Carpal Tunnel Injury in Automobile Collisions

It is trite to say that automobile collisions cause injury due to mechanical force application to the body. It is also understood that carpal tunnel syndrome is a debilitating condition which is caused by mechanical forces applied to the structures of the wrist. With the increased incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome in the 1990’s, automobile accidents have been identified as a cause of carpal tunnel syndrome. Such relationship is often based on a patient’s complaints after the accident and lack of complaint before the accident. Regardless of the patient’s complaint history, a mechanical relationship between the forces present in the accident and the injury must exist. A number of vehicle accident configurations are investigated, and the forces applied to the vehicle occupant’s wrist are identified. The directions and magnitudes of these forces are discussed with respect to their relationship to carpal tunnel syndrome. This analysis shows that in low energy collisions (delta V < 16 kph,10 mph) the forces necessary to cause carpal tunnel syndrome are not present. Other accident situations can cause carpal tunnel syndrome with a prerequisite being sufficient magnitude of force applied directly to the wrist.

Low Speed Rear End Automobile Collisions and Whiplash Injury, the Biomechanical Approach

The extent of injury in low speed rear end collisions is controversial. In many cases, the impact speed of the striking vehicle is low, neither car shows much if any post collision damage, and at the scene, the occupant of the struck vehicle appears uninjured. Yet many of these incidents progress to lawsuits with sometimes very significant damage and injury claims. In testimony, Plaintiff argues that the collision was significant while Defendant describes the collision as minor. A Biomechanical approach which addresses the forces in the collision and the resulting forces and kinematics of the occupant can help to resolve some of these issues. In the following, the process of a biomechanical analysis is described, using a specific example. A discussion of how courts have viewed this type of testimony is then presented.