Previous studies have suggested that rear seat occupants are at lower risk of serious injury and death in crashes. However, over the last 10-15 years there have been significant changes in front seat safety systems. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is still a benefit for rear seated occupants compared to front seat occupants. A matched-cohort approach, using data on restrained occupants from the US National Automotive Sampling System (data years 1993-2007), was adopted. Conditional poisson regression modeling was used to evaluate the relative risk of AIS3+ injury in front (passenger and driver) and rear seat occupants, in vehicles of model year 1990-1996 compared to newer vehicles. Occupant age, belt type, and intrusion were additional variables in the model. The relative risk of AIS3+ injury for front and rear occupants was influenced by age and model year. For those aged 16-50 years in older vehicles, the front and rear seat offered similar levels of protection (RR=1.14, CI=1.09-1.19), however in newer model vehicles (1997-2007), the rear seat carried a higher risk of injury (RR=1.98, CI=1.90-2.06). For adults over 50 years, the rear seat carried a higher risk in both older and newer vehicles, and for 9-15 year olds, the rear seat carried a lower risk. These findings suggest that safety for front seat occupants has improved over the last decade, to the point where, for occupants over 15 years of age, the front seat is safer than the rear seat. While the benefit of rear seating for children aged 9-15 years has decreased over time, they are still at lower risk in the rear seat.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.06.002DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rear seat
40
seat occupants
24
front seat
16
seat
14
rear
13
front rear
12
lower risk
12
seat carried
12
occupants
10
front
9

Similar Publications

Rear passenger restraint in frontal NCAP tests compared to the right-front passenger.

Traffic Inj Prev

November 2024

ProBiomechanics LLC, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.

Objective: This study compared kinematic and biomechanic responses of the 5 female Hybrid III in the right-rear and right-front passenger seats in frontal NCAP tests with 2015-16 MY vehicles. It focused on the lap-shoulder belt restraint of the rear passenger.

Methods: Eleven frontal NCAP tests were conducted by NHTSA at 56 km/h with a lap-shoulder belted 5 Hybrid III dummy in the right-rear and right-front seats.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This study compared modern vehicle and booster geometries with relevant child anthropometries. Vehicle geometries (seat length, seat pan height, shoulder belt outlet height, and roof height) were obtained for 275 center and outboard rear seating positions of US vehicles (MY 2009-2022). Measurements of 85 US boosters (pan height and pan length) and anthropometries of 80 US children between 4-14yo (seated height, thigh length, leg length, and seated shoulder height) were also collected.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

In recent post-mortem human subjects (PMHS) studies in a high-speed rear-facing frontal impact (HSRFFI), the PMHS sustained multiple rib fractures. The seatback structure and properties of the seats might contribute to these fractures. This study aimed to determine if a homogeneous rear-facing seat with foam-covered seatback would mitigate the risk of thoracic injury during an HSRFFI.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: The objective of this study is to examine the effects of seatback angle, seat rotation, and impact speed on occupant kinematics and injury risk in highly automated vehicles.

Methods: The study utilized the Global Human Body Models Consortium midsize male (M50-OS+B) simplified occupant model in a simplified vehicle model (SVM) to simulate frontal crashes. The M50-OS+B model was gravity-settled and belted into the driver and left rear passenger seat.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: To quantify the head and chest injury metrics associated with a pediatric anthropomorphic test device (ATD) in rearward-facing infant child restraint system (CRS) models positioned directly behind a center console during frontal impact sled tests.

Methods: Sled tests using the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 213 frontal crash pulse were performed. The test buck comprised a second row middle seat and center console from the same 2023 model mid-size SUV spaced as per the in-vehicle relative dimensions, a force plate covered with an automotive floor mat, a post-mounted shoulder belt simulating the in-vehicle roof-mounted seatbelt and an array of high-speed cameras.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!