4.5 Review

Injuries associated with hoverboard use: A review of the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE
卷 37, 期 3, 页码 472-477

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2018.06.022

关键词

Hoverboard; NEISS; Injury

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Hoverboards have become popular since they became available in 2015. We seek to provide an estimate of the number of injuries in the United States for 2015 and 2016, and to evaluate differences between adult and pediatric injury complexes. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016. Using the weighted design of the NEISS, a nationally representative sample could be determined. Results: During the 2 year period, there were 24,650 hoverboard related injuries (95% confidence interval [Cl], 17,635-31,664) in the US. The average age was 20.9 years old. There were 15,134 pediatric injuries (95% CI 9980-20,287) and 9515 adult injuries (95% CI 7185-11,845). Female patients compromised 51.2% of the sample. The upper extremity was the most common region injured [13,080 (95% CI 8848-17,311)] and fracture was the most common type of injury [10,074 (95% CI 6934-13,213)]. Hoverboard injuries increased from 2416 (95% CL 575-4245) in 2015 to 22,234 (95% CI 16,446-28,020) in 2016. Pediatric patients were more likely to be injured in the upper and lower extremity when compared to their adult cohort (p = 0.0031). Six percent of the cohort [1575 (95% CI 665-2485)] sustained critical injuries with pediatric patients being at 1.46 times higher risk for life threatening injuries. Conclusion: Emergency department (ED) visits for hoverboard related injuries appear to be increasing. Pediatric patients are more at risk for hoverboard related injuries than adults and almost 6% of ED visits involved critical injuries, highlighting that hoverboards may be more dangerous than previously recognized. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据