Helmet Law Repeal Research Articles

Does the Repeal of Mandatory Motorcycle Safety Legislation Affect the Deaths of Motorcyclists? An Autopsy-Based Study Evaluating the Impact of Michigan's Universal Helmet Law Repeal on Immediately Fatal Motorcycle Crashes

Does the Repeal of Mandatory Motorcycle Safety Legislation Affect the Deaths of Motorcyclists? An Autopsy-Based Study Evaluating the Impact of Michigan's Universal Helmet Law Repeal on Immediately Fatal Motorcycle Crashes

The Effects of Motorcycle Helmet Legislation on Craniomaxillofacial Injuries.

Motorcycle helmet legislation has been a contentious topic for over a half-century. Benefits of helmet use in motorcycle trauma patients are well documented. In 2012, Michigan repealed its universal motorcycle helmet law in favor of a partial helmet law. The authors describe the early clinical effects on facial injuries throughout Michigan. Retrospective data from the Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Program trauma database were evaluated. Included were 4643 motorcycle trauma patients presenting to 29 Level I and II trauma centers throughout Michigan 3 years before and after the law repeal (2009 to 2014). Demographics, external cause of injury codes, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes, and injury details were gathered. The proportion of unhelmeted trauma patients increased from 20 percent to 44 percent. Compared with helmeted trauma patients, unhelmeted patients were nearly twice as likely to sustain craniomaxillofacial injuries (relative risk, 1.90), including fractures (relative risk, 2.02) and soft-tissue injuries (relative risk, 1.94). Unhelmeted patients had a lower Glasgow Coma Scale score and higher Injury Severity Scores. Patients presenting after helmet law repeal were more likely to sustain craniomaxillofacial injuries (relative risk, 1.46), including fractures (relative risk, 1.28) and soft-tissue injuries (relative risk, 1.56). No significant differences were observed for age, sex, Injury Severity Score, or Glasgow Coma Scale score (p > 0.05). This study highlights the significant negative impact of relaxed motorcycle helmet laws leading to an increase in craniomaxillofacial injuries. The authors urge state and national legislators to reestablish universal motorcycle helmet laws.

Effects of repealing the motorcycle helmet law in Michigan

BackgroundIn 2012, Michigan repealed its universal helmet law. Our study assessed the clinical impact of this repeal. MethodsOur trauma database was queried retrospectively for 2 motorcycle riding seasons before and 3 seasons after repeal. On-scene death data was obtained from the Medical Examiner. ResultsHelmet use in hospitalized patients decreased after the helmet law repeal. Non-helmeted patients had a significant increased rate of head injury. Non-helmeted patients were more likely to die during hospitalization. While, helmet use and drugs/alcohol status significantly affected the risk for head injury, only drug/alcohol had a significant effect on overall mortality. ConclusionsFollowing helmet law repeal, helmet use has decreased. Helmet status and drug/alcohol use was found to significantly increase risk of head injury. Although overall mortality was only affected by drug/alcohol use, non-helmeted patients did have a higher inpatient mortality. These findings deserve furthermore study and may provide a basis for reinstating the universal helmet law.

Repeal of the Michigan helmet law: the evolving clinical impact

BackgroundMichigan repealed a 35-year mandatory helmet law in April 2012. We examined the impact of this legislation on a level 1 trauma center. MethodsA retrospective cohort study comparing the 7-month period before and the 3 motorcycle seasons after the helmet law repeal. ResultsA total of 345 patients were included in the study. Nonhelmeted riders increased from 7% to 28% after the repeal. Nonhelmeted crash scene fatalities were higher after the repeal (14% vs 68%). The nonhelmeted cohort had significantly higher in-patient mortality (10% vs 3%), injury severity score (19 vs 14.5) and abbreviated injury scale head (2.2 vs 1.3). Non-helmeted riders also had increased alcohol use, intensive care unit length of stay and need for mechanical ventilation. The median hospital cost for the non-helmeted cohort was higher (P < .05). ConclusionsThe impact of the Michigan helmet law repeal continues to evolve. Three years after this legislative change, we are now observing increased injury severity score, higher in-patient mortality, and worse neurologic injury.

Repeal of the Michigan helmet law: early clinical impacts

BackgroundMichigan repealed a 35-year mandatory helmet law on April 13, 2012. We examined the early clinical impacts at a level 1 trauma center in West Michigan. MethodsRetrospective cohort study comparing outcomes among motorcycle crash victims in a 7-month period before and after the helmet law repeal. ResultsOne hundred ninety-two patients were included. After the repeal, nonhelmeted motorcyclists rose from 7% to 29% (P < .01). There was no difference in mortality rate after admission; however, crash scene fatalities increased significantly. Intensive care unit length of stay, mechanical ventilation time, and cost of stay were also higher in the nonhelmeted cohort (P < .05). ConclusionsOur study highlights the negative ramifications of repealing a mandatory helmet law. Motorcyclists not wearing helmets increased significantly in a short period of time. Nonhelmeted motorcyclists more frequently died on the scene, spent more time in the intensive care unit, required longer ventilator support, and had higher medical costs.

Relative Risk and Financial Analysis of Motorcycle-Related Facial Trauma Following the Mandatory Pennsylvania Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal: The Allegheny General Hospital Experience

The mandatory Pennsylvania Helmet Law was repealed in 2003 allowing individuals the freedom of choice not to wear a motorcycle helmet. The objective of this study was to examine the relative risk and provide a financial analysis of individuals who sustained facial trauma from a motorcycle accident.

Increased Fatalities After Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal: Is it All Because of Lack of Helmets?

During the last 10 years, the number of motorcycle riders in the United States has risen sharply. The corresponding increase in fatalities observed during this time may be because of the increase in riders, or because the number of states that mandate universal helmet use has decreased. We examined the effect of the repeal of Florida's helmet law in July 2000 to test the hypothesis that the increase in fatalities observed after repeal resulted from an increase in the number of motorcycle riders. We identified all motorcycle fatalities (N = 197) in Miami-Dade county for a 3.5-year period before repeal (prelaw), and a similar period after repeal (postlaw), using police crash reports and medical examiner records. We compared the number of fatalities, frequency of helmet use in fatal crashes, and number of registered motorcycles in the two time periods. There was a decrease in helmet use from 80% to 33%, and an increase in motorcycle fatalities after repeal: 72 to 125. However, repeal was also associated with a rise in annual motorcycle registrations from 17,270 to 39,043. Fatality rates adjusted for numbers of registered motorcycles did not change significantly; 11.6 deaths per 10,000 motorcycles prelaw, and 12.5 deaths postlaw. There was a significant rise in motorcycle fatalities after Florida's helmet law repeal, which appears to be associated with an increase in the number of motorcycle riders. Injury prevention efforts focusing on factors other than helmet use should be developed in light of continuing repeal of universal motorcycle helmet laws across the nation.

Commentary: Motorcycle helmet law repeal: When will we learn … or truly care to tearn?

Commentary: Motorcycle helmet law repeal: When will we learn … or truly care to tearn?

Trends in Arkansas Motorcycle Trauma After Helmet Law Repeal

This study aimed to assess the impact of the 1997 Arkansas helmet law repeal on motorcycle registrations, crash and fatality risks, and alcohol involvement in motorcycle crashes. Annual motorcycle registration data for the years 1990 through 2001 were obtained from the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration. These motorcycle registration data were complemented by the motorcycle crash data from the Arkansas State Police Highway Safety Office and motorcycle fatality data for the state of Arkansas from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System. The impact of the repeal on crash rates, helmet usage, and alcohol involvement was assessed through comparisons of data from before (1993 to 1996) and after (1998 to 2001) the repeal. After the repeal, an increase in motorcycle registrations correlated with a marked rise in the total number of crashes and fatalities; however, fatalities per crash remained virtually the same. The proportion of motorcycle fatalities that were not wearing a helmet increased from 47.0% (47/100) before the repeal to 78.2% (104/133) after the repeal (P = 0.001). The overall percentage of fatal motorcycle crashes involving alcohol use remained unchanged after the repeal (37.6% [29/77] to 38.5% [40/104], P = 0.91), but the percentage of fatal crashes involving drinking nonhelmeted drivers increased from 14.2% (11/77) to 33.6% (35/104) (P = 0.003). Inebriated motorcyclists killed in crashes were overwhelmingly non-helmeted (87.5%, 35/40) after the repeal, up from 37.9% (11/29) before the repeal (P < 0.001). These findings suggest that the repeal of the mandatory helmet law in Arkansas has had a significant adverse effect on road safety.

Alcohol, Motorcycle Fatalities, and the Arkansas Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal

Alcohol, Motorcycle Fatalities, and the Arkansas Motorcycle Helmet Law Repeal

Florida's motorcycle helmet law repeal and fatality rates.

On July 1 2000, the State of Florida exempted adult motorcyclist and moped riders from wearing helmets provided they have medical insurance of 10,000 US dollars. Monthly time series of motorcycle occupant deaths are examined from 1/1994 to 12/2001. The interrupted time series analysis estimates a 48.6% increase in motorcycle occupant deaths the year after the law change. The impact estimate reduces to 38.2% and 21.3% when trends in travel miles and motorcycle registrations are controlled. Our findings suggest that the law's age exemption should be revoked.

Motorcycle Helmet Laws: A Case Study of Consumer Protection

This study examines the losses to society from federal legislation in 1976 on state motorcycle helmet laws. Two major responses were (1) repeal of helmet laws or failure to enact laws and (2) modification of helmet laws. Losses ranged from $75 million to $244 million for states without helmet laws and from $71 million to $229 million for states with modified helmet laws. Comprehensive state helmet laws would have been cost effective with cost‐benefit ratios ranging from 0.05 to 0.18. The fact that thirty‐one states did not have comprehensive helmet laws in 1981 raises questions concerning the degree that society should intervene on behalf of consumers.

Behavioral response to safety regulation

The effectiveness of safety regulation can be enhanced or offset by various forms of behavioral feedback. This study provides estimates of the effectiveness of motorcycle helmet laws in reducing fatalities based on pooled time-series and cross-sectional data for the United States during the years 1975 to 1984. Estimates from the model suggest that the presence of a helmet-wearing law induces a 12 to 22 percent decline in the motorcycle mortality problem. The results are consistent with the view that helmet laws are an effective public health policy, at least in the short run. However, there is also some evidence of gradual “risk-compensation” behavior: The immediate rise in fatalities following repeal of helmet laws appears to dissipate gradually at a rate of roughly 2.5 percent per year. This result suggests that future studies of safety regulation should consider longrun as well shortrun behavioral responses.

Motorcycle helmet use in relation to legal requirements

Helmet use by motorcyclists was observed in late 1978 in cities in six U.S. states with varying legal requirements regarding their use. In two cities (Baltimore, Maryland and Miami, Florida) in which all motorcyclists are legally required to wear helmets, virtually all wore helmets. In three cities (New Orleans, Louisiana, Phoenix, Arizona and Houston, Texas) where helmet use laws requiring use by all motorcyclists were changed in 1976 or 1977 so that use is required only by those less than 18 years old, wearing rates were 39, 46 and 63%, respectively. In Los Angeles, California, which has never had a law requiring helmet use, 46% wore helmets. Based on these survey results, and on the known efficacy of helmets in reducing injuries to motorcyclists, the repeal of helmet laws that occurred in 26 states in 1976–1978 can be expected to result in major increases in motorcyclist deaths in succeeding years.