Discussion
This study represents one of the largest database analyses describing bicyclists injured in the context of bicycle versus automobile collisions. With the rise in popularity of bicycling, particularly in urban environments, we posit that public health experts and medical practitioners can employ evidence-supported outcomes data to target interventions in their respective communities. The joint report “Bicyclists Fatalities and Serious Injuries in New York City” from the New York City Departments of Health and Mental Hygiene, Parks and Recreation, and Transportation, and the Police Department presents findings similar to our study.11 12
Regarding critical injuries sustained by bicyclists, Lustenberger et al1 found a mean ISS of 10.7±10.3, where 23% sustained severe or critical injuries (ISS >15). This was corroborated by Scott et al,13 with a mean ISS of 11.06±9.33, and Joseph et al,5 with a median ISS of 10, in smaller regional studies. In our nationwide analysis, we found an overall higher severity of injury (median ISS of 14), where 48% of injuries were categorized as severe (ISS >15). Our study population focused on BVA, which represents a higher energy trauma mechanism than bicycle accidents as a whole, thus contributing to the increased ISS observed in our study.
The protective effects of helmets in preventing severe head and intracranial injuries as well as mortality are well established. Joseph et al,5 using the National Trauma Data Bank, described intracranial injuries in bicycle-related accidents and showed that helmeted bicycle riders had 51% reduced odds of severe TBI and 44% reduction in mortality, findings that are in agreement with our study. These findings are further corroborated by a meta-analysis performed by Høye6 that involved 55 studies during a 28-year period (1989–2017) which noted helmet use was associated with reduction in any head injury (48%), severe head injury (60%), TBI (53%), and all-cause mortality in bicycle-related injuries (34%). The current study adds further weight to the body of evidence supporting the use of helmets as a means of primary prevention of injuries in bicycle-related trauma.
The association between helmet use and cervical spine injury is an area of active research. There is evidence that suggests helmets may increase the risk of cervical spine injury either from direct impact of the helmet to the riding surface or additional head/neck torsion caused by the weight of the helmet.8 Recent meta-analyses, however, refute this notion.6 7 Computational analyses simulating bicycle collisions with automobiles similarly conclude helmets confer protective effects against cervical spine injury.9 Our data show a significantly increased risk of cervical spine injury in helmeted cyclists, although the incidence of cervical spinal injuries was much lower than intracranial injuries and the observed prevalence of spinal cord injuries was very low. Thus, the marginal increased risk of cervical morbidity attributable to helmet use is far outweighed by the associated protective benefits against TBIs.
Our results agree with the trauma literature showing a significant protective effect with helmet use. Less clear, however, are the reasons why helmet utilization rates have not changed significantly despite such overwhelming evidence supporting their use. Jewett et al14 attempted to identify factors affecting helmet use, including the impact of living in an urban environment and socioeconomic status. Their study found that adults with an annual income greater than $85 000 and those living in an urban environment were more likely to use helmets. Similarly, we observed that lower socioeconomic status as reflected by lack of medical insurance was correlated with decreased helmet utilization. Residents of the Northeast and West were also more likely to use helmets, with 28.7% and 30.9% utilization rates, respectively. This may be due to the higher density of urban trauma centers in these geographical locations rather than the more rural regions of the USA.
Alcohol intoxication is a clear risk factor for serious injury in BVAs. This is the result of alcohol’s depressive effect on psychomotor skills and disinhibition resulting in higher risk-taking tendencies, including deferring helmet use. Li et al15 found 8% of cyclists with blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.02 g/dL or higher were wearing a helmet, whereas 38% of cyclists with a BAC lower than 0.02 g/dL were wearing a helmet. Although causality cannot be established with the available literature, correlation is well established. This also falls in line with our observations that 17% of helmeted cyclists had a normal blood alcohol level versus 40% of unhelmeted cyclists who presented with a documented elevated blood alcohol level. These findings suggest that alcohol counseling and concomitant short brief interventions and referrals for treatment of alcohol misuse may present another area for targeted intervention as a means of primary prevention of future injuries.
The use of ICU resources leads to substantial costs to individuals, hospital systems, and the greater public at large. In the present study, helmet use was associated with a significant reduction in hospital length of stay, ICU admission rate, ICU length of stay, and reduction in the number of ventilation days. These findings are consistent with previous studies.13
There were several limitations to this study. First, this was a retrospective analysis using a national database registry. Although correlation may be easily observed, only inferences can be made with respect to causality. This study was subject to selection bias based on the available trauma centers submitting data to the ACS-TQIP database. The data set will invariably become more robust as the number of contributing centers is increasing annually; however, the total number and severity of injuries related to bicycles are likely underestimated given the voluntary nature of ACS-TQIP participation. There was no way to verify the correct data abstraction into the TQIP database from each center’s trauma registry. For this reason missing data were a significant limitation. Bias from missing and misclassified data was also an inherent limitation of this study.
Despite these limitations, we conclude that bicyclists in accidents involving motor vehicles are at high risk of severe TBI and mortality and that these injuries are associated with significant hospital resource utilization. If we make the assumption that bicyclists generally represent a healthy segment of the population, injury prevention in this demographic will have a significant impact on quality of life and years of productivity. Our data support the current literature that helmets are associated with a protective effect against mortality, intracranial injury, and decreased hospital resource utilization. Our article observed that socioeconomic status, geographical location, and substance use are additional independent risk factors for morbidity and mortality that can be specifically targeted for preventive strategies and resource allocation. Further efforts to build targeted safety outreach programs are currently warranted.