The racial and sexual differences in emergency department visits for sport-related spine fracture injuries: a Neiss database study (2011-2020)

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Sports-related injuries (SRIs) are a significant cause of public health concern. This study aimed to identify risk factors for spine fracture injuries in sports, focusing on sport type, injury location, and demographic patterns. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data from the "National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS)" database was performed for spine injuries. A total of 138,268,340 hospital emergency department records between 1/2/2011 and 12/29/2020 resulted in a weighted national estimate of 29,148 spine fracture injuries (19,791 males and 9357 females) associated with sports. RESULTS: There were 10,530 (36 %) injuries at sports venues and 5755 (20 %) on the streets. The most prevalent sports activities leading to spine fractures were motorsports/cycling in males (60.4 %) and horseback riding in females (31.2 %). Fractures at the lumbar (40.6 %) and cervical (33.9 %) spine were the most common diagnoses. Males were more likely to have cervical fractures (40.5 % vs. 19.9 %), while females more frequently had lumbosacral injuries (66.4 % vs. 40.8 %) (all p < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that ball sports (OR=4.2), water sports (OR=3.89), and trampoline (OR=1.88) significantly increased the risk for cervical fracture. Adults (OR=2.69), males (OR=2.31), and Asians (OR=3.66) were at higher risk for cervical spine fractures. African Americans had a greater risk of spinal cord injuries, particularly among adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Specific sports activities and injury locations were identified as primary risk factors for different types of spine fractures. Demographic patterns provide context for targeted prevention strategies. These findings can inform the development of sport-specific safety measures and injury prevention programs across diverse populations.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.