Literature DB >> 34005848

Patterns of orthopaedic injury among hospitalised personal mobility device users and bicycle riders: a comparative study.

Don Thong Siang Koh1, Yew Lok Woo1, Ting Hway Wong2, Mann Hong Tan1.   

Abstract

Introduction: Personal mobility devices (PMDs), such as electronic scooters or motorised bicycles, are efficient modes of transportation. Their recent popularity has also resulted in an increase in PMD-related injuries. We aimed to characterise and compare the nature of injuries sustained by PMD users and bicycle riders.
Methods: This retrospective study compared injury patterns among PMD and bicycle users. 140 patients were admitted between November 2013 and September 2018. Parameters studied included patients' demographics (e.g. age, gender and body mass index), type of PMD, nature of injury, surgical intervention required, duration of hospitalisation and time off work.
Results: Of 140 patients, 46 (32.9%) patients required treatment at the department of orthopaedic surgery. 19 patients were PMD users while 27 were bicycle riders. 16 (84.2%) patients with PMD-related injuries were men. PMD users were significantly younger (mean age 45 ± 15 years) when compared to bicycle riders (mean age 56 ± 17 years; P <0.05). A quarter (n = 5, 26.3%) of PMD users sustained open fractures and over half (n = 10, 52.6%) required surgical intervention. Among 27 bicycle users, 7.4% (n = 2) of patients sustained open fractures and 70.4% (n = 19) required surgical intervention. Both groups had comparable inpatient stay duration and time off work.
Conclusion: PMD-related orthopaedic traumas are high-energy injuries, with higher rates of open fractures, when compared to bicycle injuries. In addition, PMD users are significantly younger and of economically viable age. Prolonged hospitalisation and time off work have socioeconomic implications. Caution should be exercised when using PMDs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bicycle injuries; open fractures; personal mobility device; public health; trauma

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34005848      PMCID: PMC9584070          DOI: 10.11622/smedj.2021050

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Singapore Med J        ISSN: 0037-5675            Impact factor:   3.331


  8 in total

1.  Are electric self-balancing scooters safe in vehicle crash accidents?

Authors:  Jun Xu; Shi Shang; Guizhen Yu; Hongsheng Qi; Yunpeng Wang; Shucai Xu
Journal:  Accid Anal Prev       Date:  2015-12-04

2.  Comparative analysis of risky behaviors of electric bicycles at signalized intersections.

Authors:  Lu Bai; Pan Liu; Yanyong Guo; Hao Yu
Journal:  Traffic Inj Prev       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.491

3.  Evaluation of e-bike accidents in Switzerland.

Authors:  T Weber; G Scaramuzza; K-U Schmitt
Journal:  Accid Anal Prev       Date:  2014-08-28

Review 4.  The epidemiology of open fractures in adults. A 15-year review.

Authors:  Charles M Court-Brown; Kate E Bugler; Nicholas D Clement; Andrew D Duckworth; Margaret M McQueen
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2011-12-27       Impact factor: 2.586

5.  Orthopaedic injuries among electric bicycle users.

Authors:  Shay Tenenbaum; Daniel Weltsch; Jason T Bariteau; Adi Givon; Kobi Peleg; Ran Thein
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 2.586

6.  The casualties from electric bike and motorized scooter road accidents.

Authors:  Maya Siman-Tov; Irina Radomislensky; Kobi Peleg
Journal:  Traffic Inj Prev       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 1.491

7.  Hoverboards: spectrum of injury and association with an uncommon fracture.

Authors:  Andrew H Schapiro; Neil U Lall; Christopher G Anton; Andrew T Trout
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2017-01-06

8.  Treatment principles in the management of open fractures.

Authors:  William W Cross; Marc F Swiontkowski
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 1.251

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.