4.6 Article

The surgical history of head injury in motor vehicle collision

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY
Volume 135, Issue 2, Pages 594-600

Publisher

AMER ASSOC NEUROLOGICAL SURGEONS
DOI: 10.3171/2020.7.JNS20941

Keywords

head injury; MVC; motor vehicle collision; TBI; traumatic brain injury; history; trauma

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Motor vehicle collisions are a major cause of head injuries, but efforts to improve automobile design and promote helmet use have significantly reduced the number of serious head injuries. Neurosurgeons have played a crucial role in preventing head injuries and saving lives in MVCs through their recommendations and research efforts.
Motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) are a significant cause of head injuries today, but efforts to manage and prevent these injuries extend as far back as the beginning of modern neurosurgery itself. Head trauma in MVCs occurred as far back as 1899, and the surgical literature of the time mentions several cases of children being struck by passing automobiles. By the 1930s, Dr. Claire L. Straith, a Detroit plastic surgeon, recommended changes to automobile design after seeing facial injuries and depressed skull fractures that resulted from automobile accidents. During World War II, Sir Hugh Cairns, a British neurosurgeon, demonstrated the efficacy of motorcycle helmets in preventing serious head injury. In the 1950s, Dr. Frank H. Mayfield, a Cincinnati neurosurgeon on the trauma committee of the American College of Surgeons, made several recommendations, such as adding padded dashboards and seatbelts, to make automobiles safer. Ford implemented the recommendations from Dr. Mayfield and others into a safety package for the 1956 models. Significant work has also been done to prevent head injury in motorsports. Efforts by surgeons, especially neurosurgeons, to prevent head injury in MVCs have saved countless lives, although it is a less frequently celebrated achievement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available