Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36745294›Full record

ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2024

Head Impact Location, Speed and Angle from Falls and Trips in the Workplace.

Xiancheng Yu, Claire E Baker, Mazdak Ghajari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xiancheng YuHEAD Lab, Dyson School of Design Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK. x.yu16@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4002-3912
Claire E BakerHEAD Lab, Dyson School of Design Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Mazdak GhajariHEAD Lab, Dyson School of Design Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common injury in the workplace. Trips and falls are the leading causes of TBI in the workplace. However, industrial safety helmets are not designed for protecting the head under these impact conditions. Instead, they are designed to pass the regulatory standards which test head protection against falling heavy and sharp objects. This is likely to be due to the limited understanding of head impact conditions from trips and falls in workplace. In this study, we used validated human multi-body models to predict the head impact location, speed and angle (measured from the ground) during trips, forward falls and backward falls. We studied the effects of worker size, initial posture, walking speed, width and height of the tripping barrier, bracing and falling height on the head impact conditions. Overall, we performed 1692 simulations. The head impact speed was over two folds larger in falls than trips, with backward falls producing highest impact speeds. However, the trips produced impacts with smaller impact angles to the ground. Increasing the walking speed increased the head impact speed but bracing reduced it. We found that 41% of backward falls and 19% of trips/forward falls produced head impacts located outside the region of helmet coverage. Next, we grouped all the data into three sub-groups based on the head impact angle: [0°, 30°], (30°, 60°] and (60°, 90°] and excluded groups with small number of cases. We found that most trips and forward falls lead to impact angles within the (30°, 60°] and (60°, 90°] groups while all backward falls produced impact angles within (60°, 90°] group. We therefore determined five representative head impact conditions from these groups by selecting the 75th percentile speed, mean value of angle intervals and median impact location (determined by elevation and azimuth angles) of each group. This led to two representative head impact conditions for trips: 2.7 m/s at 45° and 3.9 m/s at 75°, two for forward falls: 3.8 m/s at 45° and 5.5 m/s at 75° and one for backward falls: 9.4 m/s at 75°. These impact conditions can be used to improve industrial helmet standards.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsHeadHead Protective DevicesAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaBrain Injuries, TraumaticFemaleHumansMaleModels, BiologicalPostureWorkplaceBrain injuryFallsHead impact conditionHelmet standardsMulti-body dynamicsWork-related injury

Identifiers

PMID36745294
PMCPMC11402836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.