ABSTRACT
Objective: to assess the availability of trauma care services in a district referral hospital of Southern India
Methods: this was a cross-sectional study being performed during 2013 in a tertiary healthcare centre in Southern Indian. A detailed assessment of trauma care services was done in a 400 bed speciality hospital which is an apex referral hospital in the public health system using a check list based on WHO guidelines for evaluation of essential trauma care services, along with in-depth interviews of hospital stake holders and key informants
Results: the hospital had physical infrastructure in terms of emergency room, inpatient wards, operation theatres, intensive care unit and blood bank facilities. The recently constructed designated building for trauma care services was not operational and existing facilities were used beyond capacity. A designated trauma team was lacking and speciality services for managing polytrauma were deficient and thus, existing personnel were performing multiple tasks. Neurosurgeons and rehabilitative nursing staff were unavailable, and a radiographer was not available on a 24/7 basis. Existing nursing personnel had not received any formal training in trauma care and standard operating protocols were not available for trauma care. Resources for acute resuscitation were partially adequate. The hospital lacked adequate resources to manage head, abdomen, chest and spine injuries, and most of the polytrauma cases were referred to nearby city hospitals
Conclusion: district hospital, the only referral hospital in public health system for trauma victims of that region, had inadequate resources to manage trauma victims, which was probably responsible for delay in trauma care, improper referrals, high cost of care and poor outcomes
ABSTRACT
Background: Motorcyclists are the most vulnerable vehicle users in India. No published study has assessed the validity of self-reported estimates of helmet use in India. The objectives of this study were to assess helmet use by comparing observed and self-reported use and to identify factors influencing use among motorcyclists in Hyderabad, India. Methods: Population-based observations were recorded for 68 229 motorcyclists and 21 777 pillion riders (co-passengers). Concurrent roadside observations and interviews were conducted with 606 motorcyclists, who were asked whether they “always wear a helmet”. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine factors influencing helmet use. Results: In the population-based study, 22.6% (n = 15,426) of motorcyclists and 1.1% (n = 240) of pillion riders (co-passengers) were observed wearing helmets. In roadside interviews, 64.7% (n = 392) of the respondents reported always wearing a helmet, 2.2 times higher than the observed helmet use (29.4%, n = 178) in the same group. Compared with riders aged ≥40 years, riders in the age groups 30–39 years and 18–29 years had respectively 40% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.4 to 1.0, P < 0.05) and 70% (95% CI: 0.2 to 0.5, P < 0.001) lower odds of wearing a helmet after controlling for other covariates. Riders with postgraduate or higher education had higher odds of wearing a helmet (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 4.1, 95% CI: 2.5 to 6.9, P < 0.001) than those with fewer than 12 grades of schooling. After adjusting for other covariates, younger riders also had 40% (95% CI: 0.3 to 0.9, P < 0.05) lower odds of self-reporting helmet use, while those with postgraduate or higher education had 2.1 times higher odds (95% CI: 1.3 to 3.3, P < 0.01) of reporting that they always wear a helmet. Police had stopped only 2.3% of respondents to check helmet use in the three months prior to the interview. Conclusion: Observed helmet use is low in Hyderabad, yet a larger proportion of motorcyclists claim to always wear a helmet, which suggests that observational studies can provide more valid estimates of helmet use. Interview findings suggest that a combination of increased enforcement, targeted social marketing and increased supply of standard helmets could be a strategy to increase helmet use in Hyderabad.
ABSTRACT
the young people in the age group of 10-24 yr in India constitutes one of the precious resources of India characterized by growth and development and is a phase of vulnerability often influenced by several intrinsic and extrinsic factors that affect their health and safety. Nearly 10-30 per cent of young people suffer from health impacting behaviours and conditions that need urgent attention of policy makers and public health professionals. Nutritional disorders (both malnutrition and over-nutrition), tobacco use, harmful alcohol use, other substance use, high risk sexual behaviours, stress, common mental disorders, and injuries (road traffic injuries, suicides, violence of different types) specifically affect this population and have long lasting impact. Multiple behaviours and conditions often coexist in the same individual adding a cumulative risk for their poor health. Many of these being precursors and determinants of non communicable diseases (NCDs) including mental and neurological disorders and injuries place a heavy burden on Indian society in terms of mortality, morbidity, disability and socio-economic losses. Many health policies and programmes have focused on prioritized individual health problems and integrated (both vertical and horizontal) coordinated approaches are found lacking. Healthy life-style and health promotion policies and programmes that are central for health of youth, driven by robust population-based studies are required in India which will also address the growing tide of NCDs and injuries.