Expected differences and unexpected commonalities in mortality, injury severity, and injury patterns between near versus far occupants of side impact crashes.

Objective: To compare injury patterns and outcomes of near- and far-side collisions.

Methods: Near- and far-side occupants in the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network (CIREN) were compared for mortality and the occurrence of severe injuries (maximum abbreviated injury scale [MAIS] 3+). Regression models, adjusting for confounders, examined death and MAIS 3+ injuries as outcomes and near- or far-side position as an independent variable. CIREN findings were compared with those of the Crash Outcome Data Evaluation System (CODES), and the Maryland Automated Accident Reporting System.

Results: Of the 380 cases, 72% were in the near and 28% in the far position. Mortality was similar between groups within CIREN. Near-side occupants experienced a higher frequency of MAIS 3+ injuries for the thorax, abdomen, and lower extremities, and fewer MAIS 3+ head injuries than far-side occupants (35% vs. 46%, p = 0.06). Regression models revealed similar risk of MAIS 3+ head injuries among near- and far-side occupants. The most common structures contacting the head in far-side crashes (N = 62) were opposite side structures (52%) and other occupants (13%). Similar risks of head injuries among near- and far-side occupants were observed for the CODES data; however, lower risks of death were present among far-side drivers involved in crashes, based on CODES and Maryland Automated Accident Reporting System.

Conclusions: Despite a lower incidence of thoracic, abdominal, and lower extremity injuries, far-side occupants experienced a similar risk of head injuries to that of near-side occupants. Contact patterns suggest that restraint systems fail to keep far-side occupants' heads from striking opposite side structures or other occupants.