Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bicycle-related injuries in the emergency department: a comparison between E-bikes and conventional bicycles: a prospective observational study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the mechanisms and severity of injuries of e-bikers compared with conventional bicycle (CB) users at the emergency department (ED) of a level 2 trauma center in the Netherlands.

Methods

We performed a prospective observational study. All patients ≥ 16 years who presented at the ED with an e-bike or conventional bicycle accident were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes were mechanisms and severity of injury. Injury severity was defined by the abbreviated injury score and the injury severity score (ISS). Data were analyzed using SPSS (IBM version 24).

Results

A total of 78 e-bikers and 91 CB, were included. The mean age of the e-bikers was 66.9 ± 13.6 years (CB 45.2 ± 20.5 years, P < 0.001). The Charlson comorbidity index was higher in e-bikers (3.1 vs. 1.2, P < 0.001). Mechanism of injury and ISS did not differ between the groups (median ISS 4.0), even though two e-bikers were severely injured (ISS ≥ 16). Alcohol was consumed twice as frequently in CB-related injuries (40% vs. 19.2%, P < 0.01).

Conclusion

In this cohort of bicycle injuries in the ED of a level 2 trauma center, e-bikers were older and had more comorbidities than CB users. Except for a higher rate of thoracic and soft-tissue trauma in e-bikers, no differences were found in the mechanism and severity of injury. While it is important to note that helmet use and alcohol avoidance have demonstrable health benefits for bicyclists, further studies to quantify these benefits are recommended.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Univé, GfK. Effects of cycling in the Netherlands. NBTC-NIPO Research - CVTO 2015 & CVO april-sept 2016; Univé Consumenten Monitor: Elektrische Fietsen 2016; Rabobank, Cijfers en Trends, Branche-informatie Tweewielspeciaalzaken, 2017.

  2. Stichting BOVAG-RAI Mobiliteit. Mobiliteit in cijfers Tweewielers—2017–2018. October 2017.

  3. Government of the Netherlands. Safe cycling. Available on: https://www.government.nl/topics/bicycles/safe-cycling Consulted on 20May 2018.

  4. Poos HPAM, Lefarth TL, Harbers JS, et al. E-bikers are more often seriously injured in bicycle accidents: results from the Groningen bicycle accident database. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2017;161:D1520.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Valkenberg, H. Nijman, S. Schepers, P. et al. Fietsongevallen in Nederland—SEH behandelingen 2016. Veiligheid Nederland. September 2017.

  6. Du W, Yang J, Powis B, et al. Epidemiological profile of hospitalised injuries among electric bicycle riders admitted to a rural hospital in Suzhou: a cross-sectional study. Inj Prev. 2014;20:128–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gross I, Weiss DJ, Eliasi E, et al. E-bike–related trauma in children and adults. J Emerg Med. 2017;54:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feng H, Donglai L, Zhu J, et al. Related risk factors for injury severity of e-bike and bicycle crashes in Hefei. Traffic Inj Prev. 2014;15(3):319–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lawinger T, Bastian T. New appearances of powered two-wheelers. An empirical in depth study of accidents with pedelecs in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg. Z Verkehrssicherheit. 2013;59(2):99–106.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zhou SA, Wah-Ho F, Ong MEH, et al. Electric bicycle-related injuries presenting to a provincial hospital in China. Medicine. 2017;96:26.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Schepers JP, den Fishman E, Hartog P, et al. The safety of electrically assisted bicycles compared to classic bicycles. Accid Anal Prev. 2014;73:174–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Xiaoxuan L, Yun Z, Li X, et al. Orthopedic injury in electric bicycle related collisions. Medicine. 2017;96:26.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Papoutsi S, Martinolli L, Tasso Braun C et al. E-bike injuries: experience from an urban emergency department—a retrospective study from Switzerland. Emerg Med Int 2014.

  14. Feng Z, Raghuwanshi RP, Xu Z, et al. Electric bicycle related injury: a rising traffic injury burden in China. Inj Prev. 2010;16:417–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Weber T, Scaramuzza G, Schmitt KU. Evaluation of e-bike accidents in Switzerland. Accid Anal Prev. 2014;73:47–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Tenenbaum S, Weltsch D, Bariteau JT, et al. Orthopaedic injuries among electric bicycle users. Injury. 2017;48:2140–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Siman-Tov M, Radomislensky I, Israel Trauma Group, Peleg K. The casualties from electric bike and motorized scooter road accidents. Traffic Inj Prev. 2017;18(3):318–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Abbreviated injury scale 2005 - Updated 2008. Available on: https://www.aaam.org/abbreviated-injury-scale-ais/ Consulted on 25 May 2018.

  19. Baker SP, Oneill B, Haddon W Jr, et al. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma. 1974;14:187–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Palmer C. Major trauma and the injury severity score—where should we set the bar? Assoc Adv Automot Med. 2007;51:13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sundararajan V, Henderson T, Perry C, et al. New ICD-10 version of the Charlson comorbidity index predicted in-hospital mortality. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(12):1288–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Elm E, von Altman DG, Egger M, et al. STROBE Initiative. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE)statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):344–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gabbe BJ, Magtengaard K, Hannaford AP, et al. Is the Charlson Comorbidity Index Useful for Predicting Trauma Outcomes? Acad Emerg Med. 2005;12(4):318–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Holmes M, Garver M, Albrecht L, et al. Comparison of two comorbidity scoring systems for older adults with traumatic injuries. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219(4):631–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Laerd statistics. Measures of central tendency. Available via: https://statistics.laerd.com/statistical-guides/measures-central-tendency-mean-mode-median.php. Consulted on 29 May 2018.

  26. Thompson DC, Rivara F, Thompson R. Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;4:CD001855.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Joseph B, Azim A, Ansab A, et al. Bicycle helmets work when it matters the most. Am J Surg. 2017;213:413–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Airaksinen NK, Nurmi-Lüthje IS, et al. Cycling injuries and alcohol. Injury. 2018;49(5):945–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Puzio TJ, Murphy PB, et al. The electric scooter: a surging new mode of transportation that comes with risk to riders. Traffic Inj Prev. 2020;21(2):175–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Samin OA, Civil ID. The new injury severity score versus the injury severity score in predicting patient outcome: a comparative evaluation on trauma service patients of the Auckland hospital. Annu Proc Assoc Adv Automot Med. 1999;43:1–15.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Emergency Medicine, VieCuri Medical Center, Tegelseweg 210, 5912 BL, Venlo, The Netherlands

    Elke M. J. Verstappen, Dan Thao Vy, Marieke G. J. Versteegen & Dennis G. Barten

  2. Department of (General/Trauma) Surgery, VieCuri Medical Center, Tegelseweg 210, 5912 BL, Venlo, The Netherlands

    Heinrich M. Janzing

  3. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, VieCuri Medical Center, Tegelseweg 210, 5912 BL, Venlo, The Netherlands

    Loes Janssen

  4. Department of Methodology and Statistics, Maastricht University Medical Center, Postbus 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Rein Vos

Authors
  1. Elke M. J. Verstappen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan Thao Vy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heinrich M. Janzing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Loes Janssen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rein Vos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marieke G. J. Versteegen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dennis G. Barten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elke M. J. Verstappen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this report.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Verstappen, E.M.J., Vy, D.T., Janzing, H.M. et al. Bicycle-related injuries in the emergency department: a comparison between E-bikes and conventional bicycles: a prospective observational study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 47, 1853–1860 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01366-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-020-01366-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation