IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i18p9455-d631103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Principles and Methods for Evidence-Based Quantification of the Effect of Seat Belt Non-Use in Crash-Related Litigation

Author

Listed:
  • Michael D. Freeman

    (CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6211 LM Maastricht, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Traffic crashes are a common cause of injury and death, and often result from the negligent actions of an inattentive, speeding, or impaired driver. In such cases, a civil legal action may be brought by an injured claimant for compensation for injuries resulting from a crash. Crash-related litigation is defended on various theories, one of which is to raise the issue of contributory negligence when the claimant was not using an available seat belt at the time of the crash, based on the assertion that the claimed injuries would have been avoided or minimized to some degree if the claimant had been restrained. At present, there are no published standards or systematic approach for assessing and quantifying the contribution of seat belt non-use to the cause of a claimant’s specific injury. A reliable medicolegal analysis that addresses whether contributory negligence can be proven in a specific case requires a multidisciplinary approach: First, the nature and severity of the crash must be reconstructed as it affected the vehicle kinetics (engineering) and in turn affected the kinematics of the occupant (biomechanics), next, the injuries must be described and scaled for severity (medicine/pathology), and finally, the risk of the known injuries given the actual circumstances of the crash and occupant (i.e., unbelted) are compared to the risk of the same injuries, and the same crash circumstances, but in the hypothetical scenario in which the claimant is belted. In the present discussion, methods for analyzing the presence and quantifying the degree of contributory negligence for seat belt non-use, suitable for presentation in a medicolegal setting, are described and illustrated with an example from the author’s personal case inventory. A detailed reconstruction of the crash is described, along with the associated occupant kinematics, and the resulting observed injuries. The injuries are then categorized by their anatomical location, type, and severity using Abbreviated Injury Scale designations. Quantification of the injury risk for the actual (unbelted) vs. hypothetical (belted) scenario is based on case-specific analysis of data accessed from a US national crash injury database The difference in risk for the two exposure scenarios can be quantified in terms of either relative risk (a risk ratio) or attributable risk (a risk proportion), with the goal to determine whether the analysis meets the threshold of a relative risk of >2.0, or an attributable risk of 50%, in order to meet the “more probable than not” standard typically required by courts. As a final step in a reliable analysis that exceeds the legal threshold for relevant evidence, the absolute increase in risk is used to quantify the degree to which the claimant’s seat belt non-use contributed to the likelihood of their injuries.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael D. Freeman, 2021. "Principles and Methods for Evidence-Based Quantification of the Effect of Seat Belt Non-Use in Crash-Related Litigation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-14, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9455-:d:631103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9455/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9455/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Putri Dianita Ika Meilia & Maurice P. Zeegers & Herkutanto & Michael Freeman, 2020. "INFERENCE: An Evidence-Based Approach for Medicolegal Causal Analyses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-16, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Putri Dianita Ika Meilia & Maurice P. Zeegers & Herkutanto & Michael D. Freeman, 2021. "Medicolegal Causation Investigation of Bacterial Endocarditis Associated with an Oral Surgery Practice Using the INFERENCE Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-9, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9455-:d:631103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.