Bicycle helmets are protective against facial injuries, including facial fractures: a meta-analysis

Fitzpatrick, Dan; Goh, Mei; Howlett, D.C.; Williams, Marie

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2018.03.005

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…14 There is supportive evidence from published literature that facial injuries are prevented by wearing helmets. 13,15 A retrospective cohort study of about 7000 patients in Germany showed no reduction in facial injuries in helmet wearers and this is attributed to the design of the helmets which did not afford facial protection. 16 Recently, lightweight full face helmets have entered the market promising protection from facial trauma along with head injury (Figure 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cycling-Related Injuries During COVID-19 Lockdown: A North London Experience

Mumtaz

Cymerman

Komath

2021

Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: There has been a notable surge in cycling injuries during the COVID-19(SARS-CoV-2 virus) pandemic. Cycling in general increased during lockdown as a leisure & fitness activity along with reduction in the use of public transport for commuting. We investigated the bicycle-related maxillofacial injuries & associations presenting through our emergency department(ED) which covers more than 1.6 million of London population. Study Design/Methods: A retrospective observational study was undertaken in the Barnet General Hospital (“hub”) which receives all maxillofacial referrals from 6 “spoke” hospitals & other urgent primary/community care practices in North London area between 16 March 2020 & 16 July 2020. All data corresponding to cycling injuries during the lockdown period was analyzed with the aid of trauma database/trust-wide electronic patient records. Results: Twenty-two patients (6.7%) with cycling-related injuries out of a total of 322 patients who attended during the 4 months study period with maxillofacial emergencies were identified. Average age of patient cohort was 35.4 years, mainly consisting of adult males (77%). Seven patients had minor head injury and 1 patient suffered traumatic brain injury. About 59% patients did not wear a protective helmet & 3 patients had heavy alcohol/recreational drug intoxication during the accidents. Four patients needed inpatient admission and treatment under general anesthesia. Conclusions: Based on our humble study, we advocate the need for robust road & personal safety measures with mandatory government legislations, policing of drug intoxication & encouragement of physical & mental health improvement measures during these unprecedented times & beyond.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cycling-Related Injuries During COVID-19 Lockdown: A North London Experience

Mumtaz

Cymerman

Komath

2021

Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fitzpatrick et al . [ 31 ] also reported similar observation and suggested that helmet's anterior projection makes contact with the ground before the upper part of the face and also helps to reduce trauma to the midface.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Helmet shielding effect in mandibular fractures during road traffic accident

Singh

Kumar

Ganguly

et al. 2021

National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objectives of this study are to evaluate the proportion of helmeted and nonhelmeted patients sustaining mandibular fractures. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 200 patients reporting to oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) unit, trauma center, and department of OMFS. A predesigned questionnaire was used to collect the necessary data. Patients were evaluated for age, gender, mode of transport (2/4 wheeler), presence of safety measure at the time of accident (helmet/seatbelt), maxillofacial injury in two wheeler (with helmet and without helmet), type of impact, and its association to maxillofacial fractures, particularly site of maxillofacial fractures. The association between mode of injury, presence of safety measures, impact type, and site of maxillofacial injuries was assessed using the Chi-square test. P < 0.5 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean age of patients was 30 years, and approximately 92.5% of accidents patients were male. In this study, 35% nonhelmeted riders were reported head injury and 5% of the helmeted rider reported head injury. 54.5% of the patients suffered frontal impact, 28% collision, and 17.5% lateral slide collision. Head injuries are the main cause of death among the riders of all two wheelers. Lateral sliding collision injuries (17.5%) resulted 60.6% of the fractures mandible, 24.2% midface injury, and associated injury (15.15%). Conclusion: The use of helmet is strongly recommended to prevent head injuries and facial injuries. In the nonhelmeted riders in motorcycle accidents, the incidence of mandible fractures increases proportionally.

show abstract

“…Our findings are similar to those from previous studies that reported a decreased risk of facial injuries with helmet use. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19]22 The most recent meta-analysis in 2018 by Fitzpatrick et al 15 reported an odds reduction of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.63 to 0.75; P < .0001) for facial injuries among helmeted riders. Our study sample consisted of more helmeted than nonhelmeted riders compared with other study samples, which had included fewer helmeted riders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various studies have reported a preventative effect of helmet use to the lower face, a few studies have found no preventative effects, and still other studies have reported an increased risk of injury to the lower facial third with helmet use. 4,11,13,[15][16][17][18][19] Unlike American football, hockey, or lacrosse helmets, the standard bicycle helmet design does not include a face mask designed to protect the maxillofacial region. 5,19 As such, we hypothesized that the frequency of maxillofacial injuries for bicyclists who wear helmets would equal the frequency of maxillofacial injuries for the nonhelmet-wearing bicyclists.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Helmets Decrease Risk of Bicyclist-Related Maxillofacial Injuries But Not Severity

Dillon

Dodson

2019

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Given the increasing use of bicycles for local transportation and recreation, the purpose of the present study was to measure the effects of bicycle helmets on the frequency and severity of maxillofacial injuries. The specific aims were to measure and compare the frequencies and severity of maxillofacial injuries between injured bicyclists who had or had not worn helmets. Materials and Methods: We implemented a retrospective cohort study and enrolled a sample of bicyclists who had been injured from January 4, 2012 to March 31, 2018 and had presented to Harborview Medical Center for evaluation and treatment. The primary predictor variable was helmet use (yes vs no). The primary outcome variables were 1) the presence of a maxillofacial injury (yes vs no); and 2) injury severity, measured using the Face Abbreviated Injury Scale (FAIS). The other study variables were grouped into demographic or injury-related variables. The appropriate univariate, bivariate, and multivariate logistic regressions statistics were computed, and statistical significance was set at P < .05. Results: The sample included 1379 subjects, with a mean age of 39.6 AE 18.9 years (range, 1 to 91 years), and 78.4% were male. The frequency of facial injuries between the helmeted and nonhelmeted bicyclists was 17.3% and 30.6%, respectively (relative risk, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.5 to 0.7; P < .0001). The protective effect held after adjusting for age, gender, and alcohol exposure. The FAIS score between the helmeted and nonhelmeted riders was 1.8 AE 0.5 and 1.9 AE 0.6, respectively (P = .8). Conclusions: The helmeted bicyclists were 40% less likely to have a facial injury from bicycle accidents. For those cyclists with a facial injury, however, the injury severity was not different between the helmeted and nonhelmeted wearers. This might have been because, that unlike American football helmets, standard bicycle helmets do not include a face mask to protect the face.

show abstract

Bicycle helmets are protective against facial injuries, including facial fractures: a meta-analysis

Cited by 23 publications

References 23 publications

Cycling-Related Injuries During COVID-19 Lockdown: A North London Experience

Cycling-Related Injuries During COVID-19 Lockdown: A North London Experience

Helmet shielding effect in mandibular fractures during road traffic accident

Helmets Decrease Risk of Bicyclist-Related Maxillofacial Injuries But Not Severity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About