World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 1 ( January-February, 2017 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of Influencing Factors and commonly Involving Side in Maxillofacial Injuries in Road Traffic Accidents by Motorized Two Wheelers: A Cross-sectional Study

Meera Thinakaran, S Mohanavalli, G Sree V Bala

Citation Information : Thinakaran M, Mohanavalli S, Bala GS. Evaluation of Influencing Factors and commonly Involving Side in Maxillofacial Injuries in Road Traffic Accidents by Motorized Two Wheelers: A Cross-sectional Study. World J Dent 2017; 8 (1):49-54.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1410

Published Online: 01-06-2013

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; The Author(s).



Trauma remains to be a leading cause of maxillofacial injury globally. Motorized two wheelers (MTWs) are the main cause of (73%) maxillofacial injuries in the road traffic accidents; in several studies, the right side of maxillofacial injuries was reported as the common side of injury than left side. In our previous study, the percentage of the right side injuries was higher than the left side.


The aim of this study is to evaluate the influencing factors of the maxillofacial injury by MTWs and to find the association between the side maxillofacial injuries and the handedness of drivers.

Materials and methods

Clusters sampling method was used; 20 clusters were selected in Chennai. Motorized twowheeler drivers were selected. Data collected by prepared questionnaires’ were statistically analyzed. Data included the demographic details, type of vehicle, engine capacity, average driving speed, years of driving, regular usage of the helmet, type, mode and frequency of accident, management, influence of alcohol, and use of the helmet at the time of injury. The side of the facial injury and handedness of drivers were recorded.


From the total of 721 participants, 75.7% were males, 24.3% were females; 46.74% were in the age of 18 to 25; mean age is 29.45. Bikes were 55.9%, scooter 38.2%, moped 8.3%; 59.9% are geared; 50.5% were 80 to 100 cc vehicles types and 37% were 110 to 150 cc types; 62% of male's average speed is 80 km/hour; 53% of female's average speed is less than 40 km/hour. Only 18.06% had used at the time of injury. 39.4% of females had accidents, males had 59.3% (p < 0.0001). Two-wheeler vs two-wheeler accidents were 24.8%; two-wheeler vs four wheeler were 19%; by pedestrians crossing 18.7%; by animal crossing was 16.5%; skid two wheeler 20%. A total of 30.02% were under the influence of alcohol. Right-side injuries were 44.5%; left side 25.9% (p < 0.0001), while 96.9% were right-handers.


Right-side injuries were common in MTW skid and fall. Speed, type of vehicle, handedness, influence of alcohol, use of helmet, mode of injury, all are the determining factors for pattern and severity of injury. Helmet usage would definitely minimize the head injury to some extent.

How to cite this article

Mohanavalli S, Thinakaran M, Bala GSV. Evaluation of Influencing Factors and commonly Involving Side in Maxillofacial Injuries in Road Traffic Accidents by Motorized Two Wheelers: A Cross-sectional Study. World J Dent 2017;8(1):49-54.

PDF Share
  1. Urban transport. India's transport sector: the challenges ahead. Washington (DC): World Bank; 2002. p. 78-90.
  2. Ciencia Saude Coletiva 2012 Sep;17(9):2291-2304.
  3. Study of maxillofacial trauma, its aetiology, distribution, spectrum, and management. J Indian Med Assoc 2013 Jan;111(1):18-20.
  4. Two-wheeler injuries in Delhi, India: a study of crash victims hospitalized in a neurosurgery ward. Accid Anal Prev 1984;16(5-6):407-416.
  5. Analysis of road traffic fatalities in Delhi, India. Accid Anal Prev 1985;17(1):33-45.
  6. Helmet and head injury study of crash involved motorcyclists in Delhi. In: Proceedings 1984 International Conference on the Biomechanics of Impacts. Bron, France: IRCOBI; 1984. p. 65-77.
  7. Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme (TRIPP). Bulletin 2006;3(3):1-2.
  8. Clinical evaluation of neurosensory changes in the infraorbital nerve following surgical management of zygomatico-maxillary complex fractures. J Clin Diagn Res 2015 Dec;9(12):ZC54-ZC58.
  9. Efficacy of two point rigid internal fixation in the management of zygomatic complex fracture. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2009 Sep;8(3):265-269.
  10. Violence-related facial trauma: analysis of multidetector computed tomography findings of 727 patients. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010 Feb;39(2):107-112.
  11. Equine-related facial fractures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 Nov;37(11):999-1002.
  12. Craniofacial injuries in unhelmeted riders of motorbikes. Injury 1995 Sep;26(7):467-470.
  13. Pattern of mandibular fractures in Chennai, India. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 Mar;46(2):126-127.
  14. A comprehensive study on maxillofacial trauma conducted in Yamunanagar, India. J Inj Violence Res 2013 Jun;5(2):108-116.
  15. Maxillofacial trauma and the role of alcohol. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 Oct;46(7):542-546.
  16. The effect of the new “24 hour alcohol licensing law” on the incidence of facial trauma in London. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 Sep;46(6):460-463.
  17. Etiology, incidence and patterns of mid-face fractures and associated ocular injuries. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2014 Jun;13(2):115-119.
  18. Epidemiological analysis of maxillofacial fractures in Brazil: a 5-year prospective study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006 Jul;102(1):28-34.
  19. The pattern of maxillofacial fractures in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates: a review of 230 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004 Aug;98(2):166-170.
  20. Retrospective study maxillofacial fractures epidemiology and treatment plans in Southeast of Iran. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2015 Nov 1;20(6):e729–e736.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.