Abstract
Background
The northern regions of the Nordic countries have common challenges of sparsely populated areas, long distances, and an arctic climate. The aim of this study was to compare the cause and rate of fatal injuries in the northernmost area of the Nordic countries over a 5-year period.
Methods
In this retrospective cohort, we used the Cause of Death Registries to collate all deaths from 2007 to 2011 due to an external cause of death. The study area was the three northernmost counties in Norway, the four northernmost counties in Finland and Sweden, and the whole of Iceland.
Results
A total of 4308 deaths were included in the analysis. Low energy trauma comprised 24% of deaths and high energy trauma 76% of deaths. Northern Finland had the highest incidence of both high and low energy trauma deaths. Iceland had the lowest incidence of high and low energy trauma deaths. Iceland had the lowest prehospital share of deaths (74%) and the lowest incidence of injuries leading to death in a rural location. The incidence rates for high energy trauma death were 36.1/100000/year in Northern Finland, 15.6/100000/year in Iceland, 27.0/100000/year in Northern Norway, and 23.0/100000/year in Northern Sweden.
Conclusion
We found unexpected differences in the epidemiology of trauma death between the countries. The differences suggest that a comparison of the trauma care systems and preventive strategies in the four countries is required.
Keywords: Trauma, Injury, Epidemiology, Rural
Introduction
Annually, injuries kill 5.8 million people worldwide. Injuries are one of the top three leading causes of death for people aged 15 to 49 years, resulting in a significant impact on life years lost [1]. However, an increase in knowledge, preventive measures, efficiency and technology in emergency medicine, and implementation of trauma systems has contributed to increasing survival from serious injuries over the past few years [1, 2].
The burden of injury is not evenly distributed. Rural areas, with sparse population and long distances, have higher death rates from injuries than urban [3–6]. Urban-rural differences has been attributed to longer response and transport distances, behavioural differences and differences in socio-economic status [4].
The northern subarctic areas of the Nordic countries are, in a European context, characterised by large areas with low population density. Epidemiological findings from other rural areas are not necessarily applicable or transferable. The majority of trauma research in rural areas is from the USA, Canada, and Australia, countries with areas that have considerably longer transport distances, but also other societal differences. Differences in climate, politics, and demographics, necessitate local studies.
The northernmost areas of the Nordic countries have common challenges to trauma care, with regards to distance, rurality, and climate. Although some structural societal differences between the Nordic countries are likely as well, they are relatively homogenous, with small differences in socioeconomic status on a national level. Therefore, we believe that a head-to-head comparison of trauma epidemiology between these northern regions, may disclose areas where these Nordic neighbours can learn from one another. While the differences in overall epidemiology must be expected to be small, any differences may point to areas where the otherwise similar regions can look to the others for ways to improvement. In addition, though formalised trauma systems have been implemented in the Nordic countries, insight into the local epidemiology of trauma may help adjust these systems to local needs [7].
The aims of the present study were to describe and compare the rates of fatal injuries in the northern regions of the Nordic countries between the countries, and to describe and compare the injury mechanisms and places of death.
Materials and methods
Study design
A registry based retrospective cohort study.
Study area
The study area comprised the northernmost university hospital and its catchment area, for the Nordic countries. Thus, the study area included Iceland in its entirety, the three northernmost counties in Norway, and the four northernmost counties in both Finland and Sweden. The area covers approximately 730,000 km2 and had a population of nearly 2.4 million in 2011.
The four northernmost counties in Finland are Kainuu, Lapland, Middle Ostrobothnia, and Northern Ostrobothnia. Together these counties cover approximately 166,000 km2, 731,000 inhabitants (14% of Finland’s population), and had one trauma centre (analogue to a level II hospital according to the American College of Surgeon’s Trauma Centre Classification System, with all relevant specialties available, but not fulfilling the required volume of a level I hospital) and four local hospitals with trauma function (analogue to level III hospitals, with capability to initially manage the majority of injured patients but with transfer agreements with a higher level trauma centre) in 2011 [8]. Iceland covers approximately 103,000 km2 and 418,000 inhabitants, and had one Level II and one Level III hospital [9]. The three northernmost counties in Norway were Finnmark, Nordland and Troms, which cover approximately 177,000 km2, 470,000 inhabitants (10% of Norway’s population), and had one Level II and nine Level III hospitals in 2011 [10]. The four northernmost counties in Sweden are, Norrbotten, Västerbotten, Jämtland and Västernorrland. These counties cover approximately 225,000 km2, 877,000 inhabitants (9% of Sweden’s population), and had one Level II and 11 Level III hospitals in 2011 [11].
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
We identified from the national Cause of Death Registries and recorded all individuals who died from external causes (ICD-10 codes V01-Y98) in the northern regions of the Scandinavian Peninsula, and Iceland (Fig. 1) for the 5-year period from 2007 through 2011 [12].
Fig. 1.
Map of the study area. Percentages of the population under study in the respective countries are specified where applicable. The Map was created using Adobe Illustrator CC 2020 (24.0) (), by Rod Wolstenholme, UiT
We excluded all individuals with iatrogenic injuries (ICD-10 codes Y40-Y84) and all deaths occurring more than 90 days after injury. We also excluded cases in which key information was lacking, such as cases with an injury in an undetermined municipality. We excluded all accidental poisonings, except carbon monoxide poisoning where fire was the mechanism (Fig. 2). In addition, cases with too much information missing to register in the database, no hospital record found, no personal identification number found, were also excluded. These constituted 194 patients: 50 patients from Norway, 61 from Iceland, 23 from Finland, in addition to 60 patients with low energy trauma from Sweden.
Fig. 2.
Flowchart of case inclusion and exclusion. High energy trauma deaths include traumatic suicides. aOther reasons include cases with too much information missing to register in the database, no hospital record found, no personal identification number found, ICD-code(s) not matching inclusion criteria, and incompatible differences in the method of gathering LE data in Sweden (n = 60)
Data collection and analysis
We gathered data from the Cause of Death Registries (CDRs) in Finland, Iceland, and Norway, and from the Unit of Forensic Medicine in Umeå of the National Board of Forensic Medicine in Sweden. The method for data gathering in Sweden omitted many cases, particularly low energy trauma, because deaths due to ground level falls are not routinely autopsied. Because of this, Swedish data were exempt from the low energy comparison. Researchers from each country gathered their own data. We anonymised the data by assigning each case an identifier and removed personal identification numbers, keeping the key for reversal and the data separate. The anonymised data were transferred to a common database for analysis. The data could still be identified indirectly as single data points, but not when summarised as rates and proportions.
Age, sex, date of death, municipality of residence, municipality of injury, ICD-10 codes for the cause of death, and how the cause of death was determined were collected from the CDRs and Unit of Forensic Medicine [12]. The intention, mechanism, and dominating type of injury and site of death, or place of death if not on site, were obtained from the CDRs, hospital records, and autopsy reports. In Finland and Sweden, we used insurance records and police reports, respectively, to supplement the information required by the study.
We analysed all high energy trauma deaths (including trauma suicides), and low energy trauma deaths separately. The proportions given below are the proportions of collated deaths. Incidence rates were calculated using the 2011 population size as denominator, and municipality of injury as numerator. Population size was obtained from the national statistics provider from each country (Statistics Norway, Statistics Finland, StatIce, and Statistics Sweden) [8–11]. The OECD standard population of 1980 was used for age and sex standardisation [13]. All rates are given in number of deaths/100000/year (95% confidence interval [CI]).
Definitions
We categorised the municipalities into four levels of rurality based on the municipality’s population density. Level 1 (most rural) was defined as < 18.15 inhabitants/km2, level 2 as 18.15–76.9 inhabitants/km2, level 3 as 77.0–442.7 inhabitants/km2, and level 4 (most urban) as > 442.7 inhabitants/km2 [14]. We assigned an “urban” (level 3) category to the municipalities with a university hospital, even if this municipality had a lower category based on population density, and levels 3 and 4 were grouped together as “urban” during the analysis.
We divided the manner of death into the main categories of unintentional (accidental), intentional by self (suicidal), intentional by other (homicidal), other, and unknown. We defined low energy trauma as ground level falls, whereas the remaining trauma cases were regarded as high energy trauma.
We used the American College of Surgeon’s Trauma Centre Classification System to define university hospitals with a neurosurgery department as trauma centres (Level II), and smaller hospitals equipped to deal with traumatic injuries as local hospitals with trauma function (Level III) [15]. If the hospital did not admit trauma patients according to the national trauma system, the hospital was left out of the registration.
Ethics
According to Swedish law, register studies of deceased individuals do not require ethical approval. The study was approved by ethics committees in each of the other countries: Regional Ethics Committee, Finland (98/2013); The National Bioethics Committee, Vísindasiðanefnd, Iceland (VSNb201410013/03.11); The Norwegian Ethics Board (REK) (No. 2013/1470/REK Nord); and Patient Data Security Officer at University Hospital of Northern Norway (2014/0418).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0, Armonk, NY, USA). We present the results using medians with interquartile range (IQR), percentages with 95% CIs, and crude incidence rates of 100,000/year with 95% CIs. We used 95% CIs to determine if there were any differences between the countries and between the crude rates of subgroups.
Results
We collated a total of 5190 cases, with 4641 cases remaining after exclusion (Fig. 2). Low energy trauma deaths accounted for 1100 cases, whereas 3208 cases were high energy trauma deaths.
Low energy (LE) trauma comprised 24% of all included cases. Victims of low energy trauma were older (median age 84 years), and with a more equal sex distribution (male sex in 51% of cases) compared to victims of high energy trauma, and death mostly occurred in-hospital (in-hospital death in 88.5% of cases). Comparison of LE trauma deaths between the study areas can be found in Table 1. Iceland had a significantly lower incidence of LE trauma compared to the other areas.
Table 1.
Low energy (LE) trauma deaths by study region
| Northern Finland | Iceland | Northern Norway | Total study area | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of LE trauma deaths registered | 610 | 104 | 386 | 1100 |
| Incidence of LE trauma deaths per 100,000 per year (95% CI) | 16.7 (15.3–18.0) | 6.5a (5.3–7.8) | 16.5 (14.8–18.1) | 14.5 (13.6–15.4) |
|
Autopsy proportion (95% CI) |
419/610a 68.7% (65.0–72.4) |
14/104a 13.5% (6.9–20.0) |
123/386a 31.9% (27.2–36.5) |
556/1100 50.5% (47.6–53.5) |
|
Prehospital deaths (95% CI) |
94/610a 15.4% (12.5–18.3) |
11/104 10.6% (4.7–16.5) |
22/386a 5.7% (3.4–8.0) |
127/1100 11.5% (9.7–13.4) |
|
Median age, years (IQR) |
82.0 (69–88) |
86.0 (79–90) |
87.0 (82–91) |
84.0 (76–89) |
|
Male sex (95% CI) |
348/610a 57.0% (53.1–61.0) |
51/104 49.0% (39.4–58.6) |
162/386a 42.0% (37.0–46.9) |
561/1100 51.0% (48.0–54.0) |
|
Rural injury municipality proportion (95% CI) |
283/610a 46.4% (42.4–50.4) |
6/104a 5.8% (1.3–10.3) |
264/386a 68.4% (63.8–73.0) |
553/1100 50.3% (47.3–53.2) |
| Incidence of LE trauma death after injury in rural municipality (95% CI) |
16.4 14.4–18.3 |
2.0a 0.4–3.6 |
17.7 15.6–19.8 |
15.7 14.4–17.7 |
| Incidence of LE trauma death after injury in semi-urban municipality (95% CI) |
15.0 12.3–17.8 |
9.1 1.1–17.1 |
17.1 13.5–20.7 |
15.6 13.5–17.7 |
| Incidence of LE trauma death after injury in urban municipality (95% CI) |
18.4a 15.9–20.8 |
7.5 6.0–9.1 |
10.3 6.3–13.7 |
12.4 11.1–13.7 |
aSignificant difference (from one or all). Limited data were available on low energy trauma deaths from Northern Sweden and were not included in the comparison
High energy (HE) trauma comprised 76% of all included cases. Blunt force trauma was the most prevalent type of injury, followed by asphyxia and penetrating injuries. Most HE trauma deaths occurred in the prehospital phase in all study areas. Median age was 50 years, and males constituted 80% of HE deaths. A comparison of HE trauma deaths between the study areas can be found in Table 2. Finland had the highest incidence rate of HE trauma, followed by Norway, Sweden, and Iceland. Age and sex standardisation (Table 3) did change the absolute rates, but not their internal order among the countries.
Table 2.
High energy (HE) trauma deaths by study region
| Dominating type of external cause | Northern Finland | Iceland | Northern Norway | Northern Sweden | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of HE trauma deaths registered | 1321 | 249 | 633 | 1006 | 3208 | |
| Incidence in 100,000 per year (95% CI) | 36.1a (34.2–38.1) | 15.6a (13.7–17.6) | 27.0a (24.9–29.1) | 23.0a (21.5–24.4) | 26.8 (25.9–27.7) | |
|
Autopsy proportion (95% CI) |
1314/1321a 99.5% (99.1–99.9) |
228/249a 91.6% (88.1–95.0) |
232/633a 36.7% (32.9–40.4) |
b |
1774/2203 80.5% (78.9–82.2) |
|
|
Prehospital deaths (95% CI) |
1121/1321a 84.9% (82.9–86.8) |
183/249a 73.5% (68.0–79.0) |
517/633a 81.7% (78.7–84.7) |
921/1006a 91.6% (89.8–93.3) |
2742/3208 85.5% (84.3–86.7) |
|
|
Median age, years (IQR) |
51.0 (33–64) |
45.0 (31–60) |
49.0 (31–66) |
52.0 (34–66) |
50.0 (33–65) |
|
|
Male sex (95% CI) |
1062/1321 80.4% (78.3–82.5) |
203/249 81.5% (76.7–86.3) |
486/633 76.8% (73.5–80.1) |
824/1006 81.9% (79.5–84.3) |
2575/3208 80.3% (78.9–81.6) |
|
| Rural injury municipality proportion (95% CI) |
577/1321a 43.7% (41.0–46.4) |
72/249a 28.9% (23.3–34.5) |
456/633a 72.0% (68.5–75.5) |
643/1006a 63.9% (60.9–66.9) |
1747/3208 54.5% (52.7–56.2) |
|
| Incidence of HE trauma death after injury in rural municipality (95% CI) |
33.3a 30.6–36.1 |
23.8a 18.3–29.3 |
30.6 27.8–33.4 |
26.4a 24.3–28.4 |
29.3 27.9–30.7 |
|
| Incidence of HE trauma death after injury in semi-urban municipality (95% CI) |
33.0a 29.0–37.0 |
7.3* 0.1–14.4 |
19.6 15.8–23.5 |
21.1 18.6–23.5 |
24.0 22.2–25.8 |
|
| Incidence of HE trauma death after injury in urban municipality (95% CI) |
42.6a 38.8–46.4 |
14.0 11.9–16.1 |
22.6a 17.5–27.6 |
13.1 10.1–16.0 |
24.6 22.9–26.3 |
|
|
Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) |
Blunt force trauma |
5.8a (4.7–7.0) |
9.3 (8.1–10.5) |
8.1 (7.2–8.9) |
9.0 (8.4–9.5) |
|
|
Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) |
Penetrating trauma |
6.7a (5.9–7.6) |
2.0 (1.3–2.7) |
2.9 (2.2–3.5) |
0.9a (0.6–1.2) |
3.2 (2.9–3.5) |
|
Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) |
Hypothermia |
2.3a (1.8–2.8) |
0.4 (0.1–0.8) |
1.1 (0.6–1.5) |
1.0 (0.7–1.3) |
1.3 (1.1–1.5) |
|
Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) |
Asphyxia |
8.1a (7.2–9.0) |
5.0a (3.9–6.1) |
7.0 (5.9–8.1) |
6.9 (6.1–7.6) |
7.0 (6.5–7.5) |
|
Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) |
Submersion |
5.1a (4.4–5.9) |
1.5a (0.9–2.1) |
3.9 (3.1–4.7) |
3.1 (2.6–3.6) |
3.7 (3.3–4.0) |
aSignificant difference, no overlap of 95% confidence intervals
bNot applicable. Swedish data contained only cases that underwent autopsy, and the exact proportion could not be established
Table 3.
Incidence rates of High Energy (HE) and Low Energy (LE) trauma deaths adjusted for age and sex
| Northern Finland | Iceland | Northern Norway | Northern Sweden | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HE trauma | |||||
| Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) | 32.1a (30.3–33.8) | 14.6a (12.8–16.4) | 25.0a (23.0–26.9) | 20.3a (19.1–21.6) | 24.0 (23.2–24.9) |
| LE trauma | |||||
| Incidence per 100,000 per year (95% CI) | 10.8 (9.9–11.6) | 5.7a (4.6–6.8) | 11.0 (9.9–12.1) | – | 7.1 (6.7–7.5) |
aSignificant difference (from one or all)
Suicide was the most common manner of death, comprising 40% of all high energy trauma deaths, followed by accidental deaths in traffic. A comparison of mechanism of injury for high energy trauma between the study areas can be found in Table 4. The distribution was fairly similar internally in each area, with Finland significantly higher for several mechanisms. The difference between areas was greatest for suicide where Finland had an incidence rate of 15.6 per 100.000 compared to 9.3 per 100.000 in Northern Sweden, which had the second highest incidence rate for suicide.
Table 4.
Annual incidence rate per 100,000 (95% CI) of the manner and mechanism of death intentions and mechanisms of injury in high energy trauma, including traumatic suicides
| Manner of death | Mechanism of death | Subgroup | Northern Finland | Iceland | Northern Norway | Northern Sweden | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accident | 16.9a (15.5–18.2) | 7.2a (5.9–8.5) | 15.6 (14.0–17.2) | 12.3a (11.3–13.4) | 13.7 (13.0–14.3) | ||
| Road transport† | 6.9a (6.0–7.7) | 3.4a (2.5–4.3) | 6.6 (5.5–7.6) | 5.1a (4.4–5.7) | 6.2 (5.8–6.7) | ||
| Car, pickup, heavy transport, bus, etc. | 3.8 (3.1–4.4) | 2.3a (1.6–3.1) | 4.4a (3.6–5.3) | 3.5 (3.0–4.1) | 3.8 (3.5–4.2) | ||
| Pedestrian | 0.9 (0.6–1.2) | 0.5 (0.2–0.9) | 0.5 (0.2–0.7) | 0.4 (0.2–0.6) | 0.8 (0.7–1.0) | ||
| Motorcycle | 0.5 (0.2–0.7) | 0.5 (0.2–0.9) | 0.6 (0.3–1.0) | 0.8 (0.5–1.0) | 0.6 (0.5–0.8) | ||
| Bicycle | 0.7a (0.4–0.9) | 0.0a (0.0–0.0) | 0.2 (0.0–0.4) | 0.1a (0.0–0.2) | 0.3 (0.2–0.4) | ||
| ATV/ Snowmobile | 1.0 (0.7–1.3) | 0.0a (0.0–0.0) | 0.4a (0.2–0.7) | 1.1a (0.8–1.4) | 0.8 (0.6–1.0) | ||
| Other traffic | 1.1*a (0.7–1.4) | 0.1a (0.0–0.2) | 0.8a (0.4–1.2) | 0.3 (0.1–0.4) | 0.7 (0.5–0.8) | ||
| High fall | 2.1a (1.6–2.5) | 1.7 (1.1–2.3) | 2.4a (1.8–3.1) | 1.1a (0.8–1.4) | 1.7 (1.5–2.0) | ||
| Submersion | 3.8 (3.1–4.4) | 1.5a (0.9–2.1) | 2.9 (2.2–3.6) | 2.8 (2.3–3.3) | 3.0 (2.6–3.3) | ||
| Fire | 1.5 (1.1–1.9) | 0.3a (0.0–0.6) | 2.0 (1.4–2.5) | 1.1 (0.8–1.5) | 1.4 (1.2–1.6) | ||
| Hypothermia | 2.2a (1.7–2.7) | 0.4 (0.1–0.8) | 0.9 (0.5–1.3) | 1.0 (0.7–1.3) | 1.3 (1.1–1.5) | ||
| Other | 8.8 (7.8–9.7) | 5.3a(4.1–6.4) | 7.8a(6.6–8.9) | 6.2a(5.5–7.0) | 7.2 (6.7–7.7) | ||
| Homicide | 2.3a(1.8–2.8) | 0.4 (0.1–0.8) | 0.6 (0.3–0.9) | 0.6 (0.3–0.8) | 1.1 (0.9–1.3) | ||
| Knife/stabbing | 0.9a(0.6–1.2) | 0.1a(0.0–0.2) | 0.3 (0.1–0.6) | 0.5a(0.3–0.7) | 0.5 (0.4–0.7) | ||
| Shooting | 0.7a(0.4–1.0) | 0.1 (0.0–0.3) | 0.1 (0.0–0.2) | 0.0 (0.0–0.0) | 0.2 (0.2–0.3) | ||
| Blunt force trauma | 0.3 (0.1–0.5) | 0.2 (0.0–0.4) | 0.1 (0.0–0.2) | 0.0 (0.0–0.1) | 0.2 (0.1–0.2) | ||
| Other | 0.3 (0.1–0.5) | 0.1 (0.0–0.2) | 0.1 (0.0–0.2) | 0.1 (0.0–0.1) | 0.1 (0.0–0.1) | ||
| Suicide | 15.6a(14.4–16.8) | 7.0a(5.7–8.3) | 8.8 (7.6–10.0) | 9.3a(8.4–10.2) | 10.8 (10.2–11.4) | ||
| Hanging | 6.5a(5.7–7.3) | 3.6a(2.7–4.6) | 5.1 (4.2–6.0) | 5.5a(4.8–6.2) | 5.5 (5.0–5.9) | ||
| Shooting | 5.0a(4.2–5.7) | 1.4 (0.9–2.0) | 1.9 (1.3–2.4) | 2.3 (1.8–2.7) | 2.9 (2.6–3.2) | ||
| Drowning | 1.3a(1.0–1.7) | 0.4 (0.1–0.7) | 0.6 (0.3–0.9) | 0.5 (0.3–0.7) | 0.8 (0.6–0.9) | ||
| Traffic | 1.4a(1.0–1.8) | 0.6 (0.2–0.9) | 0.2 (0.0–0.4) | 0.3 (0.1–0.4) | 0.6 (0.5–0.8) | ||
| Other external cause of death | 1.4a(1.0–1.8) | 1.0 (0.5–1.5) | 1.1 (0.7–1.5) | 0.7 (0.5–1.0) | 1.0 (0.9–1.2) |
aSignificant difference (from one or all), no overlap of 95% confidence intervals
bAll transport accidents on air, sea, and land
Discussion
The aims of the present study were to describe and compare the rates of fatal injuries in the northern regions of the Nordic countries, and to describe and compare the injury mechanisms and places of death. The areas differed in the overall incidence rate of high energy trauma, with some accompanying differences in the manner and external cause of death. Northern Finland had the highest incidence, primarily driven by a high suicide rate. Deaths from high energy trauma were mostly prehospital (74–92%) in all areas; Iceland had the lowest share of prehospital high energy trauma deaths but was also the area with the lowest incidence of rural deaths. Autopsy rates were high (92–100%), except in Northern Norway (36%). The pattern of low energy trauma was more homogenous between the areas. Low energy trauma deaths occurred in older individuals, predominantly during primary admission or after being discharged, and with a more equal balance between the sexes than high energy trauma deaths.
The northern part of the Scandinavian peninsula and Iceland face similar challenges in trauma care, with sparsely populated areas, long transport distances and prehospital times in a European perspective. Differences in incidence of trauma fatalities between the northern areas, and the denser southern areas have been shown in previous studies [6, 16, 17]. The present study had injury fatality rates that exceeded those reported in studies from the southern parts of the Nordic countries [6, 18]. Despite these similar challenges for the northern areas of the Nordic countries, the present study reveals that there are marked differences between the study areas.
Iceland had a lower incidence of high energy trauma death, and a lower share of prehospital deaths. Rural areas have a higher rate of fatal injuries than urban areas, and typically a higher share of prehospital deaths [4, 19, 20]. A more urban settlement pattern in Iceland could explain Iceland’s deviant profile. Interestingly, Iceland also had a lower incidence of fatalities caused by low energy trauma, where previous studies have shown less tendency to urban-rural disparity, or even increased urban incidence rates [5, 21, 22].
There were also some differences between the other areas; Northern Finland, Northern Sweden, and Northern Norway. These areas have more similar settlement patterns, with the majority of the population living in non-urban areas, yet Northern Finland had a significantly higher incidence rate of fatal trauma, both for high energy and low energy trauma deaths [10, 11, 23]. Their incidence rates were comparatively high for most injury mechanisms overall, but particularly for suicides and homicides. The suicide rate was the main driver for the overall difference in high energy trauma death incidence between northern Finland and its neighbours.
When considering suicide, it is important to keep in mind that poisoning is a common method [24]. In trauma studies where poisonings are excluded a perceived difference in suicide rates may reflect a difference in the choice of method, and not a real difference in suicide rates. Indeed, if poisonings are considered when comparing suicide rates between the study areas of this study, only Northern Finland has a significantly different suicide rate compared to the other areas (unpublished data). Therefore, this may be a point of attack for reduction of the Finnish excessive incidence of fatal trauma, in the form of preventive strategies.
In addition to a markedly elevated suicide rate compared to the other study areas, northern Finland also had the highest incidence rate for several other mechanisms. Lower socioeconomic status and comorbidity are known risk factors for trauma related death, as well as high ethanol consumption or an unfavourable drinking pattern [4, 25, 26]. As Finland has a comparatively similar settlement pattern as its neighbours, these would be areas for further study to find explanations for the higher mortality rates. Another area to look into would be the structure and capacities of the trauma health care systems in the study areas.
Autopsy rates was another area of considerable difference. Northern Norway had a markedly lower autopsy rate compared to the other areas. Epidemiological data from a population with a higher autopsy rate are likely more reliable, and autopsies are useful in determining the correct cause of death and to assess whether deaths are preventable. In Finland and Iceland, an autopsy was performed in almost all deaths, which suggests that this also should be feasible in Norway and is an area for improvement.
Considering the northern parts of the Nordic countries as one area, the overall age and sex adjusted annual rate of injury-related deaths in the present study was 31.1/100000 (24.0 for high energy trauma deaths and 7.1 for low energy trauma deaths). This is well below the mortality rates Mack et al. has reported for the USA, more in line with, and slightly lower than their findings from Canada and Australia overall [27]. However, the incidence rate was not as high as the more rural areas of both Australia and Canada [28, 29].
Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, it is retrospective and includes only fatalities; therefore, we could not assess survivability, which would be of great interest to compare between the regions. The Swedish data were collated from the Unit of Forensic Medicine and not from the CDR. This constitutes a problem for the analysis of Swedish low energy cases, and these were exempt from comparison to the other areas. Autopsy rates for high energy trauma in Sweden have been reported to be quite high, and the inclusion through the Unit of Forensic Medicine should capture most cases [30, 31]. Even so, the Swedish high energy trauma deaths should be interpreted with care. The varying autopsy rates aggravate a comparison of injury severity scores, which could be useful in analysing differences in mortality rates. This also makes it impossible to accurately describe the mechanism of death beyond the external cause of death.
Conclusion
The northern regions of the Nordic countries have an overall rural injury pattern with relatively high rates of trauma deaths and predominantly prehospital fatalities. Northern Finland has a high injury death rate compared to its neighbours, a difference that is largely driven by a high rate of suicide. Iceland has a comparatively lower injury death rate. Given the differences in regions that would be expected to be relatively similar, further studies should investigate social differences and different approaches to health care.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Rod Wolstenholme at The University of Tromsø for the artwork contribution.
Abbreviations
- CDR
Cause of Death Registry
- LE
Low energy
- HE
High energy
- CI
Confidence interval
Authors’ contributions
TS planned the study, collected data in Norway, and coordinated overall data collection, performed the analysis, interpreted data, and wrote the manuscript. LR contributed to planning, collected data in Finland, contributed to analysis and interpretation of data, and wrote the manuscript. BM contributed to planning, collected data in Iceland, contributed to interpretation of data and writing the manuscript. GBS collected data in Iceland, contributed to interpretation of data and writing the manuscript. TB contributed to planning, collected data in Sweden, contributed to analysis and interpretation of data, and writing the manuscript. AE contributed to planning, collected data in Sweden, contributed to interpretation of data and writing the manuscript. TD contributed to planning, contributed to and supervised analysis of data, contributed to interpretation of data, and writing the manuscript. TW conceived of the study, contributed to planning, facilitated data collection, contributed to interpretation of data, and writing the manuscript. HKB contributed to planning, supervised data collection, supervised data analysis, contributed to interpretation of data, and co-wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript.
Funding
The study was conducted with funding from the Finnmarkssykehuset Health Trust, The University of Tromsø, and Northern Norway Regional Health Authority.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
According to Swedish law, register studies of deceased individuals do not require ethical approval. The study was approved by ethics committees in each of the other countries: Regional Ethics Committee, Finland (98/2013); The National Bioethics Committee, Vísindasiðanefnd, Iceland (VSNb201410013/03.11); The Norwegian Ethics Board (REK) (No. 2013/1470/REK Nord); and Patient Data Security Officer at University Hospital of Northern Norway (2014/0418). Consent to participate was not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to declare.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.World Health Organization. Injuries, Violence, The Facts: The magnitude and causes of injuries. http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/media/news/2015/Injury_violence_facts_2014/en/ (2014). Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 2.Utter GH, Maier RV, Rivara FP, Mock CN, Jurkovich GJ, Nathens AB, et al. Inclusive trauma systems: do they improve triage or outcomes of the severely injured? J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care. 2006;60(3):529–535. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000204022.36214.9e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.McDermott KM, Brearley MB, Hudson SM, Ward L, Read DJ. Characteristics of trauma mortality in the Northern Territory, Australia. Inj Epidemiol. 2017;4(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s40621-017-0111-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Peek-Asa C, Zwerling C, Stallones L. Acute traumatic injuries in rural populations. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(10):1689–1693. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.94.10.1689. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Raatiniemi L, Steinvik T, Liisanantti J, Ohtonen P, Martikainen M, Alahuhta S, Dehli T, Wisborg T, Bakke HK. Fatal injuries in rural and urban areas in northern Finland: a 5-year retrospective study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016;60(5):668–676. doi: 10.1111/aas.12682. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Bakke HK, Schrøder Hansen I, Bakkane Bendixen A, Morild I, Lilleng PK, Wisborg T. Fatal injury as a function of rurality-a tale of two Norwegian counties. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21:14. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-21-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Kristiansen T, Søreide K, Ringdal KG, Rehn M, Krüger AJ, Reite A, Meling T, Næss PA, Lossius HM. Trauma systems and early management of severe injuries in Scandinavia: review of the current state. Injury. 2010;41(5):444–452. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.05.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Official Statistics of Finland (OSF).http://www.stat.fi/til/ksyyt/2014/ksyyt_2014_2015-12-30_tau_001_en.html (2014) Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 9.Iceland Statistics. Statistics 2012. www.statice.is.(2012) Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 10.Statistics Norway. Folkemengde ved folketellingene i 2001 og 2011 i fylker og kommuner. https://www.ssb.no/a/kortnavn/fobhoved/tab-2012-06-21-03.html (2012) Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 11.SCB. Statistikdatabsen: Län och kommuner 2012. http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se (2012) Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 12.WHO ICD-10. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems, 10th revision (ICD-10). 2016. [PubMed]
- 13.Federal Health Monitoring. Standard Populations. https://www.gbe-bund.de (2021). Accessed 8 June 2021.
- 14.Kristiansen T, Rehn M, Gravseth HM, Lossius HM, Kristensen P. Paediatric trauma mortality in Norway: a population-based study of injury characteristics and urban-rural differences. Injury. 2012;43(11):1865–1872. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.08.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.ACS Committee on Trauma. RESOURCES FOR OPTIMAL CARE OF THE INJURED PATIENT. American College of Surgeons; 2014.
- 16.Bagher A, Wangefjord S, Andersson L, Wingren CJ, Ottosson A, Acosta S. Socio-economic status and major trauma in a Scandinavian urban city: a population-based case-control study. Scand J Public Health. 2016;44(2):217–223. doi: 10.1177/1403494815616302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Finland Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Target Programme for the Prevention of Home and Leisure. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3473-3 (2014) Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 18.Søreide K, Krüger AJ, Vårdal AL, Ellingsen CL, Søreide E, Lossius HM. Epidemiology and contemporary patterns of trauma deaths: changing place, similar pace, older face. World J Surg. 2007;31(11):2092–2103. doi: 10.1007/s00268-007-9226-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Mitchell RJ, Chong S. Comparison of injury-related hospitalised morbidity and mortality in urban and rural areas in Australia. Rural Remote Health. 2010;10(1):1326. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Kristiansen T, Lossius HM, Rehn M, Kristensen P, Gravseth HM, Røislien J, Søreide K. Epidemiology of trauma: a population-based study of geographical risk factors for injury deaths in the working-age population of Norway. Injury. 2014;45(1):23–30. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.07.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Dilsen G, Aydin R, Oral A, Sepici V, Alparsan B, Berker C, Aygün F, Erdogan F, Bölükbasi N, Çinar A, Ranstam J. Regional differences in hip fracture risk in Turkey. Bone. 1993;14(Suppl 1):S65–S68. doi: 10.1016/8756-3282(93)90352-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Chevalley T, Herrmann FR, Delmi M, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P, Rapin CH, et al. Evaluation of the age-adjusted incidence of hip fractures between urban and rural areas: the difference is not related to the prevalence of institutions for the elderly. Osteoporos Int. 2002;13(2):113–118. doi: 10.1007/s001980200002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Official Statistics of Finland (OSF). Population structure [e-publication]. http://www.stat.fi/til/vaerak/tau_en.html (2012) Accessed 11 Oct 2019.
- 24.Koskela L, Raatiniemi L, Bakke HK, Ala-Kokko T, Liisanantti J. Fatal poisonings in northern Finland: causes, incidence, and rural-urban differences. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25(1):90. doi: 10.1186/s13049-017-0431-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Brattström O, Eriksson M, Larsson E, Oldner A. Socio-economic status and co-morbidity as risk factors for trauma. Eur J Epidemiol. 2015;30(2):151–157. doi: 10.1007/s10654-014-9969-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Griswold MG, Fullman N, Hawley C, Arian N, Zimsen SRM, Tymeson HD, Venkateswaran V, Tapp AD, Forouzanfar MH, Salama JS, Abate KH, Abate D, Abay SM, Abbafati C, Abdulkader RS, Abebe Z, Aboyans V, Abrar MM, Acharya P, Adetokunboh OO, Adhikari TB, Adsuar JC, Afarideh M, Agardh EE, Agarwal G, Aghayan SA, Agrawal S, Ahmed MB, Akibu M, Akinyemiju T, Akseer N, Asfoor DHA, al-Aly Z, Alahdab F, Alam K, Albujeer A, Alene KA, Ali R, Ali SD, Alijanzadeh M, Aljunid SM, Alkerwi A', Allebeck P, Alvis-Guzman N, Amare AT, Aminde LN, Ammar W, Amoako YA, Amul GGH, Andrei CL, Angus C, Ansha MG, Antonio CAT, Aremu O, Ärnlöv J, Artaman A, Aryal KK, Assadi R, Ausloos M, Avila-Burgos L, Avokpaho EF, Awasthi A, Ayele HT, Ayer R, Ayuk TB, Azzopardi PS, Badali H, Badawi A, Banach M, Barker-Collo SL, Barrero LH, Basaleem H, Baye E, Bazargan-Hejazi S, Bedi N, Béjot Y, Belachew AB, Belay SA, Bennett DA, Bensenor IM, Bernabe E, Bernstein RS, Beyene AS, Beyranvand T, Bhaumik S, Bhutta ZA, Biadgo B, Bijani A, Bililign N, Birlik SM, Birungi C, Bizuneh H, Bjerregaard P, Bjørge T, Borges G, Bosetti C, Boufous S, Bragazzi NL, Brenner H, Butt ZA, Cahuana-Hurtado L, Calabria B, Campos-Nonato IR, Campuzano JC, Carreras G, Carrero JJ, Carvalho F, Castañeda-Orjuela CA, Castillo Rivas J, Catalá-López F, Chang JC, Charlson FJ, Chattopadhyay A, Chaturvedi P, Chowdhury R, Christopher DJ, Chung SC, Ciobanu LG, Claro RM, Conti S, Cousin E, Criqui MH, Dachew BA, Dargan PI, Daryani A, Das Neves J, Davletov K, de Castro F, de Courten B, de Neve JW, Degenhardt L, Demoz GT, Des Jarlais DC, Dey S, Dhaliwal RS, Dharmaratne SD, Dhimal M, Doku DT, Doyle KE, Dubey M, Dubljanin E, Duncan BB, Ebrahimi H, Edessa D, el Sayed Zaki M, Ermakov SP, Erskine HE, Esteghamati A, Faramarzi M, Farioli A, Faro A, Farvid MS, Farzadfar F, Feigin VL, Felisbino-Mendes MS, Fernandes E, Ferrari AJ, Ferri CP, Fijabi DO, Filip I, Finger JD, Fischer F, Flaxman AD, Franklin RC, Futran ND, Gallus S, Ganji M, Gankpe FG, Gebregergs GB, Gebrehiwot TT, Geleijnse JM, Ghadimi R, Ghandour LA, Ghimire M, Gill PS, Ginawi IA, Giref AZZ, Gona PN, Gopalani SV, Gotay CC, Goulart AC, Greaves F, Grosso G, Guo Y, Gupta R, Gupta R, Gupta V, Gutiérrez RA, GVS M, Hafezi-Nejad N, Hagos TB, Hailu GB, Hamadeh RR, Hamidi S, Hankey GJ, Harb HL, Harikrishnan S, Haro JM, Hassen HY, Havmoeller R, Hay SI, Heibati B, Henok A, Heredia-Pi I, Hernández-Llanes NF, Herteliu C, Hibstu DTT, Hoogar P, Horita N, Hosgood HD, Hosseini M, Hostiuc M, Hu G, Huang H, Husseini A, Idrisov B, Ileanu BV, Ilesanmi OS, Irvani SSN, Islam SMS, Jackson MD, Jakovljevic M, Jalu MT, Jayatilleke AU, Jha RP, Jonas JB, Jozwiak JJ, Kabir Z, Kadel R, Kahsay A, Kapil U, Kasaeian A, Kassa TDD, Katikireddi SV, Kawakami N, Kebede S, Kefale AT, Keiyoro PN, Kengne AP, Khader Y, Khafaie MA, Khalil IA, Khan MN, Khang YH, Khater MM, Khubchandani J, Kim CI, Kim D, Kim YJ, Kimokoti RW, Kisa A, Kivimäki M, Kochhar S, Kosen S, Koul PA, Koyanagi A, Krishan K, Kuate Defo B, Kucuk Bicer B, Kulkarni VS, Kumar P, Lafranconi A, Lakshmana Balaji A, Lalloo R, Lallukka T, Lam H, Lami FH, Lan Q, Lang JJ, Lansky S, Larsson AO, Latifi A, Leasher JL, Lee PH, Leigh J, Leinsalu M, Leung J, Levi M, Li Y, Lim LL, Linn S, Liu S, Lobato-Cordero A, Lopez AD, Lorkowski S, Lotufo PA, Macarayan ERK, Machado IE, Madotto F, Magdy Abd el Razek H, Magdy Abd el Razek M, Majdan M, Majdzadeh R, Majeed A, Malekzadeh R, Malta DC, Mapoma CC, Martinez-Raga J, Maulik PK, Mazidi M, Mckee M, Mehta V, Meier T, Mekonen T, Meles KG, Melese A, Memiah PTN, Mendoza W, Mengistu DT, Mensah GA, Meretoja TJ, Mezgebe HB, Miazgowski T, Miller TR, Mini G, Mirica A, Mirrakhimov EM, Moazen B, Mohammad KA, Mohammadifard N, Mohammed S, Monasta L, Moraga P, Morawska L, Mousavi SM, Mukhopadhyay S, Musa KI, Naheed A, Naik G, Najafi F, Nangia V, Nansseu JR, Nayak MSDP, Nejjari C, Neupane S, Neupane SP, Ngunjiri JW, Nguyen CT, Nguyen LH, Nguyen TH, Ningrum DNA, Nirayo YL, Noubiap JJ, Ofori-Asenso R, Ogbo FA, Oh IH, Oladimeji O, Olagunju AT, Olivares PR, Olusanya BO, Olusanya JO, Oommen AM, Oren E, Orpana HM, Ortega-Altamirano DDV, Ortiz JR, Ota E, Owolabi MO, Oyekale AS, P A M, Pana A, Park EK, Parry CDH, Parsian H, Patle A, Patton GC, Paudel D, Petzold M, Phillips MR, Pillay JD, Postma MJ, Pourmalek F, Prabhakaran D, Qorbani M, Radfar A, Rafay A, Rafiei A, Rahim F, Rahimi-Movaghar A, Rahman M, Rahman MA, Rai RK, Rajsic S, Raju SB, Ram U, Rana SM, Ranabhat CL, Rawaf DL, Rawaf S, Reiner RC, Reis C, Renzaho AMN, Rezai MS, Roever L, Ronfani L, Room R, Roshandel G, Rostami A, Roth GA, Roy A, Sabde YD, Saddik B, Safiri S, Sahebkar A, Salama JS, Saleem Z, Salomon JA, Salvi SS, Sanabria J, Sanchez-Niño MD, Santomauro DF, Santos IS, Santric Milicevic MMM, Sarker AR, Sarmiento-Suárez R, Sarrafzadegan N, Sartorius B, Satpathy M, Sawhney M, Saxena S, Saylan M, Schaub MP, Schmidt MI, Schneider IJC, Schöttker B, Schutte AE, Schwendicke F, Sepanlou SG, Shaikh MA, Sharif M, She J, Sheikh A, Shen J, Shiferaw MS, Shigematsu M, Shiri R, Shishani K, Shiue I, Shukla SR, Sigfusdottir ID, Silva DAS, Silva NTD, Silveira DGA, Sinha DN, Sitas F, Soares Filho AM, Soofi M, Sorensen RJD, Soriano JB, Sreeramareddy CT, Steckling N, Stein DJ, Sufiyan M'B, Sur PJ, Sykes BL, Tabarés-Seisdedos R, Tabuchi T, Tavakkoli M, Tehrani-Banihashemi A, Tekle MG, Thapa S, Thomas N, Topor-Madry R, Topouzis F, Tran BX, Troeger CE, Truelsen TC, Tsilimparis N, Tyrovolas S, Ukwaja KN, Ullah I, Uthman OA, Valdez PR, van Boven JFM, Vasankari TJ, Venketasubramanian N, Violante FS, Vladimirov SK, Vlassov V, Vollset SE, Vos T, Wagnew FWS, Waheed Y, Wang YP, Weiderpass E, Weldegebreal F, Weldegwergs KG, Werdecker A, Westerman R, Whiteford HA, Widecka J, Wijeratne T, Wyper GMA, Xu G, Yamada T, Yano Y, Ye P, Yimer EM, Yip P, Yirsaw BD, Yisma E, Yonemoto N, Yoon SJ, Yotebieng M, Younis MZ, Zachariah G, Zaidi Z, Zamani M, Zhang X, Zodpey S, Mokdad AH, Naghavi M, Murray CJL, Gakidou E. Alcohol use and burden for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. Lancet. 2018;392(10152):1015–1035. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31310-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Mack KA, Clapperton AJ, Macpherson A, Sleet D, Newton D, Murdoch J, et al. Trends in the leading causes of injury mortality, Australia, Canada and the United States, 2000–2014. Can J Public Health. 2017;108(2):e185–e191. doi: 10.17269/cjph.108.5695. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Simons R, Brasher P, Taulu T, Lakha N, Molnar N, Caron N, Schuurman N, Evans D, Hameed M. A population-based analysis of injury-related deaths and access to trauma care in rural-remote Northwest British Columbia. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care. 2010;69(1):11–19. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181e17b39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Fatovich DM, Jacobs IG. The relationship between remoteness and trauma deaths in Western Australia. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care. 2009;67(5):910–914. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181815a26. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Pettersson G, Eriksson A. Onaturliga dödsfall måste utredas bättre – risk att brott missas: Granskning av polisens och sjukvårdens dödsfallshandläggning i tre län. Läkartidningen. 2014;111(48):2160–2162. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Brooke HL, Talbäck M, Hörnblad J, Johansson LA, Ludvigsson JF, Druid H, Feychting M, Ljung R. The Swedish cause of death register. Eur J Epidemiol. 2017;32(9):765–773. doi: 10.1007/s10654-017-0316-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.