Search

Injury prevention theory, research, policy and practice have provided a rich basis for the consensus that injuries are not unavoidable ‘accidents’, but rather the result of predictable and preventable events.1–8 Yet unintentional injuries remain a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide.9 Thus, there remains a persistent global burden of injury that appears resistant to the efforts of conventional science, and a growing recognition that injury is a complex problem requiring complex solutions.10–12 In response to the recognition of this complexity, recent authors have noted the advantages of systems thinking approaches to injury prevention research.13–15 This shift holds that intrapersonal, interpersonal, organisational, community and societal determinants combine together into a highly complex ‘web of determinants’ that influences the likelihood of injury occurrence.13–16 Systems thinking thus offers much promise for further improvements in understanding injury and its prevention as a complex problem. The move to systems thinking is a promising one. However, the growing support for systems thinking as a valid way to approach complex, intractable injury problems has an unintended unhelpful consequence. This being an overemphasis on the epistemological question of how multifactorialism is accounted for in research, and a corresponding underemphasis on the ontological considerations and assumptions we make about the world. This dissonance in how complexity is understood and applied has been explored in a recent systematic review of systems thinking approaches in public health, which concluded that (1) close to half the papers identified by the review process are commentaries, (2) systems thinking in public health suffers from methodological weaknesses that need to be addressed, (3) …

The Brain Tumor Epidemiology Consortium (BTEC) is an open scientific forum, which fosters the development of multi-center, international and inter-disciplinary collaborations. BTEC aims to develop a better understanding of the etiology, outcomes, and prevention of brain tumors (http://epi.grants.cancer.gov/btec/). The 15th annual Brain Tumor Epidemiology Consortium Meeting, hosted by the Austrian Societies of Neuropathology and Neuro-oncology, was held on September 9 - 11, 2014 in Vienna, Austria. The meeting focused on the central role of brain tumor epidemiology within multidisciplinary neuro-oncology. Knowledge of disease incidence, outcomes, as well as risk factors is fundamental to all fields involved in research and treatment of patients with brain tumors; thus, epidemiology constitutes an important link between disciplines, indeed the very hub. This was reflected by the scientific program, which included various sessions linking brain tumor epidemiology with clinical neuro-oncology, tissue-based research, and cancer registration. Renowned experts from Europe and the United States contributed their personal perspectives stimulating further group discussions. Several concrete action plans evolved for the group to move forward until next year's meeting, which will be held at the Mayo Clinic at Rochester, MN, USA.

ObjectiveStudent-inflicted injury to staff in the educational services sector is a growing concern. Studies on violence have focused on teachers as victims, but less is known about injuries to other employee groups, particularly educational assistants. Inequities may be present, as educational assistants and non-educators may not have the same wage, benefits, training and employment protections available to them as professional educators. We identified risk factors for student-related injury and their characteristics among employees in school districts.MethodsWorkers’ compensation data were used to identify incidence and severity of student-related injury. Rates were calculated using negative binomial regression; risk factors were identified using multivariate models to calculate rate ratios (RR) and 95% CIs.ResultsOver 26% of all injuries were student-related; 8% resulted in lost work time. Special and general education assistants experienced significantly increased risk of injury (RR=6.0, CI 5.05 to 7.15; RR=2.07, CI 1.40 to 3.07) as compared with educators. Risk differed by age, gender and school district type. Text analyses categorised student-related injury. It revealed injury from students acting out occurred most frequently (45.4%), whereas injuries involving play with students resulted in the highest percentage of lost-time injuries (17.7%) compared with all interaction categories.ConclusionStudent-inflicted injury to staff occurs frequently and can be severe. Special education and general assistants bear the largest burden of injury compared with educators. A variety of prevention techniques to reduce injury risk and severity, including policy or environmental modifications, may be appropriate. Equal access to risk reduction methods for all staff should be prioritised.

ObjectivesWhile Japan has socioeconomic issues, such as income inequality, little is known about the association between socioeconomic factors and the risk of unintentional childhood injuries. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the influence of socioeconomic factors on the risk for unintentional injuries among preschool children in Japan.DesignCross-sectional study using data from a web-based questionnaire survey.SettingJapan (January 2015).Participants1000 households with preschool children under 6 years of age.Outcome measuresMultivariate logistic regression was performed to analyse the influence of socioeconomic factors on the incidence of unintentional injuries.ResultsOverall, 976 households were eligible for the analysis, with 201 households reporting unintentional injuries. The incidence rates for unintentional injury were estimated to be constant across all strata constructed using combinations of socioeconomic factors. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant differences in socioeconomic factors between households that reported unintentional injuries and those that did not.ConclusionThe findings of our study demonstrated that unintentional injuries among preschool children occurred at approximately fixed rates, independent of socioeconomic factors. Accordingly, prevention strategies for unintentional injuries that concern socioeconomic disadvantages should be avoided in Japan.

Background: Electric bike (E-bike)-related deaths have been increasing rapidly in China and such injuries may be partly attributable to unsafe riding practice. Objectives: To describe potentially unsafe riding behaviours among electric bikers (E-bikers) and to investigate factors influencing these practices in China. Methods: In September 2012, a cross-sectional observation study including a speed measurement component was conducted in Wuzhong (an urban district) and Zhangjiagang (a rural district) of Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China. Hand-held radar speed metres were used to read travelling speeds of E-bikes and a pro forma observation checklist was used to collect data on road riding practice. Mixed-effect logistic regressions were used to calculate adjusted ORs and 95% CIs for the association between speeding, road rule violations and helmet use and their influencing factors. Results: Among 800 E-bikes with a speed reading, 70.9% exceeded the designed speed limit of 20 km/h. Among a further 20 647 E-bikers observed, 38.3% did not comply with the road rules when entering intersections; and only 2.2% wore helmets. No regional variation was identified between urban and rural areas. Male E-bikers were associated with more speeding and road rule violations, whereas riding a pedal-equipped E-bike was associated with less road rule violations and less helmet use. Conclusions: Unsafe riding practices such as speeding, road rule violations and lack of helmet use were commonplace among E-bikers, especially among men. The study findings indicate that measures aimed at improving E-bike safety are required in China.