因單車意外致腦創傷個案倍增大部分都無佩戴頭盔

關於活動安全的資訊、投術文章

因單車意外致腦創傷個案倍增大部分都無佩戴頭盔

文章 #1  未閱讀文章PoP » 2012-04-17 14:55

來源: http://hk.news.yahoo.com/%E5%9B%A0%E5%9 ... 00571.html

中大醫學院表示,由零六年至去年,因為單車意外出現腦創傷,要送入創傷中心的病例,由六十七宗增加至一百五十一宗,上升超過一倍二,而當中有九成半的人,騎單車時並無佩戴頭盔。死亡病例就由兩人增加至四人。

醫學院表示,嚴重的腦創傷,康復後可能會影響溝通能力、導致失禁或活動能力協調出現問題,佩戴頭盔可以減輕著地時的震盪。資深單車手何兆麟提醒市民,戴頭盔亦要戴得正確,眼眉對上要留一隻手指的空間,頭盔繩的扣應該要在耳珠對下的位置。
當流赤足蹋澗石,水聲激激風吹衣。
人生如此自可樂,豈必局束為人鞿?
頭像
PoP
 
文章: 13617
註冊時間: 2006-12-06 03:42

單車意外引致腦創傷個案五年倍增

文章 #2  未閱讀文章PoP » 2012-04-17 15:47

來源: http://news.on.cc/cnt/news/20120417/bkn ... 2_001.html

中大醫學院數據指出,市民因單車意外到威爾斯親王醫院求診的個案,由 2006 年的 702 宗上升逾兩成至去年的 860 多宗,其中 151 宗涉及腦創傷,較 06 年急增逾倍,僅 7 名腦創傷患者在意外時佩戴頭盔,死亡個案亦於 5 年間由 2 人增至 4 人。

另外,40 名受訪的腦創傷患者中,逾兩成於意外後半年仍感身體比以往差,逾兩成半認為意外影響其社交能力。中大醫學院腦外科副教授黃國柱指出,踏單車時佩戴頭盔可減低傷及頭部及腦部的機會,呼籲市民佩戴。
當流赤足蹋澗石,水聲激激風吹衣。
人生如此自可樂,豈必局束為人鞿?
頭像
PoP
 
文章: 13617
註冊時間: 2006-12-06 03:42

單車意外腦創傷增逾倍

文章 #3  未閱讀文章PoP » 2012-04-18 16:22

來源: http://hk.news.yahoo.com/%E5%96%AE%E8%B ... 52092.html

政府一直未有硬性規定騎單車須戴頭盔,中大外科學系腦外科組、中大意外及急救醫學教研部組成研究小組,分析威爾斯親王醫院去年 864 宗單車意外引致傷亡個案,當中 4 人死亡,近兩成即 151 人出現腦創傷,人數較 5 年前上升 125%,當中僅 7 人(約 4.6%)有戴頭盔。

去年 2000 宗意外 20 死

警方數字顯示,去年約 2000 宗單車意外,死亡人數約 20。威院創傷中心去年共接獲 864 宗單車意外受傷個案,較 2006 年的 705 宗上升約 23%。其中腦創傷個案由 67 宗上升至 151 宗,增幅達 125%,為各創傷增幅之冠。死亡個案則有 4 宗,嚴重殘障及中度殘障亦各有 1 宗。

研究小組分析當中 40 名腦創傷病人,發現即使被評為「康復良好」者,部分仍會出現不同程度的功能障礙。其中約 13% 表示身體較從前感受更多痛楚、18% 表示感到活力較以前少,亦有 15% 表示感到焦慮甚至抑鬱、28% 社交能力受影響。

受傷人數遍及各年齡層,以 16 至 25 歲組群最多,研究小組估計主要因該年齡層較熱愛單車活動,同時亦較忽略安全。一名沒有佩戴頭盔的年輕業餘單車手,被另一單車從後撞上,車手被拋離單車、前額先着地,致頭部右側硬膜外血腫及右額顱骨骨折。即使後來康復良好,仍出現持續頭暈以及精神遲緩。另一年長單車手,同樣因沒戴頭盔,從單車跌下時頭部先着地,致急性腦血腫導致嚴重殘障,需住院 3 個月,出現嚴重認知及溝通問題。

中大﹕戴頭盔可減 88% 腦受傷

中大意外及急救醫學教研部名譽臨牀助理教授鄭志雄表示,單車意外受傷者多因高速駕車,下斜坡時失控撞車。他說,交通意外撞擊時,即使頭部沒着地,亦可能因猛烈衝擊致腦震盪,令腦部受創傷。今次分析個案中,腦創傷傷勢較輕者均有配戴頭盔。而根據外國研究,佩戴頭盔可降低 63% 至 88% 的腦受傷風險,亦可減少面部受傷,呼籲單車迷佩戴頭盔。
當流赤足蹋澗石,水聲激激風吹衣。
人生如此自可樂,豈必局束為人鞿?
頭像
PoP
 
文章: 13617
註冊時間: 2006-12-06 03:42

Brain surgeon: There's no point wearing bicycle helmets

文章 #4  未閱讀文章PoP » 2014-06-03 13:06

Source: http://www.cnet.com/news/brain-surgeon- ... e-helmets/

A British brain surgeon says cycle helmets are too flimsy and can actually create more danger by creating the illusion of greater safety.

If a car manufacturer suddenly told you fenders were useless, you might raise an eyebrow.

If a sporting goods designer told hockey goalies that their serial-killer masks didn't prevent concussions, there might ensue a fight.

So when a neurosurgeon offers that cycle helmets are pointless, you might imagine that the more bellicose spoke of the cycling fraternity might wonder if he's been in the pub all day.

However, Dr. Henry Marsh, a neurosurgeon at St. George's Hospital in London, believes many cycling helmets are simply "too flimsy."

As the Telegraph reports, Marsh was speaking at the Hay Literary Festival. There, he threw caution to an erudite wind by saying: "I ride a bike and I never wear a helmet.In the countries where bike helmets are compulsory there has been no reduction in bike injuries whatsoever."

There are surely those who would differ. All over the world, parents equip their children with bike helmets, in the sure belief that those helmets will protect little heads.

Video: http://youtu.be/07o-TASvIxY

Marsh, however, believes science doesn't prove this.

Worse, he pointed to research from the UK's University of Bath that said the mere presence of cyclists wearing helmets makes car drivers feel they are safer.

Logic then propels them to drive 3 inches closer to these cyclists, hence enhancing the possibility of accidents.

That research, conducted in 2006 by a psychologist who had himself been hit by a truck and a car while cycling, insisted that drivers became more careless around helmeted cyclists.

However, it did acknowledge that helmets were useful for children, who are more likely to be involved in low-speed accidents.

Campaigners for road safety have wanted to knock Marsh's suggestions on the head. Angela Lee, chief executive of the Bicycle Helmet Initiative told the Telegraph: "It would be a travesty if somebody takes their helmet off because of this. It is such a negligent thing to say for a person in that position."

Not everyone agrees. Michael Cavenett of the London Cycling Campaign countered: "I wouldn't say what this doctor has said is particularly controversial. People have been casting doubt on the effectiveness of helmets for 20 years."

For Cavenett, it is far more the design of roads and junctions which puts cyclists in danger.
Marsh isn't alone in suggesting bike helmets shouldn't be worn. In a 2010 Tedx Talk (video above)Mikael Colville-Andersen, cycling ambassador for Copenhagen, insisted that some research found that cycle helmets actually cause more brain damage.

Moreover, he described society's obsession with safety equipment as "almost pornographic." Why, he wondered, don't pedestrians wear helmets, as they suffer more brain damage than cyclists?

For him, riding without a helmet is also a symbol of the livable city. The problem, as he sees it, is drivers, not cyclists. What would happen, he mused, if drivers were forced to wear helmets? That would surely save lives. It would also destroy car sales.

He believes that some of the biggest proponents of cycle helmets are the car industry and the auto insurance industry, as the more laws there are insisting on cycle helmets, the fewer bikes are sold.
Marsh, for his part, declared that instead of a helmet he wears a cowboy hat.

Perhaps there are those who believe that safety should move in another direction. Is there any reason why cyclists shouldn't be forced the wear the same crash helmets those on motorbikes do?

True, it might clash aesthetically with the tight outfits advertising Italian cheese that so many cyclists seem to favor (at least in my area).

But if crash helmets are deemed to be effective, why not use them for all two-wheelers?

Or would cars drive even closer to crash-helmeted cyclists?
當流赤足蹋澗石,水聲激激風吹衣。
人生如此自可樂,豈必局束為人鞿?
頭像
PoP
 
文章: 13617
註冊時間: 2006-12-06 03:42


回到 安全地帶

誰在線上

正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員 和 1 位訪客

cron