Bicycle-related Head Injuries Research Articles

3D assessment of damaged bicycle helmets and corresponding craniomaxillo-mandibular skull injuries: A feasibility study

ObjectivesIn the Netherlands, cyclists continue to outnumber other road users in injuries and deaths. The wearing of bicycle helmets is not mandatory in the Netherlands even though research has shown that wearing bicycle helmets can reduce head and brain injuries by up to 88%. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of using 3D technology to evaluate bicycle-related head injuries and helmet protection. MethodsThree patients who had been involved in a bicycle accident while wearing a helmet were subjected to multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT) imaging after trauma. The helmets were separately scanned using the same MDCT scanner with tube voltages ranging from 80kVp to 140kVp and tube currents ranging from 10mAs to 300mAs in order to determine the best image acquisition parameters for helmets. The acquired helmet images were converted into virtual 3D surface hence Standard Tessellation Language (STL) models and merged with MDCT-derived STL models of the patients’ skulls. Finally, all skull fractures and corresponding helmet damage were visualized and related. ResultsImaging bicycle helmets on an MDCT scanner proved to be feasible using a tube voltage of 120kVp and a tube current of 120mAs. Merging the resulting STL models of the patients’ skull and helmet allowed the overall damage sustained by both skull and helmet to be related. ConclusionOur proposed 3D method of assessing bicycle helmet damage and corresponding head injuries could offer valuable information for the development and design of safer bicycle helmets.

Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Bicycle-Related Severe Head Injury: A Single Center Experience.

ObjectiveHead injury is the main cause of death and severe disability in bicycle-related injuries. The purpose of this study was to compare the demographic characteristics and injury mechanisms of bicycle-related head injuries according to the severity and outcome and determine the main risk factors and common types of accompanying injuries.MethodsA total of 205 patients who were admitted to the neurosurgery department of our hospital for bicycle-related head injuries between 2007 and 2016 were analyzed. We categorized the patients into two groups according to severity and outcome of head injury, and then identified the differences in age, sex, and cause of injury between the two groups.ResultsCollisions with a motor vehicle increased the risk of severe head injury (p=0.011), resulted in poor outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale [GOS] ≤3; p=0.022), and caused more accompanying chest/abdominal (p<0.001) and pelvic/lower extremity injuries (p=0.001) than other mechanisms. Older age and high grade of head injury severity resulted in poor outcomes (p=0.028 and p<0.001, respectively), and caused more accompanying chest/abdominal injuries (p<0.032 and p<0.001, respectively) compared with younger age and low grade of head injury severity.ConclusionIn bicycle-related head injuries, collision with motor vehicle is one of the most important risk factor for high grade of head injury severity and outcome. In addition, bicycle-related head injuries are often accompanied by injuries of other parts of the body.

The Effect of an All-Ages Bicycle Helmet Law on Bicycle-Related Trauma.

In 2003, Seattle implemented an all-ages bicycle helmet law; King County outside of Seattle had implemented a similar law since 1994. For the period 2000-2010, the effect of the helmet legislation on helmet use, helmet-preventable injuries, and bicycle-related fatalities was examined, comparing Seattle to the rest of King County. Data was retrieved from the Washington State Trauma Registry and the King County Medical Examiner. Results comparing the proportions of bicycle related head injuries before (2000-2002) and after (2004-2010) the law show no significant change in the proportion of bicyclists admitted to the hospital and treated for head injuries in either Seattle (37.9 vs 40.2% p=0.75) nor in the rest of King County (30.7 vs 31.4%, p=0.84) with the extension of the helmet law to Seattle in 2003. However, bicycle-related major head trauma as a proportion of all bicycle-related head trauma did decrease significantly in Seattle (83.9 vs 64.9%, p=0.04), while there was no significant change in King County (64.4 vs 57.6%, p=0.41). While the results do not show an overall decrease in head injuries, they do reveal a decrease in the severity of head injuries, as well as bicycle-related fatalities, suggesting that the helmet legislation was effective in reducing severe disability and death, contributing to injury prevention in Seattle and King County. The promotion of helmet use through an all ages helmet law is a vital preventative strategy for reducing major bicycle-related head trauma.

Pediatric bicycle-related head injuries: a population-based study in a county without a helmet law.

BackgroundHead injuries are the leading cause of death among cyclists, 85 % of which can be prevented by wearing a bicycle helmet. This study aims to estimate the incidence of pediatric bicycle-related injuries in Olmsted County and assess differences in injuries between those wearing helmets vs. not.MethodsOlmsted County, Minnesota residents 5 to 18 years of age with a diagnostic code consistent with an injury associated with the use of a bicycle between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2011, were identified. Incidence rates were calculated and standardized to the age and sex distribution of the 2000 US white population. Type of injuries, the percentage requiring head CT or X-ray, and hospitalization were compared using a chi-square test. Pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission, permanent neurologic injury, seizure, need for mechanical ventilation, and mortality were compared using Fisher’s exact test.ResultsA total of 1189 bicycle injuries were identified. The overall age-adjusted incidence rate of all injuries was 278 (95 % CI, 249 to 306) per 100,000 person-years for females and 589 (95 % CI, 549 to 629) for males. The corresponding rates for head injuries were 104 (95 % CI, 87 to 121) for females and 255 (95 % CI, 229 to 281) for males. Of patients with head injuries, 17.4 % were documented to have been wearing a helmet, 44.8 % were documented as not wearing a helmet, and 37.8 % had no helmet use documentation. Patients with a head injury who were documented as not wearing a helmet were significantly more likely to undergo imaging of the head (32.1 percent vs. 11.5 %; p < 0.001) and to experience a brain injury (28.1 vs. 13.8 %; p = 0.008).ConclusionsChildren and adolescents continue to ride bicycles without wearing helmets, resulting in severe head and facial injuries and mortality.

Public bicycle share programs and head injuries.

We evaluated the effect of North American public bicycle share programs (PBSPs), which typically do not offer helmets with rentals, on the occurrence of bicycle-related head injuries. We analyzed trauma center data for bicycle-related injuries from 5 cities with PBSPs and 5 comparison cities. We used logistic regression models to compare the odds that admission for a bicycle-related injury would involve a head injury 24 months before PBSP implementation and 12 months afterward. In PBSP cities, the proportion of head injuries among bicycle-related injuries increased from 42.3% before PBSP implementation to 50.1% after (P < .01). This proportion in comparison cities remained similar before (38.2%) and after (35.9%) implementation (P = .23). Odds ratios for head injury were 1.30 (95% confidence interval = 1.13, 1.67) in PBSP cities and 0.94 (95% confidence interval = 0.79, 1.11) in control cities (adjusted for age and city) when we compared the period after implementation to the period before. Results suggest that steps should be taken to make helmets available with PBSPs. Helmet availability should be incorporated into PBSP planning and funding, not considered an afterthought following implementation.

EFFECTS OF BICYCLE HELMET LAWS ON CHILDREN'S INJURIES

In recent years, many states and localities in the USA have enacted bicycle helmet laws. We estimate the effects of these laws on injuries requiring emergency department treatment. Using hospital-level panel data and triple difference models, we find helmet laws are associated with reductions in bicycle-related head injuries among children. However, laws also are associated with decreases in non-head cycling injuries, as well as increases in head injuries from other wheeled sports. Thus, the observed reduction in bicycle-related head injuries may be due to reductions in bicycle riding induced by the laws.

The relation between mechanical impact parameters and most frequent bicycle related head injuries

The most frequent head injuries resulting from bicycle accidents include skull fracture acute subdural hematoma (ASDH), cerebral contusions, and diffuse axonal injury (DAI). This review includes epidemiological studies, cadaver experiments, in vivo imaging, image processing techniques, and computer reconstructions of cycling accidents used to estimate the mechanical parameters leading to specific head injuries.The results of the head impact tests suggest the existence of an energy failure level for the skull fracture, specific for different impact regions (22–24J for the frontal site and 5–15J for temporal site). Typical linear patterns were described for frontal, parietal and occipital skull fracture. Temporal skull fracture described considerably higher variability. In term of contusion mechanogenesis, the experiments proved that relative brain–skull motion will not be prevented if the maximum frequency of the impact frequency spectrum stays below 150Hz or below the frequency corresponding to the impedance peak of the head under investigation. The brain shift patterns in humans, both in dynamic and quasistatic situations were shown to be very complex, with maximum amplitudes localized at the level of the inferolateral aspects of the frontal and temporal lobes. The resulting brain maximum amplitudes differed when the head was subjected to a sagittal or lateral motion. Finally, the presented data support the existence of a critical elongation/stretch criterion for the occurrence of ASDH due to BV rupture, located around 5mm elongation or 25% stretch limit. In addition, a tolerance level lying around 10,000rad/s2 for pulse durations below 10ms was established for BV rupture, which seems to decrease with increasing pulse duration.The described research indicates that injury specific tolerance criteria can provide a more accurate prediction for head injuries than the currently used HIC. Internal brain lesions are strongly related to rotational effects which are not appropriately accounted by the commonly accepted head injury criterion (HIC). The research summarized in this paper adds significantly to the creation of a fundamental knowledge for the improvement of bicycle helmets as well as other head protective measures. The described investigations and experimental results are of crucial importance also for forensic research.

Non-legislative interventions for the promotion of cycle helmet wearing by children

Helmets reduce bicycle-related head injuries, particularly in single vehicle crashes and those where the head strikes the ground. We aimed to identify non-legislative interventions for promoting helmet use among children, so future interventions can be designed on a firm evidence base. To assess the effectiveness of non-legislative interventions in increasing helmet use among children; to identify possible reasons for differences in effectiveness of interventions; to evaluate effectiveness with respect to social group; to identify adverse consequences of interventions. We searched the following databases: Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsycINFO (Ovid); PsycEXTRA (Ovid); CINAHL (EBSCO); ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED); Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI); Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S); and PubMed from inception to April 2009; TRANSPORT to 2007; and manually searched other sources of data. We included RCTs and CBAs. Studies included participants aged 0 to 18 years, described interventions promoting helmet use not requiring enactment of legislation and reported observed helmet wearing, self reported helmet ownership or self reported helmet wearing. Two independent review authors selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used random-effects models to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) (with 95% confidence interval (CI)). We explored heterogeneity with subgroup analyses. We included 29 studies in the review, 21 of which were included in at least one meta-analysis. Non-legislative interventions increased observed helmet wearing (11 studies: OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.29 to 3.34). The effect was most marked amongst community-based interventions (four studies: OR 4.30, 95% 2.24 to 8.25) and those providing free helmets (two studies: OR 4.35, 95% CI 2.13 to 8.89). Significant effects were also found amongst school-based interventions (eight studies: OR 1.73, CI 95% 1.03 to 2.91), with a smaller effect found for interventions providing education only (three studies: OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.88). No significant effect was found for providing subsidised helmets (seven studies: OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 4.17). Interventions provided to younger children (aged under 12) may be more effective (five studies: OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.17 to 5.37) than those provided to children of all ages (five studies: OR 1.83, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.42).Interventions were only effective in increasing self reported helmet ownership where they provided free helmets (three studies: OR 11.63, 95% CI 2.14 to 63.16).Interventions were effective in increasing self reported helmet wearing (nine studies: OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.56 to 6.87), including those undertaken in schools (six studies: OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 16.74), providing free helmets (three studies: OR 7.27, 95% CI 1.28 to 41.44), providing education only (seven studies: OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.63) and in healthcare settings (two studies: OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.38 to 5.61). Non-legislative interventions appear to be effective in increasing observed helmet use, particularly community-based interventions and those providing free helmets. Those set in schools appear to be effective but possibly less so than community-based interventions. Interventions providing education only are less effective than those providing free helmets. There is insufficient evidence to recommend providing subsidised helmets at present. Interventions may be more effective if provided to younger rather than older children. There is evidence that interventions offered in healthcare settings can increase self reported helmet wearing.Further high-quality studies are needed to explore whether non-legislative interventions increase helmet wearing, and particularly the effect of providing subsided as opposed to free helmets, and of providing interventions in healthcare settings as opposed to in schools or communities. Alternative interventions (e.g. those including peer educators, those aimed at developing safety skills including skills in decision making and resisting peer pressure or those aimed at improving self esteem or self efficacy) need developing and testing, particularly for 11 to 18 year olds. The effect of interventions in countries with existing cycle helmet legislation and in low and middle-income countries also requires investigation.

Helmtragequoten bei Kindern und Jugendlichen in Deutschland und vermeidbare Kopfverletzungen bei Fahrradunfällen

Head injuries are the main cause of death in bicycle-related accidents among children and adolescents. According to a Cochrane Review, the risk of head injury (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.26-0.37) or brain injury (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.23-0.42) decreases by 69% if a helmet is worn. This study presents the prevalence of helmet use in cycling children and adolescents in Germany and the proportion of head injuries that could be prevented by wearing helmets. The potential effects of increased helmet wearing rates on the population attributable risk percentage for head injuries (PAR%) are demonstrated. The prevalence of helmet use in children aged 3-17 years was analysed using data from the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS). The percentage of head injuries preventable by helmet use in this group is estimated by calculating PAR%. Prevalence rates of helmet use and odds ratios from a Cochrane Review about the effectiveness of bicycle helmets for the prevention of head injuries were used for analysis. The potential effect of increased helmet use is shown in 3 scenarios by means of differences of PAR% values in the most relevant age groups. The older the children, the less likely they are to wear a helmet: 89.5% (95% CI 88.0%-90.8%) of the 3- to 6-year-old children wear a helmet when cycling but only 11.0% (95% CI 9.3%-12.9%) of 14- to 17-year-old adolescents do. In the youngest group (3-6 years) 19% of bicycle-related head injuries are attributable to the non-use of helmets, but this proportion rises to 67% in the oldest group (14-17 years). The PAR% of head injuries associated with not wearing a helmet may be reduced by more than a third by increasing the helmet wearing rate to 67% (2 out of 3) among adolescents, and may be reduced to half if 75% of adolescents wore a helmet. Particularly older children and adolescents hardly use bicycle helmets, hence the rate of preventable head injury is high. Efforts towards increasing helmet use should address all age groups with a particular focus on school-aged children and adolescents.

Characteristics of bicycle-related head injuries among school-aged children in Taipei area

Background Bicycle-related head injury is an important public health issue. A paucity of statistical data on bicycle accidents exists in Taiwan. The purpose of this study was to report the characteristics of bicycle-related head injuries among school-aged children in Taipei, Taiwan. Methods Between 2001 and 2002, basic patient information of those with bicycle-related head injuries was collected from the Trauma Data Registry in 5 hospitals of the Taipei area. Telephone interviews were conducted to collect specific information surrounding bicycle accidents. Results Of 324 patients with bicycle-related head injuries, 90 (27.8%) had severe head injuries. Boys compared with girls had a higher proportion of severe head injuries (34.1% vs 23.4%; P = .048). Children aged 5 to 9 years had a higher proportion of severe head injuries compared with ages 10 to 14 years (65.2% vs 6.4%; P = .043). Bicycles without reflectors had a higher proportion of severe head injuries compared to bicycles with reflectors (69.0% vs 5.7%; P = .004). Bicyclists carrying goods (such as backpacks or weighted toward the road) and speeding were associated with severe head injury ( P < .05). Collisions with vehicles of a larger size resulted in a higher rate of severe head injury compared with collisions with pedestrians (76.9% vs 3.6%; P = .043). Conclusions For children whose main mode of transport is bicycles, the enforcement of helmet legislation, educational programs in bicycling safety and equipment, and improving the infrastructure for bicycling in urban areas are needed in Taiwan to reduce potentially debilitating or life-threatening injuries.

A systematic review of correct bicycle helmet use: how varying definitions and study quality influence the results

Background:Bicycle helmets effectively reduce the risk of bicycle-related head injuries and trauma; however, they must fit properly to be effective. Little is known about the prevalence of correctly worn helmets...

IS P-1 Characteristics of bicycle-related head injuries among school-aged children in Taiwan(International Poster 1,Science and Art for Sick Children)

IS P-1 Characteristics of bicycle-related head injuries among school-aged children in Taiwan(International Poster 1,Science and Art for Sick Children)

Bicycle helmet legislation for the uptake of helmet use and prevention of head injuries

Evidence exists to suggest that bicycle helmets may reduce the risk of head injuries to cyclists, however helmets are not uniformly worn by all bicycle users. Legislation has been enacted in some countries to mandate helmet use by cyclists, however the issue remains controversial with opponents arguing that this may inhibit people from bicycle riding and thus from gaining the associated health benefits, or that other countermeasures may have been responsible for decline in head injuries. To assess the effects of bicycle helmet legislation on bicycle-related head injuries and helmet use, and the occurrence of unintended adverse consequences. We searched CENTRAL, the Cochrane Injuries Group's specialised register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, TRANSPORT and other specialist electronic databases, up to February 2006. In addition we searched government websites, handsearched selected journals and examined the reference lists of selected publications. We included studies that reported changes in either the number of head injuries, helmet use or bicycle use post- versus pre-legislation. Only studies that included a concurrent control group and which reported on the effect of legislation implemented at either the country, state or province wide level were included. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. The data were not appropriate for meta-analysis, thus the results of the included studies have been reviewed narratively. Five studies, all from North America, met the inclusion criteria. For each of the studies, bicycle helmet legislation had been enacted for children only. Adults were used as controls in four of the studies, whilst jurisdictions with no helmet legislation were used as controls in the fifth. Three of the studies reported on changes in head injury rates and three reported on changes in helmet use. There were no included studies reporting change in bicycle use or other adverse consequences of legislation. In two studies, statistically significant decreases in head injuries were reported following the implementation of helmet legislation compared with controls, whilst one reported a non-statistically significant decline. Bicycle helmet use increased statistically significantly post-legislation in all three of the studies reporting on helmet use. Bicycle helmet legislation appears to be effective in increasing helmet use and decreasing head injury rates in the populations for which it is implemented. However, there are very few high quality evaluative studies that measure these outcomes, and none that reported data on an possible declines in bicycle use.

A decrease in both mild and severe bicycle-related head injuries in helmet wearing ages trend analyses in Sweden

Several international studies point at the efficacy of bicycle helmets in reducing head injuries. In Sweden, observational studies show that from 1988 to 1996 helmet use increased in all categories of cyclists. The objectives of this study were to analyse the trends of bicycle-related head injuries based on their main diagnosis and external cause of injury by different age groups. Our study area was the whole population of Sweden from 1987 to 1996. Outcome evaluation was based on data from the Swedish National Hospital Discharge Register concerning all bicycle-related injuries from 1987 to 1996, which presented 49 758 reported in-patient care. The trends in incidence rates (IRs) were studied with regression analyses. The results show that children under 15 years had the highest IRs. For these children, the IR decreased by 46%. The head injuries in children decreased both in collisions with motor vehicles and in other accidents. Similarly, the IR of concussion and skull fracture decreased. For non-head injuries, there were no significant changes for children. On the other hand, the incidence of both head and other injuries for adults aged 16-50 years increased. Ages above that showed no significant changes. Our conclusions are that the decrease in IR for bicycle-related head injuries refers to children in ages for whom bicycle helmet use during the period increased. This could not be explained by any general decrease in bicycle-related accidents or by any changes in the distribution of injuries after collision with motor vehicles. The increasing helmet use among younger schoolchildren probably contributed to the decrease in head injuries.

Trends in helmet use and head injuries in San Diego County: The effect of bicycle helmet legislation

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of California's bicycle helmet law on bicycle-related head injuries in San Diego County with a year 2000 population of approximately 3 million people. The study design is an ecological trend design based on observational data from a Trauma Registry. Outcome measures include helmet use compliance, site/severity of injury and abbreviated injury scale (AIS). There were 1116 bicycle trauma patients recorded in the San Diego County Trauma Registry between 1992 and 1996. The percentages of pre-law and post-law helmet use were 13.2 and 31.7%, respectively. Over the whole study period, the overall helmet use increased by an average of 43% per year with an averaged 84% rate increase in helmet use among children. Only 16.1% of patients with serious head injury used helmets, compared to 28.2% in those who did not have serious head injury. The odds ratio of helmet use against serious head injuries is 0.43 (95% CI 0.28–0.66) after adjusting for age, ethnicity and time. The p-values for comparing pre- and post-legislation serious head injury rates are p = 0.764, 0.4 and 0.194 for the overall, adult and child populations, respectively. Helmet legislation increased helmet use in the targeted child population and the effect was carried over to the adult population. Helmet use has a protective effect against serious head injury. Probably due to several of its limitations, the current study did not confirm that helmet legislation alone significantly reduced head injury rates in San Diego County during the study period.

Bicycle helmet use and preventing dental injury

Objectives To review the available literature regarding the: epidemiology of bicycle related head injuries; consequences of head injuries; rates of cycle helmet use; impact of educational campaigns and legislation on usage rates; effectiveness of cycle helmets in protecting against head and facial injuries; arguments against the compulsory use of bicycle helmets. Data sources A computerised Medline search was conducted using the keywords: head injury, facial injury, bicycle helmets, accidents. Data selection All available information was considered. Data synthesis Data was collated manually. Conclusions The wearing of bicycle helmets contributes significantly to the prevention of head injuries (HI) and traumatic brain injury (TBI), particularly in children and adolescents. There is evidence to support the role of cycle helmets in the prevention of injuries to the middle third of the face and some dental injuries. There is a case for the implementation of legislation accompanied by educational campaigns to increase significantly the use of cycle helmets. The dental profession could: play an active role in promoting cycle helmet use; support calls for the compulsory wearing of cycling helmets, particularly for children; press for modification of helmet design and standards to increase protection of the face.

Bicycle helmets--does the dental profession have a role in promoting their use?

To review the available literature regarding the: epidemiology of bicycle related head injuries; consequences of head injuries; rates of cycle helmet use; impact of educational campaigns and legislation on usage rates; effectiveness of cycle helmets in protecting against head and facial injuries; arguments against the compulsory use of bicycle helmets. A computerised Medline search was conducted using the keywords: head injury, facial injury, bicycle helmets, accidents. All available information was considered. Data was collated manually. The wearing of bicycle helmets contributes significantly to the prevention of head injuries (HI) and traumatic brain injury (TBI), particularly in children and adolescents. There is evidence to support the role of cycle helmets in the prevention of injuries to the middle third of the face and some dental injuries. There is a case for the implementation of legislation accompanied by educational campaigns to increase significantly the use of cycle helmets. The dental profession could: play an active role in promoting cycle helmet use; support calls for the compulsory wearing of cycling helmets, particularly for children; press for modification of helmet design and standards to increase protection of the face.

Urban/rural variation in children’s bicycle-related injuries

The objective of this study was to examine bicycle-related injury rates for children living in urban and rural areas. Data on all Canadian children hospitalised because of bicycling-related injuries (1994–1998) were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). Injured children were classified as residing in urban, mixed urban, mixed rural or rural areas. Incidence rates for bicycle-related head injuries and other bicycle-related injuries were calculated. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of head injury, controlling for age, sex, socio-economic status (SES), collision with a motor vehicle, and the presence of provincial helmet legislation. In total, 9367 children were hospitalised for a bicycling-related injury over the 4-year-study period. Of these, 21% occurred in rural areas, 18% in mixed rural, 17% in mixed urban, while the remaining 44% occurred in urban areas. The average annual incidence rate for bicycle-related head injuries in children was 18.49 per 100,000 for children living in rural areas compared with 10.93 per 100,000 for those living in urban areas, 15.49 for children in mixed urban areas and 17.38 for children living in mixed rural areas. This variation may be explained by differences in bicycling exposure, helmet use, hospital admission criteria, or road environments across geographic areas.

Mandatory Helmet Legislation Reduces Serious Bike Injuries &amp; Deaths

Source: Macpherson AK, To TM, Macarthur C, et al. Impact of mandatory helmet legislation on bicycle-related head injuries in children: a population-based study. Pediatrics. 2002;110:e60.The authors from Toronto, Canada, studied Canadian children with injuries related to bicycle crashes that led to hospitalization in fiscal years 1994–1998. They compared 4 provinces that have legislation requiring helmet use to provinces without legislation. Bicycle-related injuries were divided into those of the head versus injuries to “other” parts of the body using External Injury Codes (E codes) and International Classification of Disease Codes, Ninth Revision (ICD-9 codes) and calculated for the 2 groups.During the 4 years of study, 9,769 children were admitted to Canadian hospitals after bicycle crashes. Thirty-five percent of children sustained injuries to the head while 65% had injuries to other parts of the body. The head injury rate was similar in the 2 groups (no legislation provinces versus helmet legislation provinces) prior to enactment of helmet legislation. However, after enactment (data from provinces were combined for this study, irrespective of timing of legislation), there was a 45% decrease in head injuries in the provinces with legislation compared to a 27% decline in provinces without legislation (P=.001). Non-head injuries also declined over the 4 years of study, but did not differ significantly between provinces with and without helmet legislation. Fifty-eight children died from bike-related injuries. Death rates were consistently lower in provinces with helmet legislation compared to those without helmet laws.There are about 67 million bicycle riders in the United States,1 and about 900 are killed each year in crashes. About 800 of these deaths involve a crash with a car.2 Nonfatal injuries cause approximately 567,000 people to seek care in an emergency department and about two-thirds of these injuries occur in children and adolescents.2Head injuries are the most likely cause of severe injury in bicycle crashes and are present in about one-third of emergency department visits, two-thirds of hospital admissions and three-quarters of bicycle-related deaths.3 Use of helmets has been shown to reduce the risk of brain injury by 63–88% and injuries to the mid-face are reduced by about 65%.4 The above report, which demonstrates a decreased risk of head injuries in Canadian provinces requiring helmet use, supports these previous studies.The authors do not report information on what proportion of the children in each province actually wore helmets. Unfortunately, helmet use remains low in the US. About 25% of children 5–14 years of age wear a helmet when riding a bike and teenagers rarely use helmets.5 Reasons for non-use include fashion issues, discomfort, and lack of safety knowledge. Universal helmet use by children 4–15 years of age could prevent between 135 and 155 deaths and between 39,000 and 45,000 head injuries annually in the US. Every dollar spent on a bicycle helmet saves $30.00 in direct medical and other costs to society.6Prevention strategies for bicycle crash injuries include educational programs, helmet distribution, safe parks and roads, and legislation. However, legislation appears to be more cost-effective than educational programs.7 Pediatricians should continue to emphasize to parents that trauma is the number one killer of children over age 1 year and that simple safety practices such as helmet use while bike riding save lives and decrease morbidity. Furthermore, pediatricians and parents need to model behavior and use helmets when bike riding.

State level estimates of the incidence and economic burden of head injuries stemming from non-universal use of bicycle helmets

Objective: To develop national and state level estimates for preventable bicycle related head injuries (BRHIs) and associated direct and indirect health costs from the failure to use bicycle helmets. Methods:...