A Review of 13,470 Head and Neck Injuries from Trampoline Jumping.

Study Design: The authors designed a 20-year cross-sectional study using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) database. Objective: The purpose of the study is to determine the risk factors for hospital admission among individuals who suffer head and neck injuries secondary to trampoline use. Methods: The primary predictor variables were a set of heterogenous variables that were categorized into the forementioned study variable groups (patient characteristics and injury characteristics). The primary outcome variable was hospital admission. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine independent risk factors for hospital admission. Results: The final sample consisted of 13,474 reports of trampoline injuries to the head and neck. Relative to females, males (OR 1.66, P < .05) were at an increased risk for hospital admissions. Fractures (OR 35.23, P < .05) increased the risk for hospital admissions relative to dental injuries. Concerning anatomical region of injury, neck injuries (OR 30.53, P < .05) were at an increased risk for hospital admissions. Conclusions: Injuries to the neck from trampoline jumping significantly increased the risk for admission. The severity of neck injuries from trampoline jumping is well established in the literature. Additionally, male sex and fractures were each risk factors for hospital admission. Given the rising prevalence of trampoline-related head and neck injuries over the past 2 decades, it is crucial for individuals to take the necessary precautions when jumping on a trampoline.

Assessing reviews of academic oral and maxillofacial surgeons within the US on Healthgrades.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the following study was to explore the patient feedback on academic oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMSs) practicing in the United States (US) using the physician rating website (PRW) Healthgrades.com. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on academic OMSs in the US using data from Healthgrades.com. Predictor variables included OMS characteristics or rating characteristics. The primary outcome variable was overall rating. Linear regression was used to determine independent predictors of overall rating. RESULTS: The final study sample consisted of 309 academic OMSs (mean age, 56.4 years; males, 86.4%). Age group was significantly associated with overall rating (p = 0.034). Dual-degree OMSs had a higher mean overall rating than single-degree OMSs (4.26 vs. 3.98, p = 0.012). The number of ratings was also significantly associated with overall rating (p = 0.019). Upon controlling for all other variables, merely age group was independently associated with overall rating. Specifically, OMSs aged 41-55 years were associated with a higher overall rating (+0.96, p = 0.022) relative to OMSs aged >70 years. CONCLUSIONS: The OPRs on Healthgrades.com for academic OMSs within the US are generally positive. Age was the only independent predictor for overall rating - younger OMSs (aged 41-55 years) were independently associated with a higher overall rating relative to older OMSs (aged >70 years). The new generation of younger OMSs is likely to be aware of PRWs and their implications in the growing world of online exposure.

Early Childhood (0 to 5 years) Presents the Greatest Risk for Facial Dog Bites.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to compare the characteristics of dog bite wounds to the face and that of the rest of the body among the pediatric population in the United States and to determine independent risk factors for dog bite wounds to the face. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Kids' Inpatient Database. There were multiple, heterogenous predictor variables. The primary outcome variable was a facial dog bite. A multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify independent risk factors for the primary outcome variable. A P value less than .05 was the threshold for statistical significance. RESULTS: Our final sample consisted of 9,057 patients who suffered dog bite injuries, of which 2,913 (32.2%) occurred on the face. Relative to individuals aged 16-20 years, individuals aged 0-5 (odds ratio [OR] 5.7; confidence interval [CI] 4.0, 8.1), 6-10 (OR 3.8; CI 2.6, 5.5), and 11-15 years (OR 1.6; CI 1.1, 2.5) were all independently associated with increased odds of incurring a facial dog bite injury. Patients who were not admitted electively were 2.5 times (CI 1.4, 4.6) more likely to incur a facial dog bite injury relative to patients who were admitted electively. CONCLUSIONS: Young children (0-5 years) were at the greatest risk for facial dog bites relative to children aged 16-20 years. Dog bites that were admitted on emergency were more likely to occur on the face relative to those that were electively admitted to the hospital. To reduce the risk for facial dog bites and the host of chronic psychological ramifications that accompany them, established preventative strategies ought to be exercised.

When disaster strikes in the ring: a 20-year study of head and neck injuries secondary to boxing.

The purpose of this study was to explore the patterns of head and neck injuries secondary to boxing. We conducted a 20-year retrospective cross-sectional study using the National Electronic Injury Submission System (NEISS). We derived the predictor variables from both patient and injury characteristics. The principal outcome variable was the probability of hospital admission from the ED. We used bivariate analysis to determine if an association existed between two variables of interest. We created a multiple logistic regression model to model the probability of admission using all significant univariate predictors. The final sample consisted of 1,919 patients. Children were most likely to injure their heads (p < 0.01). Young adults were also most likely to injure their heads (p < 0.05). Adults were most likely to injure their faces (p < 0.01). Children were most likely to incur facial contusions (p < 0.01) and internal organ injuries (p < 0.01). Young adults were most likely to suffer concussions (p < 0.01). Adults were most likely to suffer lacerations (p < 0.01). Certain age groups were more/less likely to injure a particular anatomical site and more/less likely to incur a particular type of injury. Relative to young adults, seniors had an increased odd of admission. Head injuries had an increased odds of admission relative to mouth injuries. Fractures and internal organ injuries proved to be the most dangerous injuries.

Be careful where you aim: craniomaxillofacial trauma from the utility of metal hammers.

PURPOSE: A hammer is a popular tool among the "do it yourself" (DIY) population who pursue home-improvement projects. While we are aware that hammers have health hazards, no study has yet to explore the craniomaxillofacial injuries that could arise from the use of hammers. The purpose of this study is to describe the characteristics of craniomaxillofacial injuries from hammers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a 20-year cross-sectional study conducted using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). Injuries from hammers were included in this study if they involved the head, face, eyeball, mouth, or ear. The study predictor was the mechanism of injury. The study outcome was the admission rate from the emergency department (ED) and anatomical site injured. Patient and injury characteristics were compared using chi-squared and independent sample tests. RESULTS: Our final sample had a total of 2967 hammer-induced injuries. Most of the sample consisted of white (55.3%) males (80.2%). Summer was the most injury-congested season (30.1%). The majority of the patients were over the age of 18 (65.6%). Laceration (47.3%) was the most common primary diagnosis, followed by contusion/abrasion (21.9%). The head (42.9%) was the most commonly injured craniomaxillofacial region followed by the face (29.0%). Craniomaxillofacial injury most frequently transpired at the patient's home (63.6%). Concerning the mechanism of injury, accidentally self-induced injuries with a hammer were the most common (32.4%). Patients who were injured from the debris were more likely (P < 0.01) to be admitted (7.6%) relative to patients who were not (2.5%). The head was most likely to get injured from a falling hammer (P < 0.01). The face was most likely to get injured through accidental self-injury (P < 0.01). The eyeball was most likely to get injured from debris (P < 0.01). The mouth was, similar to the face, most likely to get injured through accidental self-injury (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Craniomaxillofacial injuries secondary to hammers illustrated a predilection to the head. Hammer falling from a height was most likely to injure the head. Debris from hammer strikes was the most dangerous mechanism of injury and was most likely to injure the eyeball. Hence, the authors urge the use of protective gear for the head (i.e., helmet) and eyeball (i.e., glasses) when handling hammers for constructive purposes.

Prevalence of Dentofacial Injuries and Concussions Among College Athletes and Their Perceptions of Mouthguards.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the rates of dento-facial injuries and concussions among National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) division 1 college athletes and their perceptions of mouth-guards and their protection role in injury prevention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A specific survey regarding the experiences of dento-facial injuries and concussions, attitudes towards the mouthguards, and knowledge of dental first aid was distributed to 682 NCAA division I college athletes registered at Columbia University. The independent predictor variable was sport type (contact versus noncontact). The dependent outcome variables were dental injury rate, facial injury rate, concussion rate, mouthguard use, knowledge of dental first aid. Chi-squared and independent sample tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The mean age of the athletes was 19.4 years (range: 17 to 22). 107 (47.6%) athletes were male. Only 62 (27.6%) athletes reported mouthguard use during gameplay. The most popular choice of mouthguard was the mouth-molded type (56.7%). Mouthguard use was significantly more prevalent among contact sport athletes (43.3% versus 1.2%; P < 0.01). Contact sport athletes were more likely to experience dental injuries (14.3% versus 0.0%; P < 0.01)., facial injuries (35.0% versus 6.2%; p < 0.01), and concussions (32.6% versus 2.4%; P < 0.01) relative to noncontact sport athletes. No significant difference was identified between contact and noncontact sport athletes with regards to knowledge of dental first aid. CONCLUSIONS: Contact sport athletes are significantly more inclined to suffer dento-facial injuries and concussions relative to noncontact sport athletes. Thus, mouthguard use and knowledge of dental first aid should be particularly reinforced amongst contact sport athletes.