SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Hasler RM, Gyssler L, Benneker LM, Zimmermann H, Exadaktylos AK. Inj. Extra 2010; 41(12): 133.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

16/j.injury.2010.07.417

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Objective: Analyze injury patterns, protective factors and risk factors in horse riding as well as has groups of safer riders and groups at greater risk.

Design: A retrospective and prospective controlled survey.

Setting: A tertiary trauma centre in Bern, Switzerland.

Methods: Injured equestrians admitted to a tertiary trauma centre in Bern between July 2000 and June 2006 were classified by injury pattern and neurological symptoms. Injured equestrians admitted from July to December 2008 were surveyed using a questionnaire with 17 parameters. The same questionnaire was applied in non-injured controls. Multiple logistic regression was performed, combined risk factors were calculated using inference trees.

Results: Retrospective survey: 365 injured equestrians. Injury pattern: extremity injuries (32%), head (24%), spine (14%), thorax (9%), face (9%), abdomen (2%), pelvis (7%). 80% of head injuries were mild. Neurological symptoms occurred in 14 patients. Two accidents were fatal. One case resulted in tetraplegia, one in paraplegia. Case–control survey: 61 patients and 102 controls (patients: 72% female, 28% male; controls: 63% female, 37% male). Falls from the horse were most frequent (65%), followed by horse kicks (19%) and horse bites (2%). Parameters significant for controls in multiple logistic regression: Older age (OR 1.03, CI 1.01–1.06; p = 0.015), male (OR 2.54, CI 1.04–6.21; p = 0.04), diploma in horse riding (OR 0.27, CI 0.11–0.65; p = 0.004). Inference trees revealed typical groups less and more likely to suffer injury.

Conclusions: Experience with horse riding and having passed a diploma in horse riding are protective factors. Educational levels and injury risk should be graded within an educational level-injury risk index.

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print