National studies from the Netherlands and Finland and the impact of regulations on incidences of fireworks-related eye injuries

Faber, Jan Tjeerd de; Kivelä, Tero; Gabel-Pfisterer, Ameli

doi:10.1007/s00347-019-00996-4

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This likely led to an under representation of the patients with severe eye injuries. Data of these patients treated at this specialized eye hospital were recently published [21]. Furthermore, because of the retrospective design of this study, some data were not registered in patients' medical records, such as the type of fireworks.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Injuries, treatment, and impairment caused by different types of fireworks; results of a 10 year multicenter retrospective cohort study

Yperen

Lieshout

Dijkshoorn

et al. 2021

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the number of patients reported to a hospital with injuries from consumer fireworks in the months December–January in the past 10 years, and to describe the association between the type of fireworks, injury pattern, treatment, and permanent impairment. Methods A multicenter, retrospective, observational case series. Patients were selected from two hospitals in the Southwest Netherlands: a level 1 trauma center and a specialized burn center. All patients with any fireworks-related injuries treated between December 1 and January 31, during 2007 (December) to 2017 (January), were eligible for participation. The primary outcome was the number of patients with any type of injury caused by fireworks. The secondary outcome measures were patient and injury characteristics, treatment details, and whole person impairment (WPI). The percentage WPI expresses a patient’s degree of permanent impairments as a result of fireworks-related injuries. Results Of the 297 eligible patients, 272 patients were included. From 2007 to 2017, between 21 and 40 patients were treated, and no clear increase or decrease was observed in the number of patients and in the number of patients per type of fireworks. Explosive fireworks mainly caused upper extremity (N = 65; 68%) injuries, while rockets (N = 24; 41%) and aerials (N = 7; 41%) mainly affected the head/neck. Decorative fireworks predominantly resulted in burns (N = 82; 68%), and explosive fireworks in soft tissue lacerations (N = 24; 25%), fractures (N = 16; 17%), and amputations (N = 14; 15%). Patients injured by explosive and homemade fireworks were most often admitted to a hospital (respectively N = 24; 36% and N = 12; 80%), and resulted in the highest proportion undergoing surgical procedures (respectively N = 22; 33% and N = 7; 47%). WPI found in this study was between 0 to 95%, with a median of 0%. In 34 (14%) patients, the injuries resulted in a WPI of ≥1%, mostly as a result of explosive fireworks (N = 18; 53%). Conclusion This study found no increase or decrease in the number of patients treated in two specialized hospitals. Explosive and homemade fireworks could be considered as most dangerous, as they result into the most hospital admissions, surgical procedures, and into the most injuries with permanent impairment as a result.

show abstract

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Injuries, treatment, and impairment caused by different types of fireworks; results of a 10 year multicenter retrospective cohort study

Yperen

Lieshout

Dijkshoorn

et al. 2021

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Male may exhibit riskier behaviours when using fireworks, and public health efforts can be targeted to this specific group. Additionally, bystanders made up about one-quarter of FRI in Hawaii, suggesting that safety interventions should be applied to both firework users and spectators; even higher proportions of bystanders were reported from European studies 15 16…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are also few studies on this topic from other countries. A study from the Netherlands and Finland found that the incidence of FRI was approximately halved in association with increased regulations and public safety campaigns 16. Safety measures included limiting firework use to 8 hours, advocating for the use of safety glasses and preventing those younger than 18 years of age from accessing fireworks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decrease in injuries from fireworks in Hawaii: associations with a county policy to limit access

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo examine trends in fireworks-related injuries (FRI) before and after enactment of an ordinance to limit access in the City and County of Honolulu (the island of Oahu).MethodsSurveillance of FRI treated in all emergency departments in the state, for 18 new year’s periods (31 December through 1 January) from 2004 to 2021. Prelaw (2004 to 2011) and postlaw (2012 to 2021) number of FRI were compared, by patient age and county.ResultsThe average annual number of FRI for all ages decreased significantly in Oahu, from 74 during the prelaw period to 27 during the postlaw period (p<0.01), but not in the remaining neighbour islands (p=0.07). Decreases were particularly evident for Oahu paediatric patients (under 18 years), among whom FRI declined from 42 to 10 per year (p<0.01). FRI were approximately halved for older Oahu patients and neighbour island paediatric patients.ConclusionsLegislation requiring permits for a specified number and type of fireworks, and limiting access to persons 18 years and older was associated with significant decreases in FRI in the City and County of Honolulu.

show abstract

“…Daher waren Patienten mit schweren Augenverletzungen wahrscheinlich unterrepräsentiert. Die Daten der in dieser spezialisierten Augenklinik behandelten Patienten wurden kürzlich veröffentlicht [21]. Wegen des retrospektiven Studiendesigns waren zudem manche Daten wie beispielsweise die Art der Feuerwerkskörper nicht in den Krankenakten der Patienten erfasst worden.…”

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Verletzungen, Behandlung und bleibende Schäden durch verschiedene Arten von Feuerwerkskörpern; Ergebnisse einer 10-jährigen multizentrischen retrospektiven Kohortenstudie

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ziele: Primäres Ziel der vorliegenden Studie war die Ermittlung der Zahl der Patienten, die während der vorangegangenen zehn Jahre in den Monaten Dezember und Januar mit Verletzungen durch Feuerwerkskörper ins Krankenhaus eingeliefert wurden; außerdem sollte der Zusammenhang zwischen der Art der Feuerwerkskörper, dem Verletzungsmuster, der Behandlung und den bleibenden Schäden beschrieben werden. Methoden: Bei der vorliegenden Untersuchung handelt sich um eine multizentrische, retrospektive Beobachtungs-Fallserie. Die Patienten stammten aus zwei Krankenhäusern im Südwesten der Niederlande: einem Level-1-Traumazentrum und einer Spezialklinik für Brandverletzungen. Alle Patienten mit Verletzungen durch Feuerwerkskörper, die in den Jahren 2007 (Dezember) bis 2017 (Januar) zwischen dem 1. Dezember und dem 31. Januar behandelt worden waren, kamen für die Teilnahme in Frage. Primäres Zielkriterium war die Anzahl der Patienten mit einer durch Feuerwerkskörper verursachten Verletzung. Sekundäre Zielkriterien waren die Patientenmerkmale und Verletzungscharakteristika, die Behandlungsdetails und die Schädigungsfolgen (whole person impairment, WPI). Der Grad der Schädigungsfolgen in Prozent drückt den Grad der dauerhaften Beeinträchtigung eines Patienten infolge von Verletzungen durch Feuerwerkskörper aus. Ergebnisse: Von 297 in Frage kommenden Patienten wurden 272 in die Studie eingeschlossen. Von 2007 bis 2017 wurden zwischen 21 und 40 Patienten behandelt, wobei kein eindeutiger Anstieg oder Rückgang der Patientenzahl und der Anzahl der Patienten pro Feuerwerkskörperart erkennbar war. Knallkörper verursachten vor allem Verletzungen der oberen Extremitäten (N = 65; 68%), wohingegen Raketen (N = 24; 41%) und Abschussrohre/-batterien (N = 7; 41%) überwiegend die Kopf/Hals-Region betrafen. Leuchtkörper hatten hauptsächlich Verbrennungen (N = 82; 68%) zur Folge und Knallkörper führten zu Weichteillazerationen (N = 24; 25%), Frakturen (N = 16; 17%) sowie Amputationen (N = 14; 15%). Patienten mit Verletzungen durch Knallkörper und selbstgebaute Feuerwerkskörper wurden am häufigsten ins Krankenhaus eingeliefert (N = 24; 36% bzw. N = 12; 80%) und bei ihnen war der Anteil operativer Eingriffe am höchsten (N = 22; 33% bzw. N = 7; 47%). Der in der vorliegenden Studie ermittelte WPI-Grad betrug zwischen 0 und 95% und der Median lag bei 0%. Bei 34 Patienten (14%) führten die Verletzungen zu einem WPI-Grad von ≥ 1%, meist als Folge einer Verwendung von Knallkörpern (N = 18; 53%). Schlussfolgerung: In dieser Studie war kein Anstieg oder Rückgang der Anzahl der in zwei Spezialkliniken behandelten Patienten zu beobachten. Knallkörper und selbstgebaute Feuerwerkskörper können als die gefährlichsten angesehen werden, da sie mit den meisten Krankenhauseinweisungen und operativen Eingriffen verbunden sind und am häufigsten Verletzungen mit bleibenden Schäden verursachen.

show abstract

National studies from the Netherlands and Finland and the impact of regulations on incidences of fireworks-related eye injuries

Cited by 16 publications

References 5 publications

Injuries, treatment, and impairment caused by different types of fireworks; results of a 10 year multicenter retrospective cohort study

Injuries, treatment, and impairment caused by different types of fireworks; results of a 10 year multicenter retrospective cohort study

Decrease in injuries from fireworks in Hawaii: associations with a county policy to limit access

Verletzungen, Behandlung und bleibende Schäden durch verschiedene Arten von Feuerwerkskörpern; Ergebnisse einer 10-jährigen multizentrischen retrospektiven Kohortenstudie

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About