Analysis of the current situation of diagnosis and therapy in Chinese severe explosion accidents over the past 15 years

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2016.01.011

Abstract

Abstract:

Objectives

To investigate the epidemiological characteristic of explosion accidents as well as the possible measures for their diagnosis and treatment.

Methods

We retrospectively investigated the accidents reasons, injury regularity and casualty characteristic of 174 explosion accidents in China from January 1, 2000 to October 1, 2015.The integrated strategy of explosion prevention, injury relief and psychosomatic rehabilitation were also been analyzed from the view of prevention, diagnosis and treatment of explosive blast injury.

Results

The explosion accidents happened in 30 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions in China.The explosive elements were complicated and diversified, mainly including chemicals, dust, cell phones, burning air, improvised explosive devices, gas, fireworks, petroleum, boilers and other rare explosive goods.Among them, explosions of chemicals, dust and cell phones constituted the first three major reasons.In these 174 accidents, the total number of casualty reached 7062.The numbers of injured and died were 4313 and 2749 respectively.The average numbers of casualty per accident were 24.79 (injured), 15.80 (died), 40.59 (casualty). The numbers of accidents located the first three major types were 33 (79%) for chemical, 21 (78%) for dust and 20 (91%) for burning air in injured people exposed to explosion accidents.The casualty of chemical (2 714/7 062), dust (1 268/7 062) and gas (1 215/7 062) explosions located the first top three types.Correspondingly, the numbers of casualty per accident were 67.00, 46.96 and 93.46 respectively, while the casualty ratios were 88%, 81% and 100%.

Conclusions

Given the epidemiological characteristics of explosive blast injury in China, we need to form the expert consensus for the diagnosis and treatment of explosive blast injury in view of an individualized idea.The efficient remedy flowsheet and emergency team via multiple subjects′ integration are also in great need.Concurrently, the new equipment and measures of diagnosis as well as treatment concerning the individualized remedy should also be considered.

Key words: Explosion, Blast injury, Burns, Dust, Improvised explosive device

Ce Yang, Jianxin Jiang, Juan Du, Haiyan Wang, Jie Gao, Zhanli Liu, Zhuo Zhuang, Zhengguo Wang. Analysis of the current situation of diagnosis and therapy in Chinese severe explosion accidents over the past 15 years[J]. Chinese Journal of Diagnostics(Electronic Edition), 2016, 04(01): 36-40.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhzdxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2016.01.011

https://zhzdxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2016/V04/I01/36

Figures/Tables 7

References 18

[1]	Singh AK,Goralnick E,Velmahos G, et al.Radiologic features of injuries from the Boston Marathon bombing at three hospitals[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2014, 203(2): 235-239.
[2]	Hamele M,Poss WB,Sweney J. Disaster preparedness, pediatric considerations in primary blast injury, chemical, and biological terrorism[J]. World J Crit Care Med, 2014, 3(1): 15-23.
[3]	Minhas MS,Khan KM,Effendi J, et al.Improvised explosive device bombing police bus: Pattern of injuries, patho-physiology and early management[J]. J Pak Med Assoc, 2014, 64(Suppl 2): S49- S53.
[4]	陈新晖,王明君,呼兵, 等. 煤矿工人肺爆震伤的影像分析[J]. 中华劳动卫生职业病杂志, 2014, 32(3): 225-228.
[5]	Romolo FS,Aromatario M,Bottoni E, et al.Accidental death involving professional fireworks[J]. Forensic Sci Int, 2014, 234(1): e5-9.
[6]	Singleton JA,Gibb IE,Bull AM, et al.Primary blast lung injury prevalence and fatal injuries from explosions：insights from postmortem computed tomographic analysis of 121 improvised explosive device fatalities[J]. J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2013, 75(2 Suppl 2): S269- S274.
[7]	Patel V. Rethinking personalised medicine[J]. Lancet, 2015, 385(9980): 1826-1827.
[8]	杨策,杜娟,王海燕, 等. 精准医学思维对创伤诊治模式的影响与前景[J/CD]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2015, 3(2): 98-101.
[9]	中华医学会创伤学分会. 天津港"8.12"大爆炸伤员伤情特点与救治反思[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2015, 31(9): 810-813.
[10]	Ramesh AC,Kumar S. Triage, monitoring, and treatment of mass casualty events involving chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents[J]. J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2010, 2(3): 239-247.
[11]	Atiyeh B,Gunn SW,Dibo S. Primary triage of mass burn casualties with associated severe traumatic injuries[J]. Ann Burns Fire Disasters, 2013, 26(1): 48-52.
[12]	Eikermann M,Velmahos G,Abbara S, et al.Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital.Case 11-2014.A man with traumatic injuries after a bomb explosion at the Boston Marathon[J]. N Engl J Med, 2014, 370(15): 1441-1451.
[13]	曾实,王昊,许民辉, 等. 颅脑冲击伤临床诊疗规范(建议)[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2014, 30(11): 1067-1069.
[14]	谭群友,孙天宇,王如文, 等. 肺部冲击伤临床诊疗规范(建议)[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2014, 30(9): 865-867.
[15]	赵松,刘晓波,童卫东, 等. 腹部爆炸冲击伤临床诊疗规范(建议)[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2014, 30(10): 971-973.
[16]	陈继川,蒋建新,孟德静, 等. 听器冲击伤临床诊疗规范(建议)[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2014, 30(8): 765-767.
[17]	周继红,王正国,朱佩芳, 等. 烧冲复合伤诊疗规范[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2013, 29(9): 809-812.
[18]	蒋建新,王正国,杨志焕, 等. 破/冲复合伤临床诊疗规范[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2014, 29(12): 1125-1127.

年份(年)	事故数(起)	构成比(%)
2000	1	0.57
2001	3	1.72
2002	4	2.30
2003	2	1.15
2004	4	2.30
2005	2	1.15
2006	3	1.72
2007	5	2.87
2008	5	2.87
2009	10	5.75
2010	22	12.64
2011	20	11.49
2012	20	11.49
2013	37	21.26
2014	20	11.49
2015	16	9.20
合计	174	100

年份(年)	事故数(起)	构成比(%)
2000	1	0.57
2001	3	1.72
2002	4	2.30
2003	2	1.15
2004	4	2.30
2005	2	1.15
2006	3	1.72
2007	5	2.87
2008	5	2.87
2009	10	5.75
2010	22	12.64
2011	20	11.49
2012	20	11.49
2013	37	21.26
2014	20	11.49
2015	16	9.20
合计	174	100

事故等级	事故数(起)	构成比(%)
轻微事故	55	31.61
一般事故	30	17.24
较大事故	39	22.41
重大事故	31	17.82
特别重大事故	19	10.92
合计	174	100

事故等级	事故数(起)	构成比(%)
轻微事故	55	31.61
一般事故	30	17.24
较大事故	39	22.41
重大事故	31	17.82
特别重大事故	19	10.92
合计	174	100

爆炸物类别	事故数(起)	构成比(%)
化学品	42	24.14
粉尘	27	15.52
手机	26	14.94
燃气	22	12.64
临时爆炸装置	19	10.92
瓦斯	13	7.47
烟花爆竹	10	5.75
油料	8	4.60
锅炉	3	1.72
不详	3	1.72
其他	1	0.57
合计	174	100

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export