Evidence Hub

Pelvic fractures resulting from snowboarding

Ogawa H, Sumi H, Sumi Y, Shimizu K

The American journal of sports medicine, 2010

145 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Information regarding pelvic fractures sustained during snowboarding is scant.

PURPOSE: To analyze the epidemiologic data, injury patterns, and types of pelvic fractures sustained during snowboarding.

STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS: We analyzed the epidemiologic factors, injury patterns, and types of pelvic fractures in 145 patients with snowboarding-related pelvic fractures who were admitted to our institution from the 1998-1999 to the 2006-2007 ski season.

RESULTS: The incidence of snowboarding-related pelvic fractures was 0.102 per 10 000 ski lift tickets, which amounted to 2% of all snowboarding-related fractures (fifth most common type of fracture among all snowboarding-related fractures). Of the pelvic fractures, 85.5% were stable (type A according to the Tile classification) and 14.5% were unstable (types B and C according to the Tile classification). Isolated sacral fractures had the second-highest incidence (24.1%) after pubic bone and/or ischium fractures (46.9%). A distinct female prevalence was seen (52.4%). Jumps and isolated falls were the main mechanisms of injury (80%), and the incidence of collision was significantly higher in the unstable group than in the stable group (P = .037). In all, 57.9% patients classified their skill level as "intermediate," and only 9.7% of patients had received professional snowboarding lessons. A total of 30 subjects (20.8%) had other injuries along with pelvic fractures; the patients with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 145 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free