• Belinda J Gabbe, Pamela M Simpson, Peter A Cameron, Christina L Ekegren, Elton R Edwards, Richard Page, Susan Liew, Andrew Bucknill, and Richard de Steiger.
• Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Farr Institute, Swansea University Medical School, Swansea, Wales, UK.
• BMJ Open. 2015 Nov 26; 5 (11): e009907.

ObjectivesTo establish the association between the patient's perception of fault for the crash and 12-month outcomes after non-fatal road traffic injury.SettingTwo adult major trauma centres, one regional trauma centre and one metropolitan trauma centre in Victoria, Australia.Participants2605 adult, orthopaedic trauma patients covered by the state's no-fault third party insurer for road traffic injury, injured between September 2010 and February 2014.Outcome MeasuresEQ-5D-3L, return to work and functional recovery (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score of upper good recovery) at 12 months postinjury.ResultsAfter adjusting for key confounders, the adjusted relative risk (ARR) of a functional recovery (0.57, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.69) and return to work (0.92, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.99) were lower for the not at fault compared to the at fault group. The ARR of reporting problems on EQ-5D items was 1.20-1.35 times higher in the not at fault group.ConclusionsPatients who were not at fault, or denied being at fault despite a police report of fault, experienced poorer outcomes than the at fault group. Attributing fault to others was associated with poorer outcomes. Interventions to improve coping, or to resolve negative feelings from the crash, could facilitate better outcomes in the future.Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

20 keywords...

hide…