Free-Floating Bikeshare and Helmet Use in Seattle, WA

Social Disparities in Helmet Usage in Bicycle Accidents Involving Children

Background Bicycle helmet use has a known protective health benefit; yet, pediatric populations have suboptimal helmet rates, which increases the risk of severe injuries. It is imperative to have an updated assessment of behavioral social disparities and for providers to be aware of them to better counsel patients. The study objective was to identify social determinants correlated with helmet use in children involved in bicycle accidents. Based on previous literature, we hypothesized that higher socioeconomic status, female sex, and Caucasian race were associated with increased helmet use. Methods A retrospective case series of 140 pediatric cases of bicycle-related traumas assessing helmet status. Participants presented to the emergency room with injuries due to a bicycle-related trauma and were subsequently admitted to the University of North Carolina (UNC) Hospital System in Chapel Hill, North Carolina (NC), from June 2006 to May 2020. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved study comprised a retrospective chart review of 140 cases from the pediatric (<18 years of age) trauma database with coding indicating bicycle-related injury. Zip codes were used to approximate the median household income utilizing the Proximity One government database. The primary exposure was helmet status, which was determined from the electronic record chart review. The hypothesis was formulated before the start of the study. The main outcomes measured in the study included age, sex, race, helmet status, zip code, insurance status, injury types, and mortality. Results There were a total of 140 study participants, of which 35 were female and 105 were male. Males comprised 79.6% of the non-helmeted group, while females were in the minority in both helmet status groups, with 65.7% still being non-helmeted. Additionally, 51.9% of patients who were helmeted used private insurance, and 59.3% of those non-helmeted used public insurance. Of the 71 head injuries, 88.7% were non-helmeted. Principally, this study found that 80.7% of children involved in a bicycle-related accident were not helmeted.  Conclusions Despite NC legislation mandating that children under 16 years of age wear helmets while operating bicycles, many children injured in bicycle-related trauma are not complying with this requirement. This study demonstrates that specific populations have decreased rates of helmet usage and emphasize the continued need to monitor helmet behaviors.

Head protection in electric micromobility: A critical review, recommendations, and future trends

Traffic jams are a burden in urban areas, being time-consuming and contributing to stressful driving and CO₂ emissions. To implement the United Nations' 2030 agenda for sustainable development, governmental strategies aim to accelerate the shift to sustainable and smart mobility. Consequently, e-micromobility (EMM) appeared as a practical solution for short-distance commuters, and it is growing at upsetting rates thanks to the introduction of sharing services. In fact, urban mobility has drastically changed over the last decade, and electric mobility and micromobility changed the panorama in larger metropolises, given their accessibility, large availability, and the potential to be a time saver in short trips and a potentially sustainable alternative in particular scenarios. The downside of portable e-transportation is the rapid increase in injuries and fatalities. Focusing on standing e-scooters, head injuries are becoming one of the most common as shown by research conducted in different urban emergency departments, alongside bone fractures, skin abrasions, and lacerations. In this work, a comprehensive review is carried out focusing on head protection for EMM, mostly for e-scooters, and the respective target markets, safety measures, and existing regulations. In the end, a critical assessment is given with recommendations for legislators and future research. Users are mostly males from 18 to 40 years old, upper-to-middle income, with elevated levels of educational attainment. Their motivation to use e-scooters is mainly to replace short walking trips. EMM, in particular e-scooters, will continue to grow thanks to its potential to substitute other micromobility alternatives. The evolution of safety measures and regulations did not keep pace with such a drastic change in mobility trends. This is evident considering how some countries are struggling with vehicle categories and regulations for helmet use and testing. The lack of legal obligation to wear a helmet and the absence of an adequate and feasible concept of protective equipment for sharing services are the main barriers to helmet use among riders. Mitigation measures have been implemented by the EMM sharing companies to improve the safety of its users by checking if they wear helmets and by offering vehicle-integrated solutions.

Roadmap for free-floating bikeshare research and practice in North America

The deployment of smartphone-operated, non-station-based bicycle fleets ("dockless" or "free-floating" bikeshare) represents a new generation of bikesharing. Users locate bikes in these free-floating systems using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and lock bikes in place at their destinations. In this paper, we review current free-floating bikesharing systems in North America and discuss priorities for future research and practice. Since launching in 2017, free-floating bikeshare has expanded rapidly to encompass 200+ systems operating 40,000+ bikes within 150+ cities. In contrast with previous systems, free-floating systems operate almost exclusively using commercial "for-profit" models, amidst concerns of financial sustainability. Governance for these systems is in early stages and can include operating fees, fleet size caps, safety requirements, parking restrictions, data sharing, and equity obligations. We identify research and practice gaps within the themes of usage, equity, sharing resources, business model, and context. While some existing bikesharing literature translates to free-floating systems, novel topics arise due to the ubiquity, fluidity, and business models of these new systems. Systems have numerous obstacles to overcome for long-term sustainability, including barriers common to station-based systems: limited supportive infrastructure, equity, theft or vandalism, and funding. Other unique obstacles arise in free-floating bikeshare around parking, sidewalk right of ways, varied bicycle types, and data sharing. This review offers background in and critical reflection on the rapidly evolving free-floating bikeshare landscape, including priorities for future research and practice. If concerns can be overcome, free-floating bikeshare may provide unprecedented opportunities to bypass congested streets, encourage physical activity, and support urban sustainability.