SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Pandey S, Roychoudhury A, Bhutia O, Singhal M, Sagar S, Pandey RM. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 2015; 14(1): 32-39.

Affiliation

Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India, Publisher Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s12663-013-0578-4

PMID

25729224

Abstract

AIM: The present study was planned to investigate the etiology of maxillofacial injuries and to analyze the pattern of maxillofacial factures as well as the various factors influencing their distribution. STUDY DESIGN: A one year cross-sectional study was done and 1,108 patients with maxillofacial fractures were analyzed consecutively from April 2010 to March 2011 who reported to the department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in the Centre for Dental Education & Research and Jai Prakash Narayan Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi. A performa was designed to collect the data that included age and sex distribution, etiology, influence of alcohol, type of fractures, use of restraints devices, associated injuries and treatment delivered.

RESULTS: Out of 1,108 patients, 89.62 % were males with a male:female ratio of 8.63:1. The 21-30 year age group was found to be maximum (39.98 %). Road traffic accidents accounted for 49.01 %, followed by assault (22.38 %) and fall from height (21.66 %). Two wheelers were the most commonly involved vehicle. Out of 437 road traffic accident patients (excluding pedestrian, n = 106), only 52.40 % were found to be using restraints devices at the time of accident. Totally 25.45 % patients were under the influence of alcohol at the time of injury. According to anatomical distribution of fractures, mandibular fractures (33.57 %) were most prevalent, followed by maxilla (31.13 %), nasal (28.33 %) and zygoma (24.36 %). Head injuries (18.32 %) were found to be the most common associated injuries followed by lower limb fractures.

CONCLUSION: The motive behind executing this article is to analyze the various trends of facial fractures and all those factors that affect their distribution. A perfect understanding of pattern of maxillofacial fracture will assist the executors of health care in the treatment planning and management of facial injuries. Knowledge gained from the present study would influence in assessing the effectiveness of existing preventive measures and elaboration of future preventive measures and conducting new research.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print