Bicycle safety helmet legislation and bicycle-related non-fatal injuries in California. Impact of mandatory helmet legislation on bicycle-related head injuries in children: a population-based study. Trends in helmet use and head injuries in San Diego County: the effect of bicycle helmet legislation. Evaluation of a promotional strategy to increase bicycle helmet use by children. Promotion of bicycle helmet use among schoolchildren: a randomized clinical trial. Effectiveness of bicycle helmets in preventing head injury in children: case-control study. Effectiveness of bicycle safety helmets in preventing head injuries. A case-control study. The impact of two related prevention strategies on head injury reduction among nonfatally injured motorcycle riders, California, 1991-1993. A case-control study of the effectiveness of bicycle safety helmets.
The objective of this study was to determine whether the bicycle safety helmet legislation in California, enacted in 1994, was associated with statistically significant reductions in head injuries among bicyclists aged 17 years and under who were subjected to the law. The study used 44,069 patient discharge cases from all public hospitals in California, from 1991 through 2000, and a case-control design to make direct comparisons between those subjected to the law (Youth) and those who were not (Adult) across the pre- and post-legislation periods. An aggregate data analysis approach and a pooled disaggregate data fitting technique using multinomial logit models were applied. The legislation was found to be associated with a reduction of 18.2% (99% confidence interval: 11.5-24.3%) in the proportion of traumatic brain injuries (Head-TBI) among Youth bicyclists. The proportions of other head, face, and neck injuries were not significantly changed across the pre- and post-legislation periods in this age group but there was a corresponding increase of 9% (5-13%) in the proportion of all other injuries. On the other hand, there was no statistically significant change in the proportions of injury outcomes for Adult bicyclists. The youngest riders, aged 0-9 years, had the greatest decrease in the proportion of Head-TBI. The reduction was the same for motor vehicle and non-motor-vehicle-related incidents. The bicycle safety helmet legislation was associated with a decrease in the likelihood of Head-TBI for non-urban residents but not for urbanites, for males but not for females, and for Whites, Asians, and Hispanics, but not Blacks and others. Childhood bicycle-related head injuries can be prevented through the use of helmets. Although helmet legislation has proved to be a successful strategy for the adoption of helmets, its effect on the rates of head injury is uncertain. In Canada, 4 provinces have such legislation. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of helmet legislation on bicycle-related head injuries in Canadian children.
                Routinely collected data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information identified all Canadian children (5-19 years) who were hospitalized for bicycling-related injuries from 1994-1998. Children were categorized as head or other injury on the basis of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes. Rates of head injuries and other injuries were compared over time in provinces that adopted legislation and those that did not.
                Of the 9650 children who were hospitalized because of a bicycle-related injury, 3426 sustained injuries to the head and face and the remaining 6224 had other injuries. The bicycle-related head injury rate declined significantly (45% reduction) in provinces where legislation had been adopted compared with provinces and territories that did not adopt legislation (27% reduction).
                This country-wide study compared rates of head injury in regions with and without mandatory helmet legislation. Comparing head injuries with other non-head-injured children controlled for potential differences in children's cycling habits. The strong protective association between helmet legislation and head injuries supports the adoption of helmet legislation as an effective tool in the prevention of childhood bicycle-related head injuries. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of California's bicycle helmet law on bicycle-related head injuries in San Diego County with a year 2000 population of approximately 3 million people. The study design is an ecological trend design based on observational data from a Trauma Registry. Outcome measures include helmet use compliance, site/severity of injury and abbreviated injury scale (AIS). There were 1116 bicycle trauma patients recorded in the San Diego County Trauma Registry between 1992 and 1996. The percentages of pre-law and post-law helmet use were 13.2 and 31.7%, respectively. Over the whole study period, the overall helmet use increased by an average of 43% per year with an averaged 84% rate increase in helmet use among children. Only 16.1% of patients with serious head injury used helmets, compared to 28.2% in those who did not have serious head injury. The odds ratio of helmet use against serious head injuries is 0.43 (95% CI 0.28-0.66) after adjusting for age, ethnicity and time. The p-values for comparing pre- and post-legislation serious head injury rates are p=0.764, 0.4 and 0.194 for the overall, adult and child populations, respectively. Helmet legislation increased helmet use in the targeted child population and the effect was carried over to the adult population. Helmet use has a protective effect against serious head injury. Probably due to several of its limitations, the current study did not confirm that helmet legislation alone significantly reduced head injury rates in San Diego County during the study period. Bicycle-related head injuries are an important cause of death and disability, despite the availability of helmets. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based bicycle helmet promotion program in increasing helmet use by children while controlling for secular trends. Two high-income and two low-income schools in an urban Canadian community were selected to receive a bicycle helmet promotion intervention, with the remaining 18 schools serving as controls. Approximately 1800 observations of bicycling children were made at randomly selected observational sites 2 to 5 months after the intervention to assess changes in behavior. Helmet use at all observation sites tripled from 3.4% (1990, preintervention) to 16% (1991, postintervention). In the high-income intervention area, observed helmet use rose dramatically from 4% to 36% in contrast to the more modest increase in the high-income control area from 4% to 15%. In the low-income intervention area, there was a modest increase from 1% to 7%, but it did not differ from the increase in the low-income control area from 3% to 13%. The program was highly successful in children of high-income families but not in children of low-income families. Developing strategies for low-income families remains a priority. Although bicycle helmets have been shown to reduce the rates of head injuries and brain injuries from bicycle mishaps, use of helmets is very uncommon. We compared a comprehensive awareness program to increase bicycle helmet use among schoolchildren to the impact of that same awareness program plus a bicycle helmet subsidy. Results showed no impact of the educational program (no children observed riding to school wore helmets before or after the program). The proportion of helmet wearers at the school that obtained the subsidy increased from 0% to 22% (p = 0.036). An educational program in conjunction with a subsidy may have a significant impact on bicycle helmet use. To examine the risk of injury to the head and the effect of wearing helmets in bicycle accidents among children.
                Case-control study by questionnaire completed by the children and their carers.
                Two large children's hospitals in Brisbane, Australia.
                445 children presenting with bicycle related injuries during 15 April 1991 to 30 June 1992. The cases comprised 102 children who had sustained injury to the upper head including the skull, forehead and scalp or loss of consciousness. The controls were 278 cyclists presenting with injuries other than to the head or face. A further 65 children with injuries to the face were considered as an extra comparison group.
                Cause and type of injury, wearing of helmet.
                Most children (230) were injured after losing control and falling from their bicycle. Only 31 had contact with another moving vehicle. Children with head injury were significantly more likely to have made contact with a moving vehicle than control children (19 (19%) v 12 (4%), P < 0.001). Head injuries were more likely to occur on paved surfaces than on grass, gravel, or dirt. Wearing a helmet reduced the risk of head injury by 63% (95% confidence interval 34% to 80%) and of loss of consciousness by 86% (62% to 95%).
                The risk of head injury in bicycle accidents is reduced among children wearing a helmet. Current helmet design maximises protection in the type of accident most commonly occurring in this study. Legislation enforcing helmet use among children should be considered. To examine the protective effectiveness of bicycle helmets in 4 different age groups of bicyclists, in crashes involving motor vehicles, and by helmet type and certification standards.
                Prospective case-control study
                Emergency departments (EDs) in 7 Seattle, Wash, area hospitals between March 1, 1992, and August 31, 1994.
                Case subjects were all bicyclists treated in EDs for head injuries, all who were hospitalized, and all who died at the scene. Control subjects were bicyclists treated for nonhead injuries.
                There were 3390 injured bicyclists in the study; 29% of cases and 56% of controls were helmeted. Risk of head injury in helmeted vs unhelmeted cyclists adjusted for age and motor vehicle involvement indicate a protective effect of 69% to 74% for helmets for 3 different categories of head injury: any head injury (odds ratio [OR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.37), brain injury (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.25-0.48), or severe brain injury (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.48). Adjusted ORs for each of 4 age groups (<6 y, 6-12 y, 13-19 y, and > or = 20 years) indicate similar levels of helmet protection by age (OR range, 0.27-0.40). Helmets were equally effective in crashes involving motor vehicles (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.20-0.48) and those not involving motor vehicles (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20-0.39). There was no effect modification by age or motor vehicle involvement (P=.7 and P=.3). No significant differences were found for the protective effect of hard-shell, thin-shell, or no-shell helmets (P=.5).
                Bicycle helmets, regardless of type, provide substantial protection against head injuries for cyclists of all ages involved in crashes, including crashes involving motor vehicles. Although the traumatic injury death rate in the United States decreased during the last 20 years, the percent of all injury deaths attributable to brain injuries has remained steady. Head injuries are a leading cause of injury among motorcycle riders in crashes, and the helmet is an effective measure to reduce these injuries. To reduce the burden and cost of motorcycle injuries, many states have increased helmet use by introducing mandatory helmet legislation. This report presents evidence on the effects of the motorcycle helmet and helmet use legislation--two interrelated prevention strategies which decrease traumatic brain injury among motorcycle riders. Nonfatally injured motorcyclists were included if they crashed between January 1, 1991 and December 31, 1993 and were treated in one of 18 hospitals in 10 California counties. Medical records for all injured motorcyclists admitted to these 18 hospitals and those treated in the emergency department and released in eight of these hospitals were individually reviewed. Complete lists of injury diagnoses for each rider were coded according to the 1990 Abbreviated Injury Severity Scale by trained clinical staff. Before the universal helmet law was introduced (when only a third of injured riders wore helmets) 38.2% of riders sustained head injuries. When helmet use increased to over 85% of injured riders following the law, less than 25% of riders sustained head injuries. Both the severity and the number of head injuries per individual rider decreased after the mandatory helmet use law led to increased helmet use. Riders wearing helmets suffered fewer skull fractures, fewer intracranial injuries, had less frequent and shorter periods of loss of consciousness, more favorable GCS scores, and shorter hospital stays. Mandatory motorcycle helmet use laws are an effective mechanism to increase helmet use among riders and thus prevent head and brain injuries resulting from motorcycle crashes. Bicycling accidents cause many serious injuries and, in the United States, about 1300 deaths per year, mainly from head injuries. Safety helmets are widely recommended for cyclists, but convincing evidence of their effectiveness is lacking. Over one year we conducted a case-control study in which the case patients were 235 persons with head injuries received while bicycling, who sought emergency care at one of five hospitals. One control group consisted of 433 persons who received emergency care at the same hospitals for bicycling injuries not involving the head. A second control group consisted of 558 members of a large health maintenance organization who had had bicycling accidents during the previous year. Seven percent of the case patients were wearing helmets at the time of their head injuries, as compared with 24 percent of the emergency room controls and 23 percent of the second control group. Of the 99 cyclists with serious brain injury only 4 percent wore helmets. In regression analyses to control for age, sex, income, education, cycling experience, and the severity of the accident, we found that riders with helmets had an 85 percent reduction in their risk of head injury (odds ratio, 0.15; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.07 to 0.29) and an 88 percent reduction in their risk of brain injury (odds ratio, 0.12; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.04 to 0.40). We conclude that bicycle safety helmets are highly effective in preventing head injury. Helmets are particularly important for children, since they suffer the majority of serious head injuries from bicycling accidents.
Bicycle helmet legislation appears to be effective in increasing helmet use and decreasing head injury rates in the populations for which it is implemented. However, there are very few high quality evaluative studies that measure these outcomes, and none that reported data on possible declines in bicycle use.