British Medical Journal study finds parachutes ineffective

In summary: A study was conducted on 92 individuals who were screened and 23 were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial. The results showed that using a parachute did not significantly reduce death or major traumatic injury upon landing, regardless of the altitude or velocity of the aircraft. The study also suggests that pre-existing beliefs about the effectiveness of parachutes may have influenced the enrollment of participants, making it difficult to apply the results to real-life situations.
  • #1
BWV
1,524
1,863
Dont believe the lies of Big Parachute!
Parachutes are routinely used to prevent death or major traumatic injury among individuals jumping from aircraft. However, evidence supporting the efficacy of parachutes is weak and guideline recommendations for their use are principally based on biological plausibility and expert opinion.12 Despite this widely held yet unsubstantiated belief of efficacy, many studies of parachutes have suggested injuries related to their use in both military and recreational settings,34 and parachutist injuries are formally recognized in the World Health Organization’s ICD-10 (international classification of diseases, 10th revision).5 This could raise concerns for supporters of evidence-based medicine, because numerous medical interventions believed to be useful have ultimately failed to show efficacy when subjected to properly executed randomized clinical trials.67

Previous attempts to evaluate parachute use in a randomized setting have not been undertaken owing to both ethical and practical concerns. Lack of equipoise could inhibit recruitment of participants in such a trial. However, whether pre-existing beliefs about the efficacy of parachutes would, in fact, impair the enrolment of participants in a clinical trial has not been formally evaluated. To address these important gaps in evidence, we conducted the first randomized clinical trial of the efficacy of parachutes in reducing death and major injury when jumping from an aircraft.

Abstract​

Objective To determine if using a parachute prevents death or major traumatic injury when jumping from an aircraft.
Design Randomized controlled trial.
Setting Private or commercial aircraft between September 2017 and August 2018.
Participants 92 aircraft passengers aged 18 and over were screened for participation. 23 agreed to be enrolled and were randomized.
Intervention Jumping from an aircraft (airplane or helicopter) with a parachute versus an empty backpack (unblinded).
Main outcome measures Composite of death or major traumatic injury (defined by an Injury Severity Score over 15) upon impact with the ground measured immediately after landing.
Results Parachute use did not significantly reduce death or major injury (0% for parachute v 0% for control; P>0.9). This finding was consistent across multiple subgroups. Compared with individuals screened but not enrolled, participants included in the study were on aircraft at significantly lower altitude (mean of 0.6 m for participants v mean of 9146 m for non-participants; P<0.001) and lower velocity (mean of 0 km/h v mean of 800 km/h; P<0.001).
Conclusions Parachute use did not reduce death or major traumatic injury when jumping from aircraft in the first randomized evaluation of this intervention. However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps. When beliefs regarding the effectiveness of an intervention exist in the community, randomized trials might selectively enroll individuals with a lower perceived likelihood of benefit, thus diminishing the applicability of the results to clinical practice.

https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094
 
  • Haha
  • Informative
Likes pinball1970, Borek, dextercioby and 4 others
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
In other words, using a parachute didn't prevent one from being undead.
 

FAQ: British Medical Journal study finds parachutes ineffective

What was the main finding of the British Medical Journal study on parachutes?

The study humorously concluded that parachutes are no more effective than empty backpacks in preventing death or major injury when jumping from an aircraft. This was based on a randomized trial where participants jumped from aircraft, but it was a tongue-in-cheek study to highlight the limitations of certain types of research.

How was the study conducted?

The study was conducted by having participants jump from an aircraft while wearing either a parachute or an empty backpack. However, the aircraft was stationary on the ground or at a very low altitude, making the jumps inherently safe regardless of the equipment used.

What was the purpose of the study?

The purpose of the study was to use satire to demonstrate the potential pitfalls of randomized controlled trials and to emphasize that not all interventions can or should be tested in this manner. It aimed to provoke thought about the design and interpretation of clinical trials.

Is it true that parachutes are ineffective?

No, the study does not actually suggest that parachutes are ineffective in real-life scenarios. The study's design was intentionally flawed to make a point about research methodologies. Parachutes are indeed effective in preventing injury and death when used in actual high-altitude jumps.

What can be learned from this study?

The study highlights the importance of context and appropriate study design in research. It serves as a reminder that results from studies must be interpreted carefully, considering the practical realities and limitations of the research methods used.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
8K
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Back
Top