QUALITY OF LIFE IN ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT SURVIVORS Jelena KOVAČEVIĆ1,2, Maja MIŠKULIN2, Matea MATIĆ LIČANIN2, Josip BARAĆ2, Dubravka BIUK2, Hrvoje PALENKIĆ2,3, Suzana MATIĆ2, Marinela KRISTIĆ4, Egon BIUK2, Ivan MIŠKULIN2* 1Institute of emergency medicine of the Vukovar-Srijem County, 32 100 Vinkovci, Croatia 2Faculty of Medicine Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31 000 Osijek, Croatia 3Department of Surgery, General Hospital Slavonski Brod, 35 000 Slavonski Brod, Croatia 4Department of Psychiatry, University Hospital Split, 21 000 Split, Croatia Received: Apr 26, 2020 Accepted: Aug 19, 2020 Original scientific article *Corresponding author: Tel. + 385 91 224 15 00; E-mail: ivan.miskulin@mefos.hr 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 202 KAKOVOST ŽIVLJENJA PREŽIVELIH V CESTNOPROMETNIH NESREČAH Kovačević J, Miškulin M, Matić Ličanin M, Barać J, Biuk D, Palenkić H, Matić S, Kristić M, Biuk E, Miškulin I. Quality of life in road traffic accident survivors. Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210. doi: 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026. ABSTRACT Keywords: road traffic accident, quality of life, injury severity, health status, compensation IZVLEČEK Ključne besede: cestnoprometna nesreča, kakovost življenja, resnost poškodbe, zdravstveno stanje, odškodnina Introduction: The loss of quality of life is the major consequence following a non-fatal road traffic accident (RTA). Previous research regarding quality of life did not include uninjured RTA survivors. The research aim was thus to evaluate the quality of life of the RTA survivors regardless of whether or not they sustained injures, and to identify factors associated with decreased quality of life after the RTA. Methods: A cohort of 200 RTA survivors with and without injuries was followed after experiencing an RTA. The quality of life and mental health outcomes were assessed 1 month following RTA. A vast range of sociodemographic, pre-RTA health-related, RTA related, RTA injury-related, compensation-related factors and mental health outcomes were investigated. Results: Decreased quality of life following an RTA showed an association with the low socioeconomic status of the RTA victims, poor pre-RTA health, injury-related factors, compensation-related factors and psychological disorders after the RTA. Conclusions: Identifying predictors of decreased quality of life following an RTA will enable planning interventions targeting the most important factors that influence recovery of RTA victims. Assessing and recording of self- reported quality of life should be a part of the routine protocol in RTA survivors’ health-care. Uvod: Poslabšanje kakovosti življenja je glavna posledica cestnoprometne nesreče (CPN), ki nima smrtnega izida. Pretekle raziskave kakovosti življenja niso vključevale preživelih CPN, ki se niso poškodovali. Cilj raziskave je bil oceniti kakovost življenja preživelih CPN, ne glede na to, ali so bili poškodovani, in prepoznati dejavnike, povezane z zmanjšano kakovostjo življenja po CPN. Metode: Spremljali so kohorto 200 ljudi, ki so preživeli CPN, s poškodbami ali brez njih. En mesec po CPN so ocenili kakovost življenja in izide duševnega zdravja. Raziskali so širok spekter socialno-demografskih dejavnikov; dejavnikov, povezanih z zdravjem pred CPN; dejavnikov, povezanih s poškodbami v CPN; dejavnikov, povezanih z odškodnino, in izidov duševnega zdravja. Rezultati: Izkazalo se je, da je zmanjšana kakovost življenja po CPN povezana z nizkim socialno-ekonomskim statusom žrtev CPN, slabim zdravjem pred CPN, dejavniki, povezanimi s poškodbami, dejavniki, povezanimi z odškodnino, in psihološkimi motnjami po CPN. Sklepi: Prepoznavanje napovednih znakov zmanjšane kakovosti življenja po CPN bo omogočilo načrtovanje intervencij, usmerjenih v najpomembnejše dejavnike, ki vplivajo na okrevanje žrtev CPN. Ocenjevanje in evidentiranje samoocenjene kakovosti življenja bi morala biti del rutinskega protokola zdravstvenega varstva preživelih CPN. © Nacionalni inštitut za javno zdravje, Slovenija. 1 INTRODUCTION About 50 million people around the world suffer from non-fatal road traffic accident (RTA) injuries every year (1). In 2018, 13,989 people were injured in RTAs in Croatia (2). The non-fatal consequences of RTAs are numerous: functional and cognitive impairments, psychological consequences and a decrease in the quality of life of the survivors (3). Decreased quality of life (QoL) is the major consequence of RTAs (4). Research shows that the physical and mental components of health-related QoL are decreased in the long-term, even in RTA survivors with minor injuries (5- 7). QoL consistently and independently predicts return to pre-injury employment and life participation among RTA survivors who sustained mild/moderate injuries (8). Research also shows that psychiatric disorders in RTA survivors decrease QoL (9), especially PTSD (4, 7, 10, 11), depressive disorder (4, 9) and anxiety disorder (9). Other potential factors that influence QoL in RTA survivors are expectations regarding recovery, pain level, social support, perceived life-threat in the RTA (4, 12, 13), level of education, injury severity, compensation claim, early medical complications and socioeconomic factors, especially financial problems (11). The research regarding the impact of RTA injury severity on the QoL following the RTA is inconsistent, some studies found that injury severity does not predict later QoL (4, 6, 9), while others found the contrary (11, 14). However, all published studies on QoL following an RTA only include the injured RTA survivors, and thus there is no knowledge on the QoL of the uninjured survivors. Furthermore, there are no QoL studies conducted among RTA victims in Croatia. The research aim was therefore to evaluate the quality of life of the RTA survivors regardless of whether or not they sustained injures, and to identify factors associated with decreased quality of life after the RTA. 2 METHODS A cohort of 200 RTA survivors recruited at the Institute of Emergency Medicine of the Vukovar-Srijem County in Croatia were included in a prospective study. They were assessed 1 month following the RTA. Inclusion criteria for participating were being an RTA survivor and aged 18 and older. RTA survivors with cognitive dysfunctions and inability to give consent were excluded, as well as those aged under 18. Recruitment of the participants and data collection was done by a medical doctor. During the research period, from October 2016 to December 2017, 640 people were involved in RTAs. Figure 1 gives details on the formation of the prospective cohort. 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 203 Figure 1. Cohort recruitment diagram. Using a specially designed questionnaire the following data about RTA survivors was collected in this study: age, gender, place of residence, education, employment, marital status, self-assessed economic status and religiousness. Using the same questionnaire, data regarding pre-RTA health-related factors such as smoking, alcohol consumption, drug abuse, earlier road crash experience, traumatic exposures, prior PTSD, chronic diseases, psychiatric diseases and previous permanent pain was also collected. Finally, the RTA-related factors explored through the same questionnaire were the type of road user, number of motor vehicles that were involved in the RTA, the injured and fatalities, fault for causing the RTA, compensation status, memory loss after the RTA, loss of consciousness in the RTA, injury status and severity, hospitalization, surgery and rehabilitation, self-assessed life-threat and pain following the RTA. The classification and detailed description of all collected data are shown in Tables 1, 2 and 3. Based on medical records related to the RTA, the injury severity was assessed using the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) (15). The final score was assigned using the New Injury Severity Scale (NISS). NISS classifies injuries as minor, moderate, serious, severe and critical (16). The PTSD Checklist for Civilians (PCL-C) was used for the assessment of PTSD symptoms following the RTA (17). A cut-point of 30 was used, as suggested for general population (18). The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was used for the assessment of anxiety symptoms following the RTA, with the cut-point of 22 (19). The Beck Depression Inventory—I (BDI—I) was used for the assessment of depression symptoms following the RTA, with the cut-point of 11 (20). 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 204 The Short Form-36 (SF-36) was used for the assessment of QoL following the RTA (21). In this QoL is a multidimensional concept describing a satisfactory, balanced and healthy life comprising both biopsychosocial and socioeconomic aspects (22), such as physical health, psychological status, independence level, social relations, personal beliefs and relations within a specific environment (11). SF-36 is the most widely used instrument for assessing health-related QoL, and has been standardized and validated. This self- reporting measure contains 36 items and is used for the assessment of health status across eight domains: physical function (PF), role limitations due to physical health (RP), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE), vitality (VT), mental health, referring to the absence of anxiety and depression, (MH), social functioning (SF), bodily pain (BP) and general health (GH). The result scores range from 0 to 100, and higher obtained values present better perception of the QoL (23). The Croatian version of SF-36 was validated and found reliable in the Croatian population (24). The normality of data distribution was tested with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; thereafter descriptive statistics were applied. The Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal- Wallis test were applied for the comparison of numerical variables. Spearman’s correlation was applied to test the correlation between the QoL domains and psychological outcomes following the RTA. The statistical significance level was set at p<0.05. The statistical package Statistica for Windows 2010 (version 10.0, StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA) was used for the analysis. 3 RESULTS 3.1 RTA Survivors’ Characteristics Participants’ median age was 42.5 years (interquartile range 28.3-56.0), 54.0% were males, 56.5% had rural residence, 62.5% finished high-school education, 58.0% were employed, 64.5% had a partner, 58.0% reported self- assessed average economic status, 90.5% were religious, 64.5% were non-smokers, 49.5% never used alcohol, 51.0% used medications, 42.0% had prior RTA experience, 52.0% reported previous traumatic exposures, 42.0% had previous chronic disease, 11.0% had previous psychiatric disease and 9.5% suffered previous permanent pain (Table 1). Non-participants and participants had similar age, gender and primary injury location. Table 1. Sociodemographic factors and health status before the RTA. Sex Male Female Age group (years) Younger (18–41) Older (≥42) Place of residence Urban Rural Education Primary Secondary Higher education Employment Employed Out of work Retired from work Relationship status Single Has a partner Self-assessed economic status Under average Average Above average Religiousness No Yes Smoking No Yes Alcohol use No Yes Drug abuse No Yes Use of medications No Yes Type of medications None Non-psychiatric Psychiatric All types Previous RTAs No Yes Traumatic exposures No Yes 54.0 46.0 48.5 51.5 43.5 56.5 19.0 62.5 18.5 58.0 26.0 16.0 35.5 64.5 20.0 58.0 22.0 9.5 90.5 64.5 35.5 49.5 50.5 98.5 1.5 49.0 51.0 49.0 9.0 3.5 8.5 58.0 42.0 48.0 52.0 108 92 97 103 87 113 38 125 37 116 52 32 71 129 40 116 44 19 181 129 71 99 101 197 3 98 102 98 78 7 17 116 84 96 104 Sociodemographic factors and health status N % 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 205 Prior PTSD No Yes Chronic disease No Yes Psychiatric disease No Yes Permanent pain No Yes 96.5 3.5 58.0 42.0 89.0 11.0 90.5 9.5 193 7 116 84 178 22 181 19 Sociodemographic factors and health status N % RTA details are shown in Table 2, and these reveal that 61.0% of the participants were drivers of motor vehicles, 53.5% were involved in the RTA involving two or more vehicles, 42.0% were in the RTA with one victim, 2.5% were in the RTA with fatalities, 61.5% of the participants were not at fault for causing the RTA, 43.5% of the participants claimed compensation and 10.0% received compensation. Table 2. Table 3. RTA details. Health status following the RTA. Type of road users Driver of motor vehicle Co-driver or a passenger Pedestrian or a cyclist Motor vehicles crashed None One Two or more Injured None One 2–3 More than 3 Fatal outcomes No Yes At fault No Yes Unknown Claimed compensation No Yes Obtained compensation No Yes Number of injuries Without injures One Multiple Injury location None Head Face Neck Chest Abdomen Spine Upper extremities Lower extremities Several locations Major injury Without injuries Head Neck Chest Abdomen Upper extremities Lower extremities Injury level Without injury Minor Moderate Serious Severe Critical Self-assessed life-threat No Yes Loss of consciousness No Yes 61.0 30.5 8.5 0.5 46.0 53.5 14.5 42.0 36.0 7.5 97.5 2.5 61.5 35.0 3.5 56.5 43.5 90.0 10.0 15.5 22.5 62.0 15.5 9.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 0.5 1.5 1.5 5.0 58.0 15.5 29.0 18.5 9.5 6.0 8.5 13.0 15.5 48.0 18.0 14.0 3.0 1.5 54.0 46.0 84.0 16.0 122 61 17 1 92 107 29 84 72 15 195 5 123 70 7 113 87 180 20 31 45 124 31 18 2 8 8 1 3 3 10 116 31 58 37 19 12 17 26 31 96 36 28 6 3 108 92 168 32 RTA details. Health status following the RTA N N % % The health status of the participants following the RTA is shown in Table 3. Multiples injures were sustained by 62.0% of the participants, 15.5% of the participants had no injuries, 48.0% sustained minor injuries, 18.0% sustained moderate injuries, 14.0% sustained serious injuries, 3.0% sustained severe injuries and 1.5% sustained critical injuries in the RTA. Threat to life was experienced by 46.0% of the participants, 16.0% reported unconsciousness, 14.0% reported amnesia, 32.0% were hospitalized, 10.0% underwent surgical treatment, 23.0% underwent rehabilitation procedures, 76.5% reported pain following the RTA, 35.5% reported PTSD symptoms, 20.0% reported depression symptoms and 4.5% reported anxiety symptoms following the RTA. 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 206 Table 4. Quality of life of the participants after the RTA. Physical functioning Role limitations due to physical health Role limitations due to emotional health Vitality Mental health Social functioning Bodily pain General health Loss of memory No Yes Hospitalization No Yes Days in hospital None 1–3 4–10 11 and more Surgery No Yes Rehabilitation No Yes Pain following the RTA No Yes Symptoms of PTSD No Yes Symptoms of depression No Yes Symptoms of anxiety No Yes 30.0–100.0 0.0–100.0 67.0–100.0 50.0–75.0 52.0–76.0 50.0–100.0 33.0–80.0 55.0–84.0 86.0 14.0 68.0 32.0 68.0 13.5 9.5 9.0 90.0 10.0 77.0 23.0 23.5 76.5 64.5 35.5 80.0 20.0 95.5 4.5 70.0 0.0 100.0 60.0 68.0 75.0 55.0 70.0 172 28 136 64 136 27 19 18 180 20 154 46 47 153 129 71 160 40 191 9 QoL domains Health status following the RTA Median N Interquartile range % 3.2 Quality of Life After the RTA The median values of QoL obtained across eight domains are presented in Table 4. The sociodemographic factors that were found to be associated with lower QoL domains were female gender, older age group, lower education level, unemployment, lower self-assessed economic status and irreligiousness. Pre-RTA health showed an association with lower QoL domains after the RTA, in terms of alcohol abstinence, previous traumatic exposure, previous chronic disease, previous psychiatric disease, previous permanent pain, use of medications and especially psychiatric medication use. Injury-related factors found associated with lower QoL domains were injury affliction, injury severity, self-assessed life-threat, pain following the RTA, hospitalization and its duration, surgery, unconsciousness in the RTA and rehabilitation following the RTA. Among RTA-related factors, not being at fault in the RTA, claiming compensation, obtaining compensation and vulnerable road users had lower QoL (Table 5). 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 207 Mental health outcomes showed a reverse correlation with all QoL domains after the RTA. The correlations between QoL domains and the symptoms of depression, anxiety and PTSD are presented in Table 6. Table 5. Factors influencing quality of life following the RTA. aMann-Whitney U test; bKruskal-Wallis test; PF = physical health; RP = role limitations due to physical health; RE = role limitations due to emotional health; VT = vitality; MH = mental health; SF = social functioning; BP = bodily pain; GH = general health Sociodemographic Gender Age group Place of residence Education Employment Marital status Self-assessed economic status Religiousness Pre-RTA health Body mass index Smoking Alcohol consumption Drug abuse Previous RTAs Previous traumatic exposures Prior PTSD Chronic disease Psychiatric disease Previous permanent pain Use of medications Types of medications RTA injury-related Injury affliction Injury severity Self-assessed life-threat Pain following the RTA Hospitalization Hospitalization duration Surgery Loss of consciousness Loss of memory Rehabilitation RTA-related Fault Fatalities Compensation claim Obtained compensation Type of road users p=0.681a p=0.084a p=0.795a p=0.478b p=0.087b p=0.628a p=0.014b p=0.898a p=0.182b p=0.620a p=0.020a p=0.637a p=0.840a p=0.983a p=0.890a p=0.039a p=0.435a p=0.828a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001b p=0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p=0.033a p=0.226a p<0.001a p=0.109b p=0.953a p=0.072a p=0.474a p=0.007b p=0.064a p=0.012a p=0.096a p=0.152b p=0.067b p=0.671a p<0.001b p=0.041a p=0.538b p=0.096a p=0.028a p=0.566a p=0.083a p=0.116a p=0.308a p=0.001a p=0.001a p=0.033a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001a p=0.053a p=0.128b p=0.036a p=0.597a p=0.097a p=0.095a p=0.657b p=0.147a p=0.178a p=0.537a p=0.070b p=0.020a p=0.226a p=0.876a p=0.182b p=0.037b p=0.101a p=0.049b p=0.868a p=0.754b p=0.260a p=0.046a p=0.969a p=0.709a p=0.471a p=0.986a p=0.410a p=0.024a p=0.069a p=0.058a p=0.253b p=0.228a p=0.347b p=0.013a p=0.001a p=0.200a p=0.318b p=0.281a p=0.334a p=0.962a p<0.001a p=0.393b p=0.618a p=0.001a p=0.001a p=0.502b p=0.052a p=0.959a p=0.224a p=0.118b p=0.007b p=0.525a p=0.003b p=0.072a p=0.612b p=0.510a p=0.005a p=0.425a p=0.864a p=0.604a p=0.776a p=0.073a p=0.039a p=0.052a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p=0.311a p=0.984a p<0.001a p=0.024b p=0.343a p=0.031a p=0.370a p=0.017b p=0.651a p=0.204a p=0.098a p=0.045b p=0.403b p=0.965a p=0.032b p=0.407a p=0.496b p=0.214a p=0.007a p=0.314a p=0.774a p=0.510a p=0.612a p=0.026a p=0.061a p=0.771a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p=0.088a p=0.150a p<0.001a p=0.659b p=0.541a p=0.140a p=0.102a p=0.053b p=0.408a p=0.079a p=0.069a p=0.828b p=0.988b p=0.874a p=0.245b p=0.130a p=0.141b p=0.198a p=0.036a p=0.500a p=0.793a p=0.394a p=0.882a p=0.043a p=0.452a p=0.172a p<0.001a p<0.001b p=0.003a p<0.001b p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p=0.298a p=0.116a p<0.001a p=0.537b p=0.157a p=0.001a p=0.155a p=0.113b p=0.072a p=0.078a p=0.427a p=0.344b p=0.094b p=0.465a p<0.001b p=0.010a p=0.319b p=0.056a p=0.009a p=0.214a p=0.589a p=0.032a p=0.941a p=0.001a p=0.057a p=0.001a p<0.001a p<0.001b p=0.061a p=0.081b p=0.002a p<0.001a p=0.177a p=0.244b p=0.045a p=0.393a p=0.196a p=0.086a p=0.322b p=0.762a p=0.005a p=0.232a p=0.156b p=0.118a p<0.001a p=0.469a p=0.034b p<0.001b p=0.708a p<0.001b p=0.862a p=0.182b p=0.097a p=0.003a p=0.272a p=0.133a p=0.031a p=0.206a p<0.001a p=0.010a p=0.014a p<0.001a p<0.001b p=0.008a p<0.001b p<0.001a p=0.002a p<0.001a p<0.001b p<0.001a p=0.355a p=0.190a p=0.012a p=0.461b p=0.421a p=0.367a p=0.607a p=0.004b Factors QoL domains PF MHER BPPR SFVT GH 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 208 Table 6. Correlation between quality of life and mental health outcomes after the RTA. *Spearman’s correlation; PF = physical health; RP = role limitations due to physical health; RE = role limitations due to emotional health; VT = vitality; MH = mental health; SF = social functioning; BP = bodily pain; GH = general health Depression symptoms Anxiety symptoms PTSD symptoms rs=-0.410 p<0.001* rs=-0.274 p<0.001* rs=-0.380 p<0.001* rs=-0.586 p<0.001* rs=-0.378 p<0.001* rs=-0.552 p<0.001* rs=-0.430 p<0.001* rs=-0.523 p<0.001* rs=-0.449 p<0.001* rs=-0.438 p<0.001* rs=-0.427 p<0.001* rs=-0.527 p<0.001* rs=-0.364 p<0.001* rs=-0.263 p<0.001* rs=-0.345 p<0.001* rs=-0.582 p<0.001* rs=-0.485 p<0.001* rs=-0.549 p<0.001* rs=-0.588 p<0.001* rs=-0.446 p<0.001* rs=-0.476 p<0.001* rs=-0.593 p<0.001* rs=-0.442 p<0.001* rs=-0.437 p<0.001* Mental health QoL domains PF MHER BPPR SFVT GH 4 DISCUSSION The study explored the QoL following an RTA and the prospective cohort included RTA survivors both with and without injuries, unlike other studies exploring RTA outcomes only among the injured. The QoL of the RTA survivors one month after the experienced RTA was below the average scores for the general Croatian population in the following QoL domains: RP (0.0 vs. 61.5) and BP (55.0 vs. 64.6) (24). Other studies also found RTA survivors had lower QoL than general population norms (4, 6, 12, 23, 25). The sociodemographic factors found associated with lower scores of the QoL domains in this study, i.e. older age, female sex, lower education level, unemployment, and lower economic level, are consistent with other research data. The Croatian general population sample reported lower QoL scores in the older age group and among females (24). Other studies of RTA victims also found older age to be associated with lower QoL after the RTA (4-6, 9, 11, 23, 25-27). A few studies also found female RTA survivors reporting lower QoL than males (5, 25, 28). Lower education level (7, 11, 12), unemployment (6, 9, 11) and lower economic status (11) of RTA victims were associated with lower QoL after the RTA in several studies. Irreligiousness has not been explored in the earlier studies, but was found relevant in this cohort. Pre-RTA health status was found to be associated with lower QoL after the RTA. Other studies also found pre- injury health status (6, 9, 11, 12, 23, 27, 29), pre-injury chronic illness (6, 9, 11, 12, 23, 29) and pre-injury psychological history (7, 12, 23, 27, 29) to be associated with decreased QoL in the RTA victims. Use of medications and psychiatric medication use were found associated with all QoL domains except RE. This factor should be further explored, since people may not want to report a psychiatric disease due to stigmatization, but may report information regarding medications they use (30). This study also found previous traumatic exposure to be associated with lower VT and GH. Alcohol consumption was found to be positively associated with all QoL domains, indicating that moderate alcohol use has a positive effect on the QoL (31). The most important injury-related factors associated with all QoL domains were pain following the RTA and self-assessed life-threat, with the latter also found to be significant in other studies (9, 12). Pain following an RTA is a well-known predictor of QoL (4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 27, 29). Given that a high baseline pain after the RTA is associated with poor long-term health outcomes, strategies to reduce pain levels should be introduced early following an RTA to reduce the risk of long-term health consequences (28). The results with regard to injury severity are inconsistent in the literature, some studies found it to be associated with lower QoL (3, 11, 12, 14, 23, 28, 32), while others found no association (5, 6, 9) or a negative association (4). However, in all studies where RTA survivors with mild injuries reported similar or worse QoL scores than RTA victims with more severe injuries, data were obtained from compensable injury claim registers restricted to a certain level of injuries i.e. mild to moderate. It can be argued that decreased QoL outcomes are the result of the compensable nature of the injury, leading to reporting bias for secondary gain (12). The current study showed not only that more severely injured had lower QoL scores, but also that RTA survivors without injuries had better QoL scores. Other research exploring traumatic injuries also showed that sustaining a traumatic (not RTA) injury was associated with lower QoL (33). Therefore, in order to obtain reliable data, research regarding the impact of RTA injury on health outcomes should include RTA victims with all injury levels along with those who are uninjured, possibly outside compensation settings. Factors indirectly injury-related, i.e. hospitalization, duration of hospitalization, surgery, loss of consciousness during RTA and rehabilitation after the RTA, had a negative impact on the QoL after an RTA. Other research also found hospitalization to be associated with lower QoL scores (3, 9, 12, 27). Psychological consequences after the RTA, 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 209 namely PTSD, depression and anxiety symptoms, showed correlations with all QoL domains. Other studies also found psychological distress (27), PTSD (4, 7, 11, 29) and anxiety/depression (4-6, 9) to be independent predictors of QoL following the RTA. Vulnerable road users, i.e. pedestrians/cyclists reported lower scores of PF, BP and GH. This association is also probably injury-related, since there were no uninjured cyclists nor pedestrians in this study. These findings all corroborate that RTA injury and its severity are both relevant for the QoL outcomes. Compensation claim is a thoroughly investigated factor showing a negative association with the QoL following an RTA in many studies (5, 7, 11, 27, 34, 35). In addition to the negative association of compensation claim with the QoL, this study showed that obtaining compensation was associated with a lower score of RE. Furthermore, not being at fault in the RTA was associated with higher scores of BP. Other research also found that not-at-fault RTA victims had lower QoL and reported significantly higher rate of neck and back pain than the at-fault group (28). This suggests that non-physical factors such as victimization, frustration and anger at being involved in an RTA that was the fault of someone else all affect well- being (28). Most of the studies investigating the QoL of RTA survivors used the SF-36 questionnaire (4, 5, 14, 23, 28, 33-35) or its shortened version. the Short Form – 12 (SF-12) (6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 26, 27), while a minority used other available instruments for assessing QoL (7, 26, 31). Therefore, the data from this study are comparable with that in other QoL studies. 4.1 Strengths and Limitations This study investigated a vast range of variables, sociodemographic, psychosocial, health-related, injury- related, RTA-related and compensation-related factors. Unlike other research, this one included uninjured RTA survivors with the traumatic experience of an RTA. Furthermore, the injured RTA victims included all levels of injury severity. Cohort recruitment was conducted outside any compensation scheme to eliminate secondary gain bias. All patients received immediate post-RTA healthcare in public healthcare settings irrelevant of their injury and health insurance status. Emergency and acute care, rehabilitation and other healthcare services for the RTA patients in Croatia are provided by public hospitals and are paid for by the state health insurance, and not like in some countries by third-party insurers in the scheme of a fault- based or no fault-based compensation system. As such, Croatian RTA victims receive equal healthcare and social benefits regardless of their involvement in compensation procedures. Given all the above, the studied cohort might be similar to general population in Croatia. The limitations of this study include self-reported data collection. Pre-RTA physical and mental health problems were self-reported, without specific diagnostic tools or medical records. The recruited participants represent only 31.3% of registered RTA survivors, mostly due to the absence of contact information of the RTA victims (48.3%). The response rate was high, and 82.6% of the contacted RTA victims gave consent to participate. The telephone contact information of the patient is not a routinely obtained in Croatian emergency medicine institutes. Furthermore, there are objective reasons, such as the medical condition of the patients and absence of relatives, that hinder obtaining contact information. Nevertheless, given the relatively small sample size, more resources should be invested in obtaining RTA victims’ contact information and implementing this procedure in the routine protocols. 5 CONCLUSIONS Decreased QoL following an RTA showed associations with the low socioeconomic status of the RTA victims, poor pre-RTA health, injury-related factors and psychological disorders after the RTA. Identifying the predictors of decreased QoL following an RTA will enable planning interventions targeting the most important factors influencing health of RTA victims. Assessing and recording of self-reported QoL should be a part of the routine protocol in RTA survivors’ healthcare. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare that no conflicts of interest exist. FUNDING The study was funded by grants from Croatian Ministry of Science and Education dedicated to multi-year institutional funding of scientific activity at the Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia - grants number: IP12 and IP13. ETHICAL APPROVAL The research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine Osijek, Croatia (Ethical Approval Code: 2158-61-07-17-211). 10.2478/sjph-2020-0026 Zdr Varst. 2020;59(4):202-210 210 REFERENCES 1. World Health Organization. Global status report on road safety 2018. Geneva: WHO, 2018. 2. Croatian bureau of statistics. Registered road vehicles and road traffic accidents in 2018. Zagreb: Croatian bureau of statistics, 2019. 3. Hours M, Chossegros L, Charnay P, Tardy H, Nhac-Vu HT, Boisson D, et al. Outcomes one year after a road accident: Results from the ESPARR cohort. Accident Anal Prev. 2013;50:92-102. doi: 10.1016/j. aap.2012.03.037. 4. Kenardy J, Heron-Delaney M, Warren J, Brown E. The effect of mental health on long-term health-related quality of life following a road traffic crash: results from the UQ SuPPORT study. Injury. 2015;46:883- 90. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.11.006. 5. Littleton SM, Cameron ID, Poustie SJ, Hughes DC, Robinson BJ, Neeman T, et al. The association of compensation on longer term health status for people with musculoskeletal injuries following road traffic crashes: emergency department inception cohort study. Injury. 2011;42:927-33. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.02.011. 6. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Elbers N, Cameron ID. Overview of findings from a 2-year study of claimants who had sustained a mild or moderate injury in a road traffic crash: prospective study. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10:76. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-2401-7. 7. Tournier C, Hours M, Charnay P, Chossegros L, Tardy H. Five years after the accident, whiplash casualties still have poorer quality of life in the physical domain than other mildly injured casualties: analysis of the ESPARR cohort. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:13. doi: 10.1186/ s12889-015-2647-8. 8. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Harris IA, Nicholas M, Casey P, Blyth F, et al. Prognostic indicators of social outcomes in persons who sustained an injury in a road traffic crash. Injury. 2015;46:909-17. doi: 10.1016/j. injury.2015.01.002. 9. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Harris IA, Nicholas M, Casey P, Blyth F, et al. Health-related quality of life 24 months after sustaining a minor musculoskeletal injury in a road traffic crash: a prospective cohort study. Traffic Inj Prev. 2017;18:251-6. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2016.1244335. 10. Hours M, Khati I, Charnay P, Chossegros L, Tardy H, Tournier C, et al. One year after mild injury: comparison of health status and quality of life between patients with whiplash versus other injuries. J Rheumatol. 2014;41:528-38. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.130406. 11. Khati I, Hours M, Charnay P, Chossegros L, Tardy H, Nhac-Vu HT, et al. Quality of life one year after a road accident: results from the adult ESPARR cohort. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74:301-11. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e318270d967. 12. Jagnoor J, De Wolf A, Nicholas M, Maher CG, Casey P, Blyth F, et al. Restriction in functioning and quality of life is common in people 2 months after compensable motor vehicle crashes: prospective cohort study. Inj Epidemiol. 2015;2:8. 13. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Nicholas M, Blyth F, Harris IA, Casey P, et al. Presence and predictors of persistent pain among persons who sustained an injury in a road traffic crash. Eur J Pain. 2015;19:1111-8. doi: 10.1002/ejp.634. 14. Lugo LH, Garcia HI, Cano BC, Arango-Lasprilla JC, Alcaraz OL. Multicentric study of epidemiological and clinical characteristics of persons injured in motor vehicle accidents in Medellin, Colobia, 2009- 2010. Colomb Med (Cali). 2013;44:100-7. 15. Civil ID, Schwab CW. The Abbreviated Injury Scale, 1985 Revision: a condensed chart for clinical use. J Traum. 1988;28:87-90. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198801000-00012. 16. Stevenson M, Segui-Gomez M, Lescohier I, Di Scala C, McDonald-Smith G. An overview of the injury severity score and the new injury severity score. Inj Prev. 2001;7:10-3. doi: 10.1136/ip.7.1.10. 17. Blanchard EB, Jones-Alexander J, Buckley TC, Forneris CA. Psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist (PCL). Behav Res Ther. 1996;34:669-73. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(96)00033-2. 18. National Center for PTSD. Using the PTSD checklist (PCL). Accessed February 5th, 2020 at: https://sph.umd.edu/sites/default/files/files/ PTSDChecklistScoring.pdf. 19. Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA. An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometric properties. J Consult Clin Psych. 1988;56:893-7. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.56.6.893. 20. Beck AT, Steer RA, Garbin MG. Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: twenty-five years of evaluation. Clin Psychol Rev. 1988;8:77-100. doi: 10.1016/0272-7358(88)90050-5. 21. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-83. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002. 22. Bilgin NG, Mert E, Sezgin M. Evaluation of the effects of disabilities due to traffic accidents on the quality of life using SF-36 health survey. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2012;46:168-73. doi: 10.3944/ AOTT.2012.2673 23. Andersen D, Ryb G, Dischinger P, Kufera J, Read K. Self-reported health indicators in the year following a motor vehicle crash: a comparison of younger versus older subjects. Ann Adv Automot Med. 2010;54:359-67. 24. Maslić Seršić R, Vuletić G. Psychometric evaluation and establishing norms of Croatian SF-36 health survey: framework for subjective health research. Croat Med J. 2006;47:95-102. 25. Rissanen R, Ifver J, Hasselberg M, Berg HY. Quality of life following road traffic injury: the impact of age and gender. Qual Life Res. 2020. doi: 10.1007/s11136-020-02427-3. 26. Gopinath B, Harris IA, Nicholas M, Casey P, Blyth F, Maher CG, et al. A comparison of health outcomes in older versus younger adults following a road traffic crash injury: a cohort study. PLos One. 2015;10:e0122732. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122732. 27. Gopinath B, Jagnoor J, Kifley A, Dinh M, Craig A, Cameron ID. Predictors of health-related quality of life after non-catastrophic injury sustained in a road traffic crash. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2019.10.001. 28. Littleton SM, Hughes DC, Poustie SJ, Robinson BJ, Neeman T, Smith PN, et al. The influence of fault on health in the immediate post-crash period following road traffic crashes. Injury. 2012;43:1586-92. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.03.002. 29. Samoborec S, Ruseckaite R, Ayton D, Evans S. Byopsychosocial factors associated with non-recovery after a minor transport-related injury: a systematic review. PLos One. 2018;13:e0198352. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0198352. 30. Kovacevic J, Miskulin M, Degmecic D, Vcev A, Leovic D, Sisljagic V, et al. Predictors of mental health outcomes in road traffic accident survivors. J Clin Med. 2020;9:309. doi: 10.3390/jcm9020309. 31. Kaplan MS, Huguet N, Feeny D, McFarland BH, Caetano R, Bernier J, et al. Alcohol use patterns and trajectories of health-related quality of life in middle-aged and older adults: a 14-year population-based study. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2012;73:581-90. doi:10.15288/jsad.2012.73.581. 32. Tournier C, Charnay P, Tardy H, Chossegros L, Carnis L, Hours M. A few seconds to have an accident, a long time to recover: consequences for road accident victims from the ESPARR cohort 2 years after the accident. Accident Anal Prev. 2014;72:422-32. doi: 10.1016/j. aap.2014.07.011. 33. Overgard M, Hoyer CB, Christensen EF. Long-term survival and health- related quality of life 6 to 9 years after trauma. J Trauma. 2011;71:435- 41. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31820e7ec3. 34. Murgatroyd DF, Harris IA, Tran Y, Cameron ID. The association between seeking financial compensation and injury recovery following motor vehicle related orthopaedic trauma. BMC Musculoskel Dis. 2016;17:282. doi: 10.1186/s12891-016-1152-2. 35. Littleton SM, Hughes DC, Gopinath B, Robinson BJ, Poustie SJ. The health status of people claiming compensation for musculoskeletal injuries following road traffic crashes is not altered by the early intervention programme: a comparative study. Injury. 2014;45:1493-9. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.05.011.