Abstract
Injury outcomes seem to be more severe in older than younger persons. This may make personal injury assessment (PIA) particularly difficult, mainly because of seniors' previous health frailties. To set the grounds for seniors' PIA guidelines, we compared an older with a younger adult population of trauma victims and, secondarily, identified differences between the groups regarding three-dimensional and medico-legal damage parameters assessment. Using a retrospective study of victims of road traffic accidents, we compared the groups (n = 239 each), assuring similar acute injury severity (ISS standardised difference = 0.01): G1 (older adults); G2 (younger adults). Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio. G1 revealed higher negative consequences when considering the three-dimensional damage assessment, with more frequent and severe outcomes, being a cause of further difficulties in daily living activities, with a loss of independence and autonomy. Nevertheless, regarding the medico-legal damage parameters, permanent functional disability did not show significant differences. This study generates evidence that reveals the need to rethink the traditional methodology of PIA in older persons, giving more relevance to the real-life contexts of each person. It is essential to: obtain complete information about previous physiologic and health states, begin the medico-legal assessment as early as possible, make regular follow-ups, and perform a multidisciplinary evaluation.