed? Early on, there was an incidence of people not wearing the seatbelt, as they thought the airbag was sufficient, and there were a number of aortic disruptions from the rapid deceleration that manifested several hours later.

There is no specific "cut-off", because it's not a cookie-cutter model.

Most people will be fine, but you don't want to be on the hook for the one that isn't.
 
If you drive the box with lights and sirens, you offer everyone a ride to the ED. If they decline, you make them sign something.

Now, the cops sometimes decide when to call rescue in, for things like fenderbenders and the like, but with liability where it is, everyone gets a ride.
 
To cover yourself, every patient should be seen. I NEVER tell anyone NOT to be seen. An important question is, was the victim wearing a seatbelt when the airbag deployed? Early on, there was an incidence of people not wearing the seatbelt, as they thought the airbag was sufficient, and there were a number of aortic disruptions from the rapid deceleration that manifested several hours later.

There is no specific "cut-off", because it's not a cookie-cutter model.

Most people will be fine, but you don't want to be on the hook for the one that isn't.


ok, thanks. I meant "cut-off' in terms of discharge instructions, "If you have increased pain, etc". Just wondering, 'cause a friend asked me and I wasn't sure. 😳
Thanks again to both.
 
DC instructions that EVERYONE gets are: nausea and vomiting, if you are worse in any way, or you think you need to be seen again. These are in conjunction with anything specific to the complaint.

If someone is throwing up, they can't take any PO meds you've prescribed. If they are worse in any way, or think they need to be seen again, that (legally) helps you a little bit, as it's difficult to answer: "If you were worse, why didn't you go get seen?" or "If you thought you needed to be seen again, why didn't you go?"

As Corey Slovis and Keith Wrenn from Vanderbilt wrote: "Good discharge instructions are better than an accurate diagnosis."
 
DC instructions that EVERYONE gets are: nausea and vomiting, if you are worse in any way, or you think you need to be seen again. These are in conjunction with anything specific to the complaint.

If someone is throwing up, they can't take any PO meds you've prescribed. If they are worse in any way, or think they need to be seen again, that (legally) helps you a little bit, as it's difficult to answer: "If you were worse, why didn't you go get seen?" or "If you thought you needed to be seen again, why didn't you go?"

As Corey Slovis and Keith Wrenn from Vanderbilt wrote: "Good discharge instructions are better than an accurate diagnosis."




So, so so true. This has saved my rear on a couple of cases. We CQI all 'return within 24'-ers. I have had two that came back because of solid discharge instructions and was found to have done nothing wrong (not having the diagnosis initially) because of 1-good charting and 2-good discharge instruction.


EM is not about finding the diagnosis 100% of the time. Its about figuring out whose sick, who needs to come in, who can go home and when to come back.
 
I also think is it wise to always include a generalized statement or two on your discharge instuctions, something line "worsening symptoms, new concerns, or decline of health." there isn't much that falls outside of these...
 
To cover yourself, every patient should be seen. I NEVER tell anyone NOT to be seen. An important question is, was the victim wearing a seatbelt when the airbag deployed? Early on, there was an incidence of people not wearing the seatbelt, as they thought the airbag was sufficient, and there were a number of aortic disruptions from the rapid deceleration that manifested several hours later.

I agree that rapid decelerations raise concern for aortic injury, but does seat belt vs airbag really make a difference?
 
I agree that rapid decelerations raise concern for aortic injury, but does seat belt vs airbag really make a difference?

I looked for the data I was looking for, but couldn't find it. I'll keep looking. I did find this, though:

http://www.jtrauma.com/pt/re/jtraum...hL6BsvZhshfs4GB7!424277612!-949856144!8091!-1

The Association between Occupant Restraint Systems and Risk of Injury in Frontal Motor Vehicle Collisions.

ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care. 54(6):1182-1187, June 2003.
McGwin, Gerald Jr., MS, PhD; Metzger, Jesse MPH; Alonso, Jorge E. MD; Rue, Loring W. III, MD

Abstract:
Background : An evaluation of seat belt use and airbag deployment, either alone or in combination, on risk of injury to specific body regions has yet to be completed.

Methods : A retrospective cohort study of front seat occupants involved in police-reported, tow-away, frontal motor vehicle collisions using data from the 1995 through 2000 National Automotive Sampling System was conducted. Only vehicles with a change in velocity (delta-V) of >= 15 km/h were included. Risk of injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale score >= 2) to specific body regions was compared according to seat belt use and airbag deployment.

Results : Compared with completely unrestrained occupants, those using a seat belt alone or in combination with an airbag had a reduced overall risk of injury (relative risk, 0.42 and 0.71, respectively); no association was observed for those restrained with an airbag only (relative risk, 0.98). This pattern of results was similar for specific body regions with the exception of the lower extremity, wherein a significantly increased risk was observed for airbag deployment alone.

Conclusion : Airbag deployment does not appear to significantly reduce the risk of injury either alone or in combination with seat belts. Airbag deployment without associated seat belt use may increase the risk of lower extremity injury.
 
OK, found a few:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=2331291&dopt=Abstract

Accid Anal Prev. 1990 Apr;22(2):167-75. Related Articles, Links

Restraint effectiveness, occupant ejection from cars, and fatality reductions.

Evans L.

Operating Sciences Department, General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, Michigan 48090.

The effectiveness of air cushion restraint systems, or airbags, in preventing fatalities is estimated by assuming that they do not affect ejection probability, and protect only in frontal, or near frontal, crashes with impact-reducing effectiveness equal to that of lap/shoulder belts. In order to compute airbag effectiveness, lap/shoulder belt effectiveness and the fraction of fatalities preventable by eliminating ejection are estimated using Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS) data. Ejection prevention is found to account for almost half of the effectiveness of lap/shoulder belts (essentially all for lap belts only). Airbag effectiveness is estimated as (18 +/- 4)% in preventing fatalities to drivers and (13 +/- 4)% to right front passengers. Drivers switching from lap/shoulder belt to airbag-only protection increase their fatality risk by 41%.

- accountable to ejection

________________________________________

A Fatality Associated with the Deployment of an Automobile Airbag
[Case Report]

Brown, Diane K. MD; Roe, E. Jedd MD, FACEP; Henry, Thomas E. MD
From the Department of Emergency Medical Services (DAB., E.J.R.), Denver General Hospital; and the Coroner's Office (T.E.H.), City and County of Denver, Denver, Colorado.
Address for reprints: Diane K. Brown, MD, 2035 Overlook Dr., Grand Junction, CO 81505.
Abstract

Airbags have become an increasingly accepted automobile safety feature that can reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with motor vehicle collisions. We present the following case report of an unusual fatality with multiple internal injuries from a minor mechanism motor vehicle collision. The cause of injuries was determined to be secondary to the deployment of a driver's side airbag without the concomitant use of a lap-shoulder belt.

...

CASE REPORT

A 71-year-old woman was the unrestrained driver of a motor vehicle equipped with an airbag system. Her vehicle had rear-ended another vehicle at an estimated collision speed of less than 10 mph and sustained only minor front fender damage. There was no interior damage, and the airbag had been deployed.

The victim was found by paramedics slumped over the steering wheel with pulseless electrical activity. She was extricated with a cervical collar in place onto a backboard and transported by ambulance to a level I trauma center with cardiopulmonary resuscitation in progress. En route the patient was intubated, given epinephrine and atropine through intravenous access, and treated as a medical arrest given the minor mechanism.

On arrival to the emergency department, the patient was unresponsive, cyanotic with pulseless electrical activity. Pupils were fixed and dilated. Frank blood was present from the left ear and mouth. Neck examination was remarkable for palpable crepitus over the upper cervical spine and a 1-cm laceration to the left anterior neck. There was significant ecchymosis present over the anterior neck, chest, abdomen, and extremities. Breath sounds were present bilaterally with mechanical ventilation and the abdomen soft and nondistended.

Despite continued resuscitative efforts, including pericardiocentesis and needle thoracostomy, the patient's status remained unchanged. She was subsequently pronounced dead.

Autopsy results revealed the following findings:

1. Atlanto-occipital dislocation, with tearing of the anterior atlanto-occipital membrane, apical dental ligament, and the tectorial membrane. There was fracturing of the anterior margin of both superior articular facets of the atlas.

2. Pontomedullary laceration anteriorly.

3. Basilar, subdural, and subarachnoid hemorrhage.

4. Rib fractures 1 through 8 on the right and rib fractures 1 through 9 on the left.

5. Partial aortic tear at and slightly above the level of the ductus that involved the total thickness of the wall and approximately 75% of the circumference, with extensive hemorrhage dissecting into the surrounding mediastinum and into the neck.

6. Several linear capsular tears over the left lobe of the liver, with deep stellate lacerations over the anterior and lateral surface of the right lobe that almost transected the liver.

7. Bilateral hemothorax (100 cm3 right, 300 cm3 left) and hemoperitoneum (400 cm3).

Additional findings included mild to moderate arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease, myxomatous degeneration of the mitral valve, and chronic lymphocytic thyroiditis. Toxicology was positive only for caffeine. Cause of death was reported as secondary to multiple internal injuries.

____________________________________

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content...430f14426adba0f1bf6f7b2e&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

Air-Bag-Associated Rupture of the Right Atrium

To the Editor: We recently encountered an unusual complication associated with the deployment of an automobile air bag.

A 22-year-old woman was in a car traveling 10 to 15 mph that collided with a stopped car. The woman's car sustained relatively minor damage, but the air bag inflated. The woman became unconscious at the scene and was hypotensive when the emergency medical service arrived. No signs of trauma were detectable, and despite the aggressive administration of intravenous fluids, her blood pressure did not respond. Central venous pressure was 27.5 cm of water, and a pericardial effusion was noted on a computed tomographic scan. Pericardiocentesis revealed blood. At thoracotomy, 1100 ml of blood was evacuated from the tamponaded pericardium. A right atrial tear was repaired. The patient did well and was sent home 11 days after the surgery.

Air bags reduce mortality,1 but fatalities may occur in high-speed collisions that result in multiple chest trauma and cardiac rupture. This case is unusual in that it did not involve a high-speed collision and no rib fractures or other signs of trauma were noted.

The velocity of air bags during deployment has been measured at 98 to 211 mph (average, 144)2. This may be sufficient to rupture the right atrium, since it is one of the thinnest vascular structures in the thorax. The absence of a rib fracture can probably be attributed to the patient's youth and relatively pliable thorax. The fact that she was not wearing a seat belt may have aggravated the situation by increasing the total velocity of the impact as well as by putting her thorax closer to the rapidly inflating air bag.

This case brings up two important points. First, cardiac rupture can occur even in the absence of rib fractures with severe barotrauma. Second, even in low-velocity collisions, the efficacy and safety of the air bag may be enhanced by the use of shoulder seat belts.


Gilead I. Lancaster, M.D.
John H. DeFrance, M.D.
John J. Borruso, M.D.
Danbury Hospital
Danbury, CT 06810
 
I also think is it wise to always include a generalized statement or two on your discharge instuctions, something line "worsening symptoms, new concerns, or decline of health." there isn't much that falls outside of these...


I wish I had a "Return to the ER for any new or worsening symptoms" in a permenant copy/paste button.
 
Apollyon,

Interesting citations, but not proof that airbags alone vs. seatbelts alone cause more aortic injuries. Just looking at the physics, I'd say it makes little to no difference. Rapid deceleration is rapid deceleration. Whether it's the belt or the airbag that provides the decelerating force likely makes no difference. The increased mortality seen in one study wasn't clearly attributed to any particular injury, but it doesn't take much imagination to figure out what some of the other likely fatal injuries were.
 
Looking at the physics (and a few crash test videos), I would be inclined to think that the airbag alone option will cause an increased rate of deceleration of the chest wall versus the seatbelt alone option. Here's why. The airbag deploys prior to the dummy hitting the bag reducing the available distance through which to declerate. Imagine 24in between chest wall and the steering wheel and then shorten that distance by 6-8in due to airbag thickness. I understand that the seatbelts also shorten the deceleration distance as well. The airbags just seem to do a better job of it. Agreed, it's the same amount of deceleration (60mph - 0mph), yet with a greater rate of deceleration acting on the thoracic contents.
 
I could care less about the argument b/w airbags and seatbelts. The simple truth is, I would never ride in a car w/o my seatbelt.

The airbag discharges at 210 mi/ hr. I dunno about you but I don't want to come in contact with anything head-on at that speed.

Your best bet is to be at least 12 inch away from the steering wheel with your hands either on the wheel or at your sides. If you are closer than 12 inches from the steering wheel you run the risk of contacting the airbag module cover with your head and face before the airbag has sufficient time to deploy. The airbag module cover causes severe skeletal injuries during deployment often leading to OA dislocation or spinal fractures w/ accompanying cord transection. Any contact with the module cover during deployment will result in fracture of the joint making contact.

I just finished a forensic pathology rotation and I did a report on airbag related injuries. I'm in the know.

To the OP, I would want to see anyone in an accident that was severe enough to cause airbag deployment.
 
Thanks to all. Two people I know got into an accident and (of course) asked for my advice- my gut reaction was to tell them to go to the ED, of course, but it did get me thinking.

BTW, one was fine, one had a bowel perf...
 
Top