Patients With Ice Hockey Injuries Presenting to US Emergency Departments, 1990–2006

Abstract

Context: Although the number of US ice hockey participants doubled from 1990 to 2006, no nationally representative studies have examined US ice hockey injuries among participants of all ages during this period. Objective: To describe patients with ice hockey injuries presenting to a representative sample of US emergency departments (EDs) from 1990 through 2006. Design: Prospective injury surveillance study. Setting: The US Consumer Product Safety Commission collects data from 100 nationally representative EDs via the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). Patients or Other Participants: Individuals injured while playing ice hockey and presenting to a NEISS-affiliated ED from 1990 through 2006. Main Outcome Measure(s): Incidence and patterns of ice hockey–related injuries. Results: From 1990 through 2006, 8228 patients with ice hockey–related injuries presented to NEISS-affiliated EDs, representing an estimated 302 368 ice hockey–related injuries sustained nationally during this time. Injuries occurred predominantly among males (93.5%). More than half of the injured were aged 9 to 14 years (28.9%) or 15 to 18 years (30.1%), and injury incidence in these age groups increased over the study period (P = .009 and P < .001, respectively). The most commonly injured body sites were the face (19.1%), wrist/hand/finger (14.1%), shoulder/upper arm (13.8%), and lower leg/ankle/foot (11.1%). Lacerations (27.0%), contusions/abrasions (23.6%), fractures (17.3%), and sprains/strains (16.9%) were the most common injuries. Falls (16.5%), contact with boards (13.6%), and contact with stick (13.0%) were the most common injury mechanisms. Compared with those aged 9 to 18 years, those aged 2 to 8 years and those older than 18 years sustained larger proportions of face (injury proportion ratio [IPR] = 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.29, 3.08) and mouth (IPR = 4.34; 95% CI = 2.87, 6.56) injuries. Concussions were more common among those aged 2 to 18 years (9.0%) than in those who were older than 18 years (3.7%) (IPR = 2.47; 95% CI = 1.75, 3.49). Conclusions: Ice hockey injury patterns vary by age and sex. Our findings indicate that many trips to the ED might be prevented by using protective equipment appropriately.

Incidence of Patients with Lower Extremity Injuries Presenting to US Emergency Departments by Anatomic Region, Disease Category, and Age

“…Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, and the National Health Interview Survey) showed the NEISS contains the most comprehensive surveillance of injuries treated in the emergency department [11]. The database has been used for various studies [1,3,21,23,24]. Some of these studies use the NEISS to give an in-depth analysis of a specific injury type such as a shoulder dislocation, scaphoid fracture, or an ankle sprain.…”

Ускорение Головы Спортсмена При Выполнении Силовых Приемов В Хоккее С Шайбой

“…По данным недавно проведенного общенационального американского исследования, сотрясения мозга, связанные в том числе с проведением силовых приемов, более распространены среди лиц в возрасте до 18 лет (9 % всех травм), чем среди более старших спортсменов (3,7 % всех травм). Одна из причин этого заключается в том, что мозг детей и подростков более подвержен черепно-мозговой травме, чем мозг взрослого человека, даже при меньшей силе удара [4].…”

Commentary: The Injury Proportion Ratio: What's It All About?

“…1 In their analysis of NEISS data, Deits et al reported that the proportion of head injuries seen at the ED among females was 2.22 times greater than the proportion of head injuries among males. Because 19.9% of the females' injuries were to the head, we can deduce that the proportion of head injuries to males was approximately 9%.…”

“…It is a useful surrogate of disease risk and can inform the direction of prospective research studies examining risk factors. The limitations of this measure are well described and include the following: (1) No population-at-risk information (denominator) means that diseases or deaths cannot be attributed to actual exposures or risk factors, and (2) the sum of all proportionate causes must equal 1, so any proportion is dependent on the value of all other proportions. 17 In other words, an excess in one cause is offset by a deficit in another cause.…”

“…We thank the Journal of Athletic Training (JAT ) and Deits et al 1 for allowing us to comment on the analysis of national emergency department (ED) surveillance data on hockey injuries appearing in this issue. This commentary focuses on the use in descriptive epidemiology of the injury proportion ratio (IPR).…”