Association Between Conventional Bicycle Helmet Use and Facial Injuries After Bicycle Crashes

Bicycle-related accidents in Rome: Investigating clinical patterns, demographics, injury contexts, and health outcomes for enhanced public safety

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to analyze the clinical characteristics, demographic features, and injury circumstances of patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED) at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli (IRCCS) in Rome, Italy, due to bicycle accidents.

METHODS

Data on clinical characteristics, accident timing, injury circumstances, and helmet use were collected for ED patients involved in bicycle accidents from January 2019 to December 2022. Subsequently, Abbreviated Injury Scale codes of all diagnoses were recorded and the Injury Severity Score was calculated.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 763 patients were admitted to the ED following bicycle accidents, with a 0.3 % fatality rate and a 30.4 % frequency of multitrauma. Multivariate analysis revealed that collisions with other vehicles increased trauma severity and the risk of ICU admission. Conversely, helmet use was associated with reduced severity of head trauma and a lower likelihood of ICU admission. Notably, toxicological investigations were not conducted for any ED-admitted patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a low mortality rate and a low incidence of multi-trauma have been shown in comparison to other nations, it is necessary to adopt prevention strategies like safety devices, more cycle paths, and better infrastructures on the one hand, and stricter laws on the other. It is essential to require toxicological testing in Italy for all accidents involving this means of transport, and to make helmet use compulsory for all ages.

Effect of helmet use on maxillofacial injuries due to bicycle and scooter accidents: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Maxillofacial injury is a common injury resulting from bicycle (including e-bike) and scooter accidents. With 80,000 admissions to emergency departments in 2019, bicycle accidents account for more than half of all traffic-related emergency department visits in the Netherlands. The United States reports approximately 130,000 injuries and 1000 fatalities related to cycling annually. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to examine the protective effect of helmets against maxillofacial injuries resulting from bicycle and scooter (including e-bike and e-scooter) accidents. After a systematic literature search, 14 studies were found to be eligible for this systematic review. Of these, 11 were included in the meta-analysis. None of the included studies focused on vehicles with motors (e-bikes and e-scooters); all focused only on non-motorized vehicles. All included studies were non-randomized, which could have led to bias in the pooled results. Data from the included studies were tested for heterogeneity using the binary random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird method), and the odds ratio for the occurrence of maxillofacial injury in cyclists wearing a helmet versus those not wearing a helmet was calculated by random-effects meta-analysis. Patients who had worn a helmet suffered significantly fewer maxillofacial injuries than patients who had not, in bicycle accidents (odds ratio 0.682). In conclusion, wearing a helmet has a significant protective effect against maxillofacial injury, indicating the need for strict helmet legislation.

Evaluation of full-face, open-face, and airbag-equipped helmets for facial impact protection

OBJECTIVE

Two-wheeler riders frequently sustain injuries to the head and face in real-world crashes, including traumatic brain injury, basilar skull fracture, and facial fracture. Different types of helmets exist today, which are recognized as preventing head injuries in general; however, their efficacy and limitations in facial impact protection are underexplored. Biofidelic surrogate test devices and assessment criteria are lacking in current helmet standards. This study addresses these gaps by applying a new, more biofidelic test method to evaluate conventional full-face helmets and a novel airbag-equipped helmet design. Ultimately, this study aims to contribute to better helmet design and testing standards.

METHODS

Facial impact tests at two locations, mid-face and lower face, were conducted with a complete THOR dummy. Forces applied to the face and at the junction of the head and neck were measured. Brain strain was predicted by a finite element head model taking both linear and rotational head kinematics as input. Four helmet types were evaluated: full-face motorcycle and bike helmets, a novel design called a face airbag (an inflatable structure integrated into an open-face motorcycle helmet), and an open-face motorcycle helmet. The unpaired, two-sided student's t-test was performed between the open-face helmet and the others, which featured face-protective designs.

RESULTS

A substantial reduction in brain strain and facial forces was found with the full-face motorcycle helmet and face airbag. Upper neck tensile forces increased slightly with both full-face motorcycle (14.4%, p >.05) and bike helmets (21.7%, p =.039). The full-face bike helmet reduced the brain strain and facial forces for lower-face impacts, but not for mid-face impacts. The motorcycle helmet reduced mid-face impact forces while slightly increasing forces in the lower face.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The chin guards of full-face helmets and the face airbag protect by reducing facial load and brain strain for lower face impact; however, the full-face helmets' influence on neck tension and increased risk for basilar skull fracture need further investigation. The motorcycle helmet's visor re-directed mid-face impact forces to the forehead and lower face via the helmet's upper rim and chin guard: a thus-far undescribed protective mechanism. Given the significance of the visor for facial protection, an impact test procedure should be included in helmet standards, and the use of helmet visors promoted. A simplified, yet biofidelic, facial impact test method should be included in future helmet standards to ensure a minimum level of protection performance.

Head-ground impact conditions and helmet performance in E-scooter falls

OBJECTIVE

Head injuries are common injuries in E-scooter accidents which have dramatically increased in recent years. The head impact conditions and helmet performance during E-scooter accidents are barely investigated. This study aims to characterize the head-ground impact biomechanics and evaluate bicycle helmet protection in typical E-scooter falls.

METHOD

The finite element (FE) model of a hybrid III dummy riding an E-scooter was developed and validated. The FE model with and without a bicycle helmet was used to reproduce twenty-seven E-scooter falls caused by the collision with a curb, in which different riding speeds (10, 20, and 30 km/h), curb orientations (30, 60, and 90°), and E-scooter orientations (-15, 0, and 15°) were simulated. Head-ground impact velocities and locations were evaluated for the unhelmeted configurations while the helmet performance was evaluated with the reduction of head injury metrics.

RESULTS

E-scooter falls always resulted in an oblique head-ground impact, with 78 % on the forehead. The mean vertical and tangential head-ground impact velocities were respectively 5.7 ± 1.5 m/s and 3.7 ± 2.0 m/s. The helmet significantly (p < 0.1) reduced the head linear acceleration, angular velocity, HIC_36, and BrIC, but not the angular acceleration. However, even with the helmet, the head injury metrics were mostly above the thresholds of severe head injuries.

CONCLUSION

Typical E-scooter falls might cause severe head injuries. The bicycle helmet was efficient to reduce head injury metrics but not to prevent severe head injuries. Future helmet standard evaluations should involve higher impact energy and the angular acceleration assessment in oblique impacts.

Patterns of maxillofacial trauma in helmet vs. non helmet wearing two wheeler drivers in a tertiary care center

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The frequency and patterns of maxillofacial fractures vary by country, based on demographic, socioeconomic, cultural and environmental factors. Wearing a helmet is an efficient form of head protection for two-wheeler drivers and is now required in the vast majority of countries. The aim of this study was to compare the patterns of maxillofacial trauma in patients who wore helmets and those who did not.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data were gathered from clinical records of patients presenting with maxillofacial trauma between January 2019 and February 2022. The inclusion criteria were met by subjects involved in two-wheeler accidents with comprehensive case records and radiological investigations.

RESULTS

A total of 177 people presented following maxillofacial trauma. The mean age was 34.2 ± 12.7 years. There were 151 (85.3%) males and 26 (14.6%) females. One hundred and two patients had not been wearing a helmet, while 75 patients were wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. Mandible fractures were the most common injury in both groups, followed by zygomatic arch fractures (which were more common in non-helmet users) and dentoalveolar fractures in helmet users.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant difference in the pattern and severity of maxillofacial trauma in helmet users and non-helmet users.

Anatomical distribution of mandibular fractures from severe bicycling accidents: A 12-year experience from a Norwegian level 1 trauma center

Background/Aim

The mandible makes up a substantial part of the lower face, and is susceptible to injury. Even in helmeted cyclists, accidents may lead to fractures of the mandible because conventional helmets provide little protection to the lower part of the face. In addition, some studies indicate that helmets may lead to an increased risk of mandibular fractures. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the anatomic distribution of mandibular fractures in injured cyclists and to assess if helmet use influenced the fracture locations.

Material and Methods

Data from a Norwegian Level 1 trauma center were collected in the Oslo University Hospital Trauma Registry over a 12‐year period. Of 1543 injured cyclists, the electronic patient charts of 62 cyclists with fractures of the mandible were retrospectively evaluated in detail. Demographic data, helmet use, and fracture type were assessed.

Results

Sixty‐two patients (4%) had fractures of the mandible, and women had an increased risk (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.49–4.16, p < .001). The most common fracture site was the mandibular body, followed by the condyle. Isolated mandibular fractures occurred in 45% of the patients and 55% had other concomitant facial fractures. There were 42% of the patients with fractures in multiple sites of the mandible, and 42% had a concomitant dentoalveolar injury. Half of the cyclists were wearing a helmet at the time of the accident and 39% were not. There was no significant difference in fracture distribution between the helmeted and non‐helmeted groups.

Conclusions

Fracture of the mandibular body was the most prevalent mandibular fracture type following bicycle accidents. Women had an increased risk of mandibular fractures compared with men, whereas helmet wearing did not affect the anatomical fracture site.

Effect of Delay of Care for Patients with Craniomaxillofacial Trauma in Rwanda

Objectives

Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) trauma represents a significant proportion of global surgical disease burden, disproportionally affecting low- and middle-income countries where care is often delayed. We investigated risk factors for delays to care for patients with CMF trauma presenting to the highest-volume trauma hospital in Rwanda and the impact on complication rates.

Study Design

This prospective cohort study comprised all patients with CMF trauma presenting to the University Teaching Hospital of Kigali, Rwanda, between June 1 and October 1, 2020.

Setting

Urban referral center in resource-limited setting.

Methods

Epidemiologic data were collected, and logistic regression analysis was undertaken to explore risk factors for delays in care and complications.

Results

Fifty-four patients (94.4% men) met criteria for inclusion. The mean age was 30 years. A majority of patients presented from a rural setting (n = 34, 63%); the most common cause of trauma was motor vehicle accident (n = 18, 33%); and the most common injury was mandibular fracture (n = 28, 35%). An overall 78% of patients had delayed treatment of the fracture after arrival to the hospital, and 81% of these patients experienced a complication (n = 34, P = .03). Delay in treatment was associated with 4-times greater likelihood of complication (odds ratio, 4.25 [95% CI, 1.08-16.70]; P = .038).

Conclusion

Delay in treatment of CMF traumatic injuries correlates with higher rates of complications. Delays most commonly resulted from a lack of surgeon and/or operating room availability or were related to transfers from rural districts. Expansion of the CMF trauma surgical workforce, increased operative capacity, and coordinated transfer care efforts may improve trauma care.

The Association of Helmet Use with the Occurrence of Maxillofacial Injuries Following Bicycle or Scooter Accidents: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Study Design

Retrospective Cohort Study.

Objective

Yearly, bicycle and scooter accidents in the Netherlands amount to 90 thousand emergency department visits. Maxillofacial injuries are common after cycling or scooter accidents. To prevent these injuries, helmet use might be beneficial. However, the effect of helmet use on maxillofacial injuries remains unclear. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the effect of helmet use on maxillofacial injuries in patients who had a bicycle or scooter accident.

Methods

We collected data from the emergency department of the Erasmus Medical Center in the period from October 2017 to October 2019. Patients that were involved in a bicycle or scooter accident and subsequently received a CT scan of the head were included. We compared the incidence of maxillofacial injuries in helmeted cyclists and scooter users to non-helmeted users. Descriptive and analytic statistics were computed. Level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Helmet use among scooter users was associated with a significant reduction in maxillofacial fractures (p < 0.001) and soft tissue injuries (p < 0.001). Helmet use among cyclists was not associated with a reduction in maxillofacial fractures (p = 0.17) or soft tissue injuries (p = 0.30). Helmet use was not associated with a reduction in soft tissue injuries of the lower face in both cyclists (p = 0.47) and scooter users (p = 0.24).

Conclusions

Helmet use should be considered among cyclists and scooter users to prevent maxillofacial injuries. Especially unhelmeted scooter users might benefit from helmet use as this is associated with a lower incidence of maxillofacial injuries.

Alcohol and Drug Use While Cycling Significantly Increases the Likelihood of Facial Fractures

PURPOSE

Substance use, including alcohol and drugs, has been found to amplify the risks associated with cycling. Our purpose was to determine the relationship between alcohol or drug use and facial injuries in a nationwide population of patients experiencing cycling trauma.

METHODS

The authors report a cross-sectional study of patients reported to the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019, in the United States. Patients were included in our study if they were evaluated in the emergency department for a cycling-related injury. Primary outcome was facial injury.

RESULTS

There were a total of 6499 adult patients who experience an injury after cycling trauma reported by the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-participating emergency departments during the study period. A total of 553 (553/6499; 8.5%) patients had a facial injury and 82 patients with facial injuries had alcohol/drug use recorded (82/553; 14.8%). The proportion of males with facial injuries was higher in the alcohol/drug group than the no alcohol/drug group (86.6% versus 76.4%, respectively; P = 0.04). Injured cyclists in the alcohol/drug group experienced greater odds of sustaining a facial injury (odds ratio: 2.21, 95% confidence interval: 1.71-2.84, P < 0.0001) and a facial fracture (odds ratio: 2.75, 95% confidence interval: 1.83-4.13, P < 0.0001) than injured cyclists in the no alcohol/drug group.

CONCLUSIONS

Substance use while cycling is not safe and significantly increases the likelihood of a facial injury and of facial fractures. This prevalence of injuries would suggest that cycling under the influence should always be illegal, and the law strictly enforced.

Facial Injuries Due to Cycling are Prevalent: Improved Helmet Design Offering Facial Protection is Recommended

PURPOSE

Safety equipment for recreational cycling is commonly designed to protect the calvarium, but not the face, in the event of a crash. The purpose of this study is to identify the prevalence of facial injuries and their most common subcategories due to cycling injuries and to serve as an anatomical guide of what facial structures most need protection.

METHODS

We report a cross-sectional study of consecutive patients reported to the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019. Patients were included in our study if they were evaluated in the emergency department (ED) for an injury due to cycling trauma. Primary outcome was injury to the face. Other variables of interest include age, sex, race, ED disposition, type of facial injury, location of facial injury, and presence of additional injuries. Descriptive and univariate statistics of the primary outcome were computed with these variables.

RESULTS

There were 138,078 total patients injured due to cycling trauma reported by National Electronic Injury Surveillance System -participating EDs during the study period and, of those, 14,326 patients experienced injury to the face, revealing a 10.4% prevalence of facial injury due to cycling trauma (14,326/138,078). Thirteen percent (1,987/14,326) of facial injuries were fractures, and the most involved structures were the nose (786/1987; 40%), orbit (459/1987; 23%), and mandible (405/1987; 20%). Compared to children, adults demonstrate a greater risk of facial fracture (23.5% versus 6.5%, P < .0001) and hospital admission after facial injury (8.9 vs 2.8%, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of facial injury in the setting of cycling trauma is over 10%, and 13% of these injuries were facial fractures. With this high prevalence, there is a need for cycling helmets that include facial protection or faceguards, and we outline the commonly fractured anatomical areas that need the most protection.

Associated Injuries Are Common Among Patients With Bicycle-Related Craniofacial Fractures

PURPOSE

Ample evidence exists on the relationship between bicycle injuries and craniofacial fractures. However, as the mechanism behind these injuries is often multifactorial, the presence of associated injuries (AIs) in this study population requires further examination. We hypothesized that patients with craniofacial fracture injured in bicycle accidents are at high risk of sustaining severe AIs, especially those of the head and neck region.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The investigators performed a retrospective study on all patients with bicycle-related craniofacial fracture admitted to a tertiary trauma centre during 2013 to 2018. The predictor variable was defined as any type of craniofacial fracture. The outcome variable was defined as any kind of AI. Other study variables included demographic and injury-related parameters. Variables were analyzed using bivariate and Firth's logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 407 patients were included in the analysis. Our results revealed that AIs were present in 150 (36.9%) patients; there were multiple AIs in 47 cases. Traumatic brain injuries followed by upper limb injuries were the most frequent AIs. Severe head and neck injuries were present in 20.1% of all patients with craniofacial fracture. AIs were observed in 57.4% of patients with combined midfacial fractures (P < .001). Helmet use had a protective effect against traumatic brain injuries (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that AIs are relatively common in this specific patient population. Close co-operation in multidisciplinary trauma centers allowing comprehensive evaluation and treatment can be recommended for patients with bicycle-related craniofacial fracture.

Dentoalveolar injuries, bicycling accidents and helmet use in patients referred to a Norwegian Trauma Centre: A 12-year prospective study

BACKGROUND/AIM

Despite its many benefits, bicycling carries the risk of accidents. Although numerous studies have reported the effect of helmet use on traumatic brain injury, it remains unclear if, and to what extent, helmet use reduces the risk of facial injuries. This is particularly true in regard to injuries of the lower face. In addition, there is limited evidence of the effect of helmet use on dentoalveolar injuries. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the frequency and distribution of dentoalveolar injuries in bicycling accidents and to explore the influence of helmet use.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 1543 bicyclists were included from the trauma registry of a Norwegian tertiary trauma center over a 12-year period. Data were collected prospectively, including patient characteristics, type of injury, and helmet use. The prevalence of dentoalveolar injuries was assessed in conjunction with helmet use and facial fractures.

RESULTS

Twenty-five percent of the patients had maxillofacial injuries, and 18% of those with facial fractures exhibited concomitant dentoalveolar injuries. The most common type of dentoalveolar injury was tooth fracture (39%). The most frequent location of facial fractures with combined dentoalveolar injuries was the maxilla, which had fractured in 32 patients. Women had a higher risk of sustaining dentoalveolar injuries compared to men (odds ratio 1.50, 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.22). There were 1257 patients (81%) who had reliable registration of helmet use; 54% of these wore a helmet, while 46% did not. Helmet users had an increased risk of dentoalveolar injuries compared to non-helmeted bicyclists (adjusted odds ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Dentoalveolar injuries are fairly common in trauma patients admitted to a trauma center following bicycling accidents. Bicycling helmets are associated with an increased risk of dentoalveolar injuries.

Helmet Usage Reduces Serious Head Injury Without Decreasing Concussion After Bicycle Riders Crash

BACKGROUND

The importance of bicycle helmets in reducing injuries is unclear. Our center receives a disproportionate number of bicycle crash victims. We sought to evaluate the types of injuries observed and the role of helmets in reducing head injuries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated demographic data and compared injuries between bicycle riders that crashed with and without helmets over a 9-year period. Categorical variables were compared using linear regression methods and nominal variables using ANOVA. Differences were considered significant for P ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

There were 906 patients evaluated, 701 with helmets (77%) and 205 (23%) without helmets. The mean Injury Severity Score was 9.3 ± 6.4. The most common injuries were concussion (n = 385), rib fractures (n = 154), clavicle fractures (n = 139), facial fractures (n = 102), and cervical spine fractures (n = 89). There was no significant difference in the number of patients with a concussion in riders with or without helmets, [299/701, 42.6% versus 86/205, 42.0%, respectively, (P = NS)]. In helmet versus no helmet riders, there were significantly fewer patients with facial fractures, [67/701, 9.5%, versus 35/205, 17.0%, respectively, (P = 0.003)], skull fractures [8/701, 1.1% versus 9/205, 4.4%, respectively, (P = 0.003)], and serious head injuries [6/701, 0.85% versus 8/205, 3.9%, respectively, (P = 0.002)].

CONCLUSIONS

Helmeted patients involved in bicycle crashes are less likely to sustain a serious head injury, a skull fracture, or facial fractures compared to riders without helmets. The most common injury in patients with a bicycle crash is a concussion. Helmets did not prevent concussion after bicycle rider's crash in our patient population.

Facing Facts: Facial Injuries from Stand-up Electric Scooters

Background

Stand-up electric scooters (SES) are a popular public transportation method. Numerous safety concerns have arisen since their recent introduction.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed to identify patients presenting to the emergency departments in Indianapolis, who sustained SES-related injuries.

Results

A total of 89 patients were included in our study. The average patient age was 29 ± 12.9 years in a predominantly male cohort (65.2%). No patient was documented as wearing a helmet during the event of injury. Alcohol intoxication was noted in 14.6% of accidents. Falling constituted the leading trauma mechanism (46.1%). Injuries were most common on Saturday (24.7%) from 14h00 to 21h59 (55.1%). Injury types included: abrasions/contusions (33.7%), fractures (31.5%), lacerations (27.0%), or joint injuries (18.0%). The head and neck region (H&N) was the most frequently affected site (42.7%). Operative management under general anesthesia was necessary for 13.5% of injuries. Nonoperative management primarily included conservative orthopedic care (34.8%), pain management with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (34.8%) and/or opioids (4.5%), bedside laceration repairs (27.0%), and wound dressing (10.1%). Individuals sustaining head and neck injuries were more likely to be older (33.8 vs. 25.7 years, p=0.003), intoxicated by alcohol (29.0% vs. 3.9%, p=0.002), and requiring CT imaging (60.5% vs. 9.8%, p <0.001).

Conclusion

Although SESs provide a convenient transportation modality, unregulated use raises significant safety concerns. More data need to be collected to guide future safety regulations.