scholarly journals Risk of Mortality in Association with Pregnancy in Women following Motor Vehicle Crashes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author(s):  
Ya-Hui Chang ◽  
Ya-Yun Cheng ◽  
Wen-Hsuan Hou ◽  
Yu-Wen Chien ◽  
Chiung-Hsin Chang ◽  
...  

The aim of the study was to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the association between mortality risk and motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) in pregnant women compared with nonpregnant women. We used relevant MeSH terms to identify epidemiological studies of mortality risk in relation to MVCs from PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for quality assessment. For comparison of mortality from MVCs between pregnant and nonpregnant women, the pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The eight studies selected met all inclusion criteria. These studies included 14,120 injured victims who were pregnant at the time of the incident and 207,935 victims who were not pregnant. Compared with nonpregnant women, pregnant women had a moderate but insignificant decrease in mortality risk (pooled OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.38–1.22, I2 = 88.71%). Subgroup analysis revealed that the pooled OR significantly increased at 1.64 (95% CI = 1.16–2.33, I2 < 0.01%) for two studies with a similar difference in the mean injury severity score (ISS) between pregnant and nonpregnant women. Future studies should further explore the risk factors associated with MVCs in pregnant women to reduce maternal mortality.

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 447-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ediriweera Desapriya ◽  
Scime Giulia ◽  
Sayed Subzwari ◽  
Dinithi C. Peiris ◽  
Kate Turcotte ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e035562
Author(s):  
Carmen Amezcua-Prieto ◽  
Jennifer Ross ◽  
Ewelina Rogozińska ◽  
Patritia Mighiu ◽  
Virginia Martínez-Ruiz ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo systematically review and quantify the effect of motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) in pregnancy on maternal and offspring outcomes.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of observational data searched from inception until 1 July 2018. Searching was from June to August 2018 in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Latin-American and Caribbean System on Health Sciences Information, Scientific Electronic Library Online, TRANSPORT, International Road Research Documentation, European Conference of Ministers of Transportation Databases, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register.ParticipantsStudies were selected if they focused on the effects of exposure MVC during pregnancy versus non-exposure, with follow-up to verify outcomes in various settings, including secondary care, collision and emergency, and inpatient care.Data synthesisFor incidence data, we calculated a pooled estimate per 1000 women. For comparison of outcomes between women involved and those not involved in MVC, we calculated ORs with 95% CIs. Where possible, we statistically pooled the data using the random-effects model. The quality of studies used in the comparative analysis was assessed with Newcastle–Ottawa Scale.ResultsWe included 19 studies (3 222 066 women) of which the majority was carried out in high-income countries (18/19). In population-level studies of women involved in MVC, maternal death occurred in 3.6 per 1000 (95% CI 0.25–10.42; 3 studies, 12 000 women; Tau=1.77), and fetal death or stillbirth in 6.6 per 1000 (95% CI 3.81–10.12; 8 studies, 47 992 women; I2=92.6%). Pooled incidence of complications per 1000 women involved in MVC was labour induction (276.43), preterm delivery (191.90) and caesarean section (166.65). Compared with women not involved in MVC, those involved had increased odds of placental abruption (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.27–1.63; 3 studies, 1 500 825 women) and maternal death (OR 202.27; 95% CI 110.60–369.95; 1 study, 1 094 559 women).ConclusionPregnant women involved in MVC were at higher risk of maternal death and complications than those not involved.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018100788.


BMJ Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (9) ◽  
pp. e011993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Craig ◽  
Yvonne Tran ◽  
Rebecca Guest ◽  
Bamini Gopinath ◽  
Jagnoor Jagnoor ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 1695-1702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joon-Ki Kim ◽  
Gudmundur F. Ulfarsson ◽  
Venkataraman N. Shankar ◽  
Sungyop Kim

2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren N. Moore ◽  
William H. Schneider ◽  
Peter T. Savolainen ◽  
Mohamadreza Farzaneh

Author(s):  
Suzanne P. McEvoy

Early on, road epidemiological studies (Redelmeier & Tibshirani, 1997; McEvoy et al., 2005) indicated an increased risk of motor vehicle crashes, including injury crashes, associated with mobile phone use. However, these studies were unable to assess the relative risks pertaining to specific phone tasks (for example, conversing versus texting). Moreover, direct comparisons of risk between different types of driver distractions, while possible (McEvoy, Stevenson, Woodward, 2007), were difficult to undertake. Naturalistic driving studies using instrumented cars in every day driving have provided more details of the tasks that confer particular risk in relation to phone use and other driver distractions (Klauer et al., 2014; Olson et al., 2009; Klauer et al., 2006; Dingus et al., 2006). Interest generated in these studies has prompted current trials using similar methodologies elsewhere, for example, Australia (Regan et al., 2013). To date, phone tasks involving handling of the phone and/or multiple or prolonged eye glances away from the forward roadway (dialling, reaching for the phone and text messaging) have been shown to significantly increase the risk of crashes and near crashes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document