4.2 Article

Tram-track cycling injuries: a significant public health issue

Journal

IRISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s11845-022-03254-w

Keywords

Cyclists; Emergency Department; Injuries; Luas; Tram-tracks

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to describe the crash characteristics and associated injuries of cyclists whose bicycles got caught in tram tracks. The results show that 60% of cyclists sustained limb fractures, with 14% requiring orthopedic surgery. It was also found that 50% of patients were not wearing helmets at the time of the incident, and 54% of collisions occurred during rush hour in Dublin city center.
Aim Many cycling collisions occur due to human error, cycling ability, distraction or infrastructure. One such infrastructural issue for cyclists sharing the road with tram lines is where the wheel of the bicycle gets caught in the rail track itself or in a gap between the rail and the road margin resulting in a sudden stall of the bicycle and potentially significant injury. This study aims to describe the crash characteristics of tram-track cycling collisions and their associated injuries.Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted over 2 years, looking at cyclists that presented to St James's Emergency Department (ED) following injuries sustained due to a bicycle wheel catching in the on-road tram tracks.Results Forty-eight patients were identified over a 2-year period. Sixty per cent of cyclists sustained limb fractures with 14% requiring orthopaedic surgery. Fifty per cent of patients were not wearing a helmet at the time of the incident and 54% of the collisions occurred around Dublin city centre during rush hour.Conclusion Further prospective multi-centre studies are required to properly describe the magnitude cycling accidents around the Luas tracks and inform future public health measures in this area.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available