The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Injury During Contact With Horses: Recent Experience With 75 Patients at a Level I Trauma Center
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine equine-related trauma at a trauma center servicing a region in which there is significant contact between horses and humans. METHODS: Data were collected on all patients admitted to the University of Kentucky Medical Center from January 1994 to December 1998 for treatment of horse-related injuries. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were admitted to our center after injuries due to contact with horses (0.75% of all trauma admissions). There were 42 men (55%). The mean age was 37 years (range, 3 to 81 years). The majority of patients (67/75) were injured during recreational activities, and most fell or were thrown (40/75). Only 14% of patients were wearing helmets. The most common injuries were extremity fractures and head injuries, but thoracic and abdominal injuries were not rare. Of the 75 patients, 34 required surgery. Five patients (6.7%) died, all of head injury. During the study period, 11 people died in Kentucky due to contact with horses. CONCLUSIONS: Injury due to contact with horses is uncommon even at a center servicing a region with a large equine population. However, injuries are often serious and lead to significant morbidity and occasional mortality. Prevention of death from horse-related trauma is synonymous with prevention of head injury.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous studies of human–horse interactions have predominantly focused on injury and fatality statistics [17,22,23,24,25].”
From What People Really Think About Safety around Horses: The Relationship between Risk Perception, Values and Safety Behaviours (2020) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chapman, M., Thomas, M., & Thompson, K. (2020) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani10122222 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- GRIFFEN, M., BOULANGER, B. R., KEARNEY, P. A., TSUEI, B., & OCHOA, J.
- Venue
- Southern Medical Journal
- Publisher
- Southern Medical Association
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 441-445
- ISSN
- 0038-4348
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review