The overall aim of this thesis was to describe experiences of emergency treatment among people injured in traffic accidents, and to test and evaluate the effects of follow-up telephone calls from a nurse during the subsequent phase. The thesis is based on four sub-studies of motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians who had fallen in traffic during the years 2002-2005. The participants were aged 18 to 70 years old and had minor (MAIS 1) or nonminor (MAIS 2+) injuries. Sub-study I was a qualitative study in which individual narrative interviews were conducted with nine persons who had sustained traffic injuries. The aim of this study was to describe the injured individuals’ experiences of pre-hospital and hospital care and subsequent rehabilitation. The interviews were analysed using content analysis, and the experiences of the interviewees were formulated into four themes: facing commotion, experiencing trust and security, lacking security and support, and struggling to return to everyday life. The results showed that a sensitive caregiver who provides comprehensible information facilitates both the emergency treatment and the subsequent period of care and rehabilitation. Sub-study II was a cross-sectional study in which the participants (n=565) estimated their perceptions of the quality of care in the accident and emergency department (A&E) after an injury event. The Mini-KUPP (“Quality from the Patient’s Perspective”) questionnaire was used to estimate quality of care at the A&E. The questionnaire was posted to the subjects’ home addresses three weeks after the visit to the A&E. The results showed that the quality of care was scored on the top half of the scale by all three road user categories. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, significant connections emerged between good quality of care and a short waiting time, non-minor injuries (MAIS2+), higher age, and higher levels of education. The factor most closely associated with the perception of good quality of care was a short waiting time. Sub-study III was a stratified and randomised intervention study including 568 injured persons. In addition to modern trauma care, the intervention group received follow-up via telephone, three weeks after the injury, by a nurse who provided advice and support during the rehabilitation period. The control group received modern trauma care but no follow-up. Both groups estimated their health-related quality of life two weeks (baseline) and six months after the injury. After six months, estimates of health-related quality of life were generally higher in the intervention group than in the control group. A sub-group analysis found that the differences were most pronounced for the group who had received adequate advice in connection with the telephone follow-up. Of the three road user categories, the motorists gained the greatest benefit from the telephone intervention, with milder problems with regard to pains/difficulties and essential activities. Sub study IV was a health economic study. The calculations were built on the results from study III (n=568). A cost utility analysis was performed, including the costs for the intervention and the QALYs gained. The results showed that the telephone intervention was cost-effective. The total gain in the intervention group was 2.60 QALYs, while the car occupants gained 1.54 QALYs. The cost per QALY gained was 16 000 SEK overall and 8 500 SEK for car occupants. Conclusion: A sensitive caregiver who also provides good information can instil security and trust in the patient. For the purposes of generally improving the quality of care in an A&E, the aim above all should be a short waiting time, but the treatment of minor injuries should also be improved. Access to a supportive nurse who is able to provide advice during the subsequent phase has the potential to improve health-related quality of life in a cost-effective way.