Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:33:42.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Case Study of the High-speed Train Crash Outside Santiago de Compostela, Galicia, Spain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2016

Rebecca Forsberg  and
José Antonio Iglesias Vázquez
Rebecca Forsberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Division of Surgery - Research Center for Disaster Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
José Antonio Iglesias Vázquez
Affiliation:
Emergency Medical Services, Galicia, Spain
*
Correspondence: Rebecca Forsberg, PhD Division of Surgery Center for Research and Development – Disaster Medicine Linnaeusväg 6, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction

The worldwide use of rail transport has increased, and the train speeds are escalating. Concurrently, the number of train disasters has been amplified globally. Consequently, railway safety has become an important issue for the future. High-velocity crashes increase the risk for injuries and mortality; nevertheless, there are relatively few studies on high-speed train crashes and the influencing factors on travelers’ injuries occurring in the crash phase. The aim of this study was to investigate the fatal and non-fatal injuries and the main interacting factors that contributed to the injury process in the crash phase of the 2013 high-velocity train crash that occurred at Angrois, outside Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Methods

Hospital records (n=157) of all the injured who were admitted to the six hospitals in the region were reviewed and compiled by descriptive statistics. The instant fatalities (n=63) were collected on site. Influencing crash factors were observed on the crash site, by carriage inspections, and by reviewing official reports concerning the approximated train speed.

Results

The main interacting factors that contributed in the injury process in the crash phase were, among other things, the train speed, the design of the concrete structure of the curve, the robustness of the carriage exterior, and the interior environment of the carriages. Of the 222 people on board (218 passengers and four crew), 99% (n=220) were fatally or non-fatally injured in the crash. Thirty-three percent (n=72) suffered fatal injuries, of which 88% (n=63) died at the crash site and 13% (n=9) at the hospital. Twenty-one percent (n=32) of those admitted to hospital suffered multi-trauma (ie, extensive, severe, and/or critical injuries). The head, face, and neck sustained 42% (n=123) of the injuries followed by the trunk (chest, abdomen, and pelvis; n=92; 32%). Fractures were the most frequent (n=200; 69%) injury.

Conclusion

A mass-casualty incident with an extensive amount of fatal, severe, and critical injuries is most probable with a high-velocity train; this presents prehospital challenges. This finding draws attention to the importance of more robust carriage exteriors and injury minimizing designs of both railway carriages and the surrounding environment to reduce injuries and fatalities in future high-speed crashes.

ForsbergR , VázquezJAI . A Case Study of the High-speed Train Crash Outside Santiago de Compostela, Galicia, Spain. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(2);163–168.

Keywords

accident preventionhigh velocityrailroadstraffic accidentswounds/injuries
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , April 2016 , pp. 163 - 168
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. About high speeds. International Union of Railways Web site. http://uic.org/spip.php?rubrique867. Accessed February 19, 2015.Google Scholar
2. Tang, A, Yip, A. Collision avoidance timing analysis of DSRC-based vehicles. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42(1):182-195.Google Scholar
3. Saccomanno, F, Young-Jin Park, P, Fu, L. Estimating countermeasure effects for reducing collisions at highway-railway grade crossings. Accid Anal Prev. 2007;39(2):406-416.Google Scholar
4. Forsberg, R. Train Crashes – Consequences for Passengers. 2012. Thesis, Umeå University, Sweden.Google Scholar
5. Forsberg, R, Björnstig, U. One hundred years of railway disasters and recent trends. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2011;26(5):367-373.Google Scholar
6. Mrzyglód, M, Kuczek, T. Uniform crashworthiness optimization of car body for high-speed trains. Stuct Multidisc Optim. 2014;49(2):327-336.Google Scholar
7. Gao, G, Tian, H. Train’s crashworthiness design and collision analysis. Int J Crashworthiness. 2007;12(1):21-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Tyrell, D, Severson, K, Marquis, B. Train crashworthiness design for occupant survivability. Paper presented at: the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition; November 12-17, 1995; San Francisco, California USA.Google Scholar
9. Simons, JW, Kirkpatrick, W. High-speed passenger train crashworthiness and occupant survivability. Int J Crashworthiness. 1999;4(2):121-132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Rautji, R, Dogra, TD. Rail traffic accidents: a retrospective study. Med Sci Law. 2004;44(1):67-70.Google Scholar
11. Ministerio de Formento: Comisión de Investigación de Accidentes Ferroviarios. Informe Final Sobre el Accidente Grave Ferroviario No 0054/2013. Ocurrido el Día 24.07.2013. En las Proximidades del la Estación de Santiago de Compostela (A Coruna) [in Spanish]. http://www.fomento.gob.es/NR/rdonlyres/0ADE7F17-84BB-4CBD-9451-C750EDE06170/125127/IF240713200514CIAF.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed March 2, 2015.Google Scholar
12. Oestern, HJ, Huels, B, Quirini, W, Pohlemann, T. Facts about the disaster at Eschede. Journal of Trauma. 2000;14(4):287-290.Google ScholarPubMed
13. Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB). Rail Accident Report - Derailment at Grayrigg: 23 February 2007. http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/081023_R202008_Grayrigg_v4r.pdf. Published 2011. Accessed March 1, 2015.Google Scholar
14. Design flaws and poor management caused Wenzhou collision, report confirms. Railway Gazette Web site. http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/policy/single-view/view/design-flaws-and-poor-management-caused-wenzhou-collision-report-confirms.html?sword_list%5B%5D=Wenzhou&sword_list%5B%5D=collision&no_cache=1. Published 2012. Accessed February 24, 2015.Google Scholar
15. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Kamedo Report: The Train Crash in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2012 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
16. Forsberg, R, Holgersson, A, Bodén, I, Björnstig, U. A study of a mass casualty train crash, focusing on the cause of injuries. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security. 2014;6(2):152-166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Ilkjær, LB, Lind, T. Passengers injuries reflected carriage interior at the railway accident in Mundelsturp, Denmark. Accid Anal Prev. 2001;33(2):285-288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Severson, KJ, Parent, DP. Train-to-train impact test of crash energy management passenger rail equipment: occupant experiments. ASME Conference Proceedings. 2006: 75-86.Google Scholar
19. Braden, G. Application of commercial aircraft accident techniques to a railroad derailment. Aero Med. 1974;45(7):772-779.Google Scholar
20. Holgersson, A, Forsberg, R, Saveman, BI. Interior safety in trains is neglected - a case study from the rail crash in Kimstad [in Swedish]. Läkartidningen. 2012;109(1-2):24-26.Google Scholar
21. Fothergill, NJ, Ebbs, SR, Reese, A, et al. The Purely train crash mechanism: injuries and prevention. Archives in Emergency Medicine. 1992;9(2):125-129.Google Scholar
22. Forsberg, R, Saveman, BI. Survivors’ experiences from a train crash. Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-being. 2011;6(4):8401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Eriksson, A, Ericsson, D, Lundström, NG, Thorson, J. Injuries at train derailments - proposed risk reducing measures [in Swedish]. Läkartidningen. 1984;81(5):352-354.Google Scholar
24. Cugnoni, HL, Fincham, C, Skinner, DV. Cannon Street rail disaster - lessons to be learned. Injury. 1994;25(1):11-13.Google Scholar
25. Eckstein, M, Heightman, AJ. Trauma at the Tunnel Los Angeles Metrolink train crash presents crews with unprecedented triage, treatment and transport challenges. JEMS. 2009;34(5):54-62.Google Scholar
26. Kaji, AH, Schriger, D, Green, S. Looking through the retrospectoscope: reducing bias in emergency medicine chart review studies. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2014;64(3):292-298.Google Scholar