Go-kart injuries of the shoulder region

Go-Kart Related Injuries: A Local Scene

Objectives

To study the characteristics and nature of injuries relating to go-kart in the local setting and to compare the findings with those reported in the medical literature.

Methods

A prospective survey of patients with go-kart related injuries attending the accident and emergency department of a public district hospital in Hong Kong within the year 2002. The data were analysed and compared with previous studies.

Results

Forty-two patients were collected in the study. The mean age was 26 years. Ten patients (23.8%) were at or below the age of 20 years. Twenty-nine patients (69.0%) were males. Out of the 42 patients, all were riders except one who was a bystander. Thirty-three patients (78.6%) had injuries in indoor tracks. Ten (23.8%) patients were admitted and five (50%) of those admitted required operations. There was no fatality. Twenty-seven patients (64.3%) had only single injury. Most (64.2%) were minor soft tissue injuries. However, fractures or dislocations occurred in 13 patients (31.0%). Two patients (4.8%) suffered from internal organ injuries. Isolated head and facial injuries occurred in 11.9% of patients. All were simple concussion. Nine patients (21.4%) suffered from isolated lower limb injuries, with more than half sustaining fractures or dislocations. Collision with other karts (40.5%) was the most frequent mechanism of injury. Riding in outdoor track was associated significantly with increased admission when compared with indoor track (77.8% vs 9.1%, p<0.001). There was no association between rider's age, gender, previous riding or injury experience, or the presence of briefing before the race with the rate of admission.

Conclusion

Go-kart racing and working on racing track can be a recreation or occupation with potential dangers. In our study, characteristics of patients, mechanisms and types of injuries were similar to other western studies. Accidents on outdoor tracks appeared to be more serious and more likely admitted than those on indoor circuits. Special safety precautions on outdoor events may help to reduce the severity of injuries. However, drivers with more riding or injury experiences were not exempted from severe injuries. Moreover, presence of briefing before the race did not help reduce the admission rate either. Perhaps, a safe and careful attitude of the rider and a seriously conducted briefing by a qualified instructor would be more important to reduce accidents. Further proper large scale controlled epidemiological studies will definitely help to improve the understanding of go-kart related injuries.

Injuries and outcomes associated with recreational vehicle accidents in pediatric trauma

PURPOSE

To identify injuries and outcomes from Recreational/Off-Highway Vehicles (RV/OHV) accidents at a pediatric trauma center.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospective pediatric trauma registry was performed to identify patients sustaining injuries from an RV/OHV between January 2007 and July 2015. Vehicles included: all-terrain vehicles (ATV), dirt bikes, utility-terrain vehicles (UTV), golf carts, go-karts, and dune buggies.

RESULTS

Five hundred twenty-eight patients were injured while on an RV/OHV: 269 ATV, 135 dirt bike, 42 UTV, 38 golf cart, 34 go-kart, and 10 dune buggy. The majority (n=381, 72%) had at least one injury with an Abbreviated Injury Scale ≥2; 39% (n=204) had orthopedic injuries and 22% (n=116) had central neurologic injuries. Over three-fourths (n=412, 78%) were admitted. For the 48% (n=253) of patients requiring surgery, 654 surgical procedures were performed. Median hospital charge was $27,565 (IQR: $15,553-$44,935). Excluding golf carts, helmet use was 49% (n=231); 16% (n=76) wore protective clothing. Only 22% (n=26) wore a restraining belt.

CONCLUSION

Severe injuries occur in children who ride RV/OHV often warranting admission and surgical intervention. Improved understanding of RV/OHV injuries may guide caregivers in decision-making about pediatric RV/OHV use and encourage use of protective gear.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, Prognosis Study.