Citation

Aulino G, Spagnolo D, Cittadini F. Safety Sci. 2023; 163: e106119.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106119

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

We read with great interest the recent article published by Karpinski et al. that analyzed the characteristics of 21 shared electric-scooter (e-scooter) fatalities in the United States from 2018 to 2020 to identify potential risk factors (Karpinski et al., 2022). Indeed, from the end of 2017, e-scooters rentals became accessible for the first time in the USA. Since then, they have expanded globally, primarily through rental companies of developed nations in North America, Asia, Oceania, and Europe (Badeau et al., 2019). Karpinski et al. reported that most fatalities thus far have been young men in motor vehicle collisions. Regarding crash circumstances, they demonstrated that 33% of the fatally injured e-scooter riders hit the windshield of the car, 38% were thrown from e-scooter, and 19% went down and under the vehicle (Karpinski et al., 2022). They also imply that ambient factors like lighting may be significant in deadly e-scooter crashes, representing a major contributor to the crashes. Here, we want to discuss some aspects not analyzed in the article regarding helmet use and provide some considerations from a forensic point of view. We recently published a case study of an accident between an e-scooter and a car. We examined the victim's injuries and the potential benefit of wearing a helmet (Aulino et al., 2022). In our case, a 33-year-old man was operating a shared e-scooter during the night when it struck a car. After 30 min, he was declared dead due to severe injuries. The most likely accident dynamic was a frontal collision between the car and the e-scooter. The first part of the patient hit by the vehicle in the crash was his right leg. According to the dynamics, the man struck his head against the windshield before dropping to the ground. Even though this is just one instance, we concur with the authors' analysis of the risk variables, particularly the danger posed by these vehicles traveling on urban roads and the limited vision at night. However, we also want to discuss the relationship between traumatic head injury and helmet use. The hit produced severe craniofacial injuries even though the speed was probably not high, as evidenced by the fact that there were very few lesions upon exterior examination. Only a lacerated wound in the right front-parietal area was discovered during the external inspection of the head and neck. Additionally, a lengthy fracture of the skull cap that stretched from the right side to the left side was discovered during the autopsy. This fracture type demonstrates that kickback brought harm when the individual fell to the ground. For this reason, the damage would have been reduced if the individual had been wearing a helmet authorized for this kind of transportation. In all situations when high-speed collisions are not present, the requirement of wearing a helmet and access to well-maintained bicycle lanes can prevent fatalities. While it is less likely to occur if the user ends up under the car, wearing a helmet could save lives in situations where the rider collides with the windshield or is ejected off the e-scooter. Moreover, even though fatal accidents typically differ from non-fatal ones in several ways (Carroll and Waller, 1980, Cerrelli, 1997), it is crucial to emphasize that numerous studies have revealed a low rate of helmet wear and a link between non-helmet use and the degree of trauma recorded in e-scooter injuries (Trivedi et al., 2019, Lavoie-Gagne et al., 2021, Cittadini et al., 2022). ...

Language: en

Keywords

E-scooter accidents; Electric scooter; Fatalities; Forensic medicine; Helmet