Prevalence and distribution of maxillofacial trauma in tertiary care centers before/ after motorcycle helmet use law in Sullia, India-A retrospective study

Predictors of Facial Fractures in Trauma Patients: Retrospective Review at a Level I Trauma Center

BACKGROUND

The incidence and causes of facial fractures differ between patients, but patterns arise within populations. These patterns vary by gender, age, and between countries. This study aims to determine variables to identify patients at risk for facial fractures in a United States trauma population.

METHODS

This is a single-center study of Trauma Registry data, inclusive of years July 1, 2016, to January 31, 2022. Inclusion criteria were based upon all trauma patients. Confirmation of a non-isolated facial fracture (dependent variable) was verified using ICD10 diagnosis codes. A logistic regression was performed in SPSS to ascertain the effects of predictor variables on the likelihood that a trauma patient will experience a facial fracture.

RESULTS

20377 patients were included in the analysis based upon the requirements specified in the methods section; 1575 (7%) had a positive facial fracture. The logistic regression model was statistically significant (N = 18507, P < .01). Significant risk factors for facial fracture identified included helicopter transport (OR = 1.35, P < .01) and increasing injury severity scores (OR = 1.07, P < .01). Modes of injury most likely to predict facial fracture included assault (OR = 6.62, P < .01), moped (OR = 2.02, P < .01), and motorcycle trauma (OR = 1.55, P < .01). The discharge disposition most likely among facial fracture patients included short-term general hospital (OR = 1.71, P < .01) and intermediate care facility (OR = 4.47, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with traumatic injuries from assault, moped, and motorcycle accidents were more likely to present with facial fractures. These patients had more severe injuries, seen as increased ISS scores, higher likelihood of transport by helicopter, and the need for additional care after discharge.

Patterns of maxillofacial trauma in helmet vs. non helmet wearing two wheeler drivers in a tertiary care center

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The frequency and patterns of maxillofacial fractures vary by country, based on demographic, socioeconomic, cultural and environmental factors. Wearing a helmet is an efficient form of head protection for two-wheeler drivers and is now required in the vast majority of countries. The aim of this study was to compare the patterns of maxillofacial trauma in patients who wore helmets and those who did not.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data were gathered from clinical records of patients presenting with maxillofacial trauma between January 2019 and February 2022. The inclusion criteria were met by subjects involved in two-wheeler accidents with comprehensive case records and radiological investigations.

RESULTS

A total of 177 people presented following maxillofacial trauma. The mean age was 34.2 ± 12.7 years. There were 151 (85.3%) males and 26 (14.6%) females. One hundred and two patients had not been wearing a helmet, while 75 patients were wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. Mandible fractures were the most common injury in both groups, followed by zygomatic arch fractures (which were more common in non-helmet users) and dentoalveolar fractures in helmet users.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant difference in the pattern and severity of maxillofacial trauma in helmet users and non-helmet users.