Effectiveness of Brief Alcohol Intervention in Reducing Alcohol Consumption Among Patients With Alcohol-Related Facial Trauma in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Facial trauma is a frequent presentation to the emergency department following alcohol-related injuries. Brief alcohol intervention (BAI) is a form of a motivational interview which is implemented in the postinjury phase to educate patients on the detrimental effects of their alcohol drinking behavior and reduce their future consumption. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of BAI on alcohol drinking behavior in the emergency department setting. METHODS: An extensive systematic literature review was implemented from 21 October 2020 to 23 November 2020. All clinical studies that reported the outcomes of brief alcohol intervention on alcohol consumption in patients who attended the emergency department with facial injuries were included in the systematic review. The data sources utilized include Google Scholar, PubMed, ISI, Scopus, EMBASE, SIGLE, Virtual Health Library, NYAM, ClinicalTruaks.Gov, Controlled Trials (mRCT), and ICTRP. RESULTS: The current systematic review included 8 articles encompassing 941 patients. Of the included patients, 304 (32.3%) patients were subjected to BAI, while the remaining 637 (67.7%) were not subjected to BAI. BAI significantly decreased the amount of alcohol consumption 3 months after intervention (SMD -0.596; 95% CI -1.067, -0.126; P = .013). Patients who received BAI were 1.89 times more likely to reduce their alcohol consumption (OR 1.89; 95% CI 0.59, 6.11; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: BAI is an efficacious motivational tool for patients with facial trauma in the emergency setting. It can effectively reduce the amount and rate of alcohol consumption after facial trauma in the short-term. However, a higher level of evidence is required to reach long-term conclusions.

Relationship between the use and types of helmets with facial injuries - a prospective study.

INTRODUCTION: many studies have demonstrated the benefits of helmet to prevent and reduce severity of injuries in motorcyclists. OBJECTIVE: the aim of the present study was to evaluate a possible relationship between the use of different types of helmets and the occurrence of facial injuries among victims of motorcycle accidents, seen at Hospital da Restauração, Recife/PE, Brazil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: demographic and trauma data were collected from hospitalized motorcycle accident victims with facial injuries from December 2020 to July 2021. Pearsons chi-square test was used to assess association between two categorical variables using a margin of error of 5%. RESULTS: among the participants, the average age was 33.46 years. The age group between 18 and 29 years was the most prevalent. Most participants were male. 60.0% of motorcyclists used helmets at the time of the accident and of this percentage 37.6% used fixed full-face helmet, 16.5% open-face helmet and the other 5.9% articulated full-face helmet. 62.7% of participants had facial fractures. Among the fractures, those of the zygomatic-orbital complex were the most common fracture and were significantly associated with the use of helmets, especially with open-face helmet. CONCLUSIONS: the use of helmets was associated with a lower number of facial fractures among patients who were victims of motorcycle accidents. Fracture of the zygomatic-orbital complex was related to the absence of a helmet at the time of the accident, as well as the use of open-face helmets.

FFP3 Feelings and Clinical Experience (FaCE). Facial pressure injuries in healthcare workers from FFP3 masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: Prolonged wear of filtering facepiece 3 (FFP3) masks during the COVID-19 pandemic has led to dermatoses, including pressure sores. This study aimed to better understand the local scale and nature of the problem, coping strategies, and impact on those affected. METHODS: A survey was designed by plastic surgeons, tissue viability nurses, and critical care doctors. Key elements were demographics, mask-wearing behaviours, facial injuries, coping mechanisms, and impacts, such as time off work or redeployment. Question types were multiple-choice questions, visual analogue scales, and blank space. It was distributed for voluntary completion at a London NHS Trust via staff update emails and posters. RESULTS: Between 24th April-15th May 2020, 178 surveys were completed in full. Participants were 84% female, 55% worked in ITU, and 48% were nurses. Grade 1 facial pressure injuries were reported by 79% of respondents (n=124). Other significant occupational dermatoses included pain (70%), dry skin (50%), and acne (41%). The cheeks and bridge of nose were most affected. Staff used barrier creams (17%), dressings (17%), and analgesia (10%) to manage facial injuries. Half of those who modified their mask were not re-fit tested. A total of 33% required redeployment to a non-FFP3 area or time off. CONCLUSIONS: FFP3 masks worn beyond the recommended 1 h are associated with facial injuries. When advanced PPE (i.e., powered airflow masks) is unavailable, we must provide targeted skincare support (prevent and manage), modify shift patterns to reduce mask wear intensity, and amend fit test protocols to optimise protection against COVID-19.

Helmet Use in Preventing Head Injuries in Bicycling, Snow Sports, and Other Recreational Activities and Sports.

Bicycling, snow sports, and other recreational activities and sports are important activities to keep children and youth active as part of a healthy lifestyle. These activities can be associated with serious and fatal head and facial injuries. Helmets, when worn correctly, are effective in decreasing head injuries and fatalities related to these activities. Legislation for helmet use is effective in increasing helmet use in children and, ultimately, in decreasing deaths and head and facial injuries. A multipronged strategy employing legislation, enforcement of laws, and medical clinicians and community programs is important for increasing helmet use to decrease deaths and injuries from recreational sports.

Preventing facial pressure injuries among health care staff working in diverse COVID-19 care environments.

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a specially designed care bundle on the development of facial pressure injuries among frontline health care workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a mixed methods study. First, a pre-posttest observational design was employed to evaluate the impact of the pre-piloted intervention, a care bundle including skin cleansing and hydration, protective material use, facemask selection and skin inspection, developed in line with international best practice guidelines. Data were collected using survey methodology. Frontline COVID-19 staff working in acute, community and ambulance services were invited to participate. Then, judgemental and volunteer sampling was used to select participants to undertake semi-structured interviews to elicit feedback on their perceptions of the care bundle. The sample included 120 acute hospital staff, 60 Ambulance staff, 24 Community Hub staff and 20 COVID-19 testing centre staff. A survey response rate of 61% was realised (n = 135/224). Of the participants, 32% (n = 43) had a facial pressure ulcer (FPI) pre-intervention and 13% (n = 18) developed an FPI while using the care bundle. The odds ratio (OR) was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.18 to 0.61; P = .0004), indicating a 77% reduction in the odds of FPI development with use of the care bundle. Analysis of the qualitative data from 22 interviews identified three key themes, the context for the care bundle, the ease of use of the care bundle and the care bundle as a solution to FPI development. The care bundle reduced the incidence of FPI among the participants and was found to be easy to use. Implementation of skin protection for frontline staff continues to be important given the persistently high incidence of COVID-19 and the ongoing need to wear PPE for protracted durations.

Facial Injuries Due to Cycling are Prevalent: Improved Helmet Design Offering Facial Protection is Recommended.

PURPOSE: Safety equipment for recreational cycling is commonly designed to protect the calvarium, but not the face, in the event of a crash. The purpose of this study is to identify the prevalence of facial injuries and their most common subcategories due to cycling injuries and to serve as an anatomical guide of what facial structures most need protection. METHODS: We report a cross-sectional study of consecutive patients reported to the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019. Patients were included in our study if they were evaluated in the emergency department (ED) for an injury due to cycling trauma. Primary outcome was injury to the face. Other variables of interest include age, sex, race, ED disposition, type of facial injury, location of facial injury, and presence of additional injuries. Descriptive and univariate statistics of the primary outcome were computed with these variables. RESULTS: There were 138,078 total patients injured due to cycling trauma reported by National Electronic Injury Surveillance System -participating EDs during the study period and, of those, 14,326 patients experienced injury to the face, revealing a 10.4% prevalence of facial injury due to cycling trauma (14,326/138,078). Thirteen percent (1,987/14,326) of facial injuries were fractures, and the most involved structures were the nose (786/1987; 40%), orbit (459/1987; 23%), and mandible (405/1987; 20%). Compared to children, adults demonstrate a greater risk of facial fracture (23.5% versus 6.5%, P < .0001) and hospital admission after facial injury (8.9 vs 2.8%, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of facial injury in the setting of cycling trauma is over 10%, and 13% of these injuries were facial fractures. With this high prevalence, there is a need for cycling helmets that include facial protection or faceguards, and we outline the commonly fractured anatomical areas that need the most protection.

Motorcycle helmet selection and usage for improved safety: A systematic review on the protective effects of helmet type and fastening.

OBJECTIVE: Motorcycle helmets are the most common and effective protective device to reduce head injuries and mortality in crashes among powered two-wheeler riders. Even if they are globally recognized as effective, there are still concerns regarding their correct use, which is necessary to achieve maximum head protection. The goal of this systematic review is to assess which characteristics of helmet design and use showed a positive influence on rider safety, in order to provide insights to improve end-user helmet usage. METHODS: A literature search was carried out combining two sets of keywords, one related with either motorcycle or rider and the other referring to either protective equipment or injuries. After the exclusion of duplicates, 977 papers were screened by reviewers, thus identifying 32 papers that were analyzed in group discussions. RESULTS: Among the papers included in this study, no strong conflicting conclusions emerged in their results. The studies focusing on the use of different types of helmets highlighted that full-face helmets, compared with other standard helmets, have a positive influence on head injuries and facial injuries. Correct fastening was clearly beneficial for head and facial injuries, induced injuries, and helmet ejection. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides important insights to improve the usage of helmets by end-users. Correct fastening is a crucial factor to avoid helmet roll-off during a crash. Most studies agreed that full-face helmets provide higher protection in comparison with other standard helmets, especially for facial injuries, and no negative influence with respect to neck and spinal injuries.

Rule Modifications to Reduce Checking-Related Injuries in High School Boys' Lacrosse.

CONTEXT: The National Federation of State High School Associations previously implemented 2 lacrosse rule modifications: Rule 5.4 in the 2012-2013 academic year to heighten the penalty for a head or neck hit to the head, face, or neck (HFN) and Rule 5.3.5 in the 2013-2014 academic year to minimize body checking. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the rates of overall injury, HFN injuries, and concussions due to intentional contact (checking) differed for boys' high school lacrosse players after Rule 5.4 and 5.3.5 modifications were enacted. DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study. SETTING: Web-based online surveillance system. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Boys' high school lacrosse players during the 2008-2009 to 2016-2017 seasons whose teams involved athletic trainers participating in the High School Reporting Information Online sports injury-surveillance system. INTERVENTION(S): Rule 5.4 in the 2012-2013 academic year increased the penalty for any intentional hits to the HFN, and Rule 5.3.5 in the 2013-2014 year eliminated body checking to a player in a defenseless position. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Overall, HFN, and concussion injury rate ratios (IRRs) by checking mechanism; overall and checking-related injury ratios by competitions and practices. RESULTS: A decrease was shown in checking-related HFN injuries (IRR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.65) and checking-related concussions (IRR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.12, 0.70) during practices in the seasons after both rule modifications were imposed, but no decreases occurred in any checking-related injuries during competitions. By injury mechanism, no decreases were evident after the Rule 5.4 modification. When both rule modifications (Rules 5.4 and 5.3.5) were enacted together, concussion rates due to delivering body checks (IRR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.29, 0.91) and overall injury risk due to being body checked (IRR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.53, 0.97) decreased. CONCLUSIONS: When both Rule 5.4 and 5.3.5 modifications were in effect, concussion and overall injury risks decreased for the body checker and the player being body checked, respectively.

The effectiveness of different types of motorcycle helmets - A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Protective helmets may reduce the risk of death and head injury in motorcycle collisions. However, there remains a large gap in knowledge regarding the effectiveness of different types of helmets in preventing injuries. OBJECTIVE: To explore and evaluate the effectiveness of different types of motorcycle helmets; that is the association between different helmet types and the incidence and severity of head, neck, and facial injuries among motorcyclists. Also, to explore the effect of different helmet types on riders. METHODS: A systematic search of different scientific databases was conducted from 1965 to April 2019. A scoping review was performed on the included articles. Eligible articles were included regarding defined criteria. Study characteristics, helmet types, fixation status, retention system, the prevention of injury or reduction of its severity were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 137 studies were included. There was very limited evidence for the better protection of full-face helmets from head and facial injury compared to open-face and half-coverage helmets. There was however scarce evidence for the superiority of a certain helmet type over others in terms of protection from neck injury. The retention system and the fixation status of helmets were two important factors affecting the risk of head and brain injury in motorcyclists. Helmets could also affect and limit the riders in terms of vision, hearing, and ventilation. Multiple solutions have been discussed to mitigate these effects. CONCLUSION: Full-face helmets may protect head and face in motorcycle riders more than open-face and half-coverage helmets, but there is not enough evidence for better neck protection among these three helmet types. Helmets can affect the rider's vision, hearing, and ventilation. When designing a helmet, all of these factors should be taken into account.

Do Helmet Use and Type Influence Facial Trauma Occurrence and Severity in Motorcyclists? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This article consists of a systematic review of the literature, which verified whether the use and types of helmets reduce the occurrence and severity of facial fractures in hospitalized motorcyclists after traffic accidents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prevalence studies and cohort studies, published in Latin American languages with no restrictions on publication dates, were considered. Two authors independently screened reference lists for eligible articles, assessed them for inclusion criteria, and extracted the data using a specific form. Twenty-six articles were selected, all prevalence studies. RESULTS: The patients who used a helmet had a lower prevalence and severity of facial fractures, compared to patients who did not wear a helmet. There were no differences in the occurrence of lower third fractures between patients who used or did not wear a helmet at the time of the trauma; as well as in meta-analysis of occurrence and severity of facial trauma between helmet types (open or closed). CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that the use of helmet leads to a lower number of fractures and severity of trauma when compared to nonuse. Regarding the type of helmet, there was no difference in the occurrence and severity of facial fracture in individuals who used closed or opened helmets.

Facial pressure injuries and the COVID-19 pandemic: skin protection care to enhance staff safety in an acute hospital setting.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a specially designed care bundle on the development of facial pressure injuries (PI) among frontline healthcare workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of facial PIs. The secondary outcomes of interest were facial pain while wearing PPE and ease of use of the care bundle. METHODS: This study used a voluntary survey by questionnaire, supplemented by a qualitative analysis of interviews from a small purposive sample that took place in one large Irish hospital over a two-month period in 2020. The hospital was a city-based public university teaching hospital with 800 inpatient beds. The intervention was a care bundle consisting of skin protection, face mask selection, material use, skin inspection, cleansing and hydration developed in line with international best practice guidelines. All staff working in COVID-19 wards, intensive care units and the emergency department in the hospital were given a kitbag containing the elements of the care bundle plus an information pamphlet. Data were collected via a survey and interviews. RESULTS: A total of 114 staff provided feedback on the use of the care bundle. Before using the care bundle 29% (n=33) of the respondents reported developing a facial PI, whereas after using the care bundle only 8% (n=9) of the respondents reported developing a facial PI. The odds ratio (OR) of skin injury development was 4.75 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.15-10.49; p=0.0001), suggesting that after the care bundle was issued, those who responded to the survey were almost five times less likely to develop a skin injury. Interviews with 14 staff determined that the bundle was easy to use and safe. CONCLUSION: Among those who responded to the survey, the use of the bundle was associated with a reduction in the incidence of skin injury from 29% to 8%, and respondents found the bundle easy to use, safe and effective. As with evidence from the international literature, this study has identified that when skincare is prioritised, and a systematic preventative care bundle approach is adopted, there are clear benefits for the individuals involved.

Do Mandatory Face Shields Reduce the Number of Craniomaxillofacial Injuries in the National Hockey League?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of the National Hockey League's (NHL) mandatory visor policy on the number and type of craniomaxillofacial (CMF) injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was designed using the 2 databases: the NHL Injury Viz and the Pro Sports Transactions. CMF injuries and player characteristics from the NHL's 2009-2010 through the 2016-2017 seasons were obtained. The study outcomes of games missed and number of injuries were compared before and after the implementation of the league rule. RESULTS: A total of 149 CMF injuries were included in the final sample. Following the mandatory visor rule, there were significant decreases in the total number of CMF injuries per season (14.3 vs 30.7, P = .01) and the number of upper face injuries per season (7.0 vs 16.7, P = .04). Although there was no difference in the ratio of upper facial injuries before and after the rule change, players who wore a face shield did have a lower proportion of upper face injuries among all CMF injuries sustained (42.9 vs 64.6%, P < .01). Ultimately, neither face shield use (P = .49) nor implementing a mandatory face shield rule (P = .62) changed the number of games missed when injury did occur. CONCLUSIONS: Upper facial injuries were observed to be less common among players wearing face shields. After the NHL mandated face shields, there were significant decreases in the mean number of CMF and upper facial injuries per season. Face shields did not appear to influence the severity or downtime from injury that were sustained.

Facial Protection to Prevent Facial Trauma and Allow for Optimal Protection after Facial Fracture Repair.

Facial skeletal fractures continue to affect humankind, and many methods to alleviate and prevent the injuries outright have been sought after. Prevention is desired, but the implementation and general compliance may contribute to missed opportunities to decrease the burden of facial skeletal trauma. In this article, we explore the preventative as well as postoperative options for the protection of the facial skeleton.

Protective Effects of Helmet Type on Facial Injuries.

ABSTRACT: The compulsory use of helmet by motorcyclists has lowered the incidence of facial trauma, but there are few studies evaluating the effects of different helmet types on such injuries. The authors collected retrospective data from the medical records of 287 motorcyclists presenting facial injuries treated at the maxillofacial surgery department of the "University Magna Graecia" of Catanzaro city in South Italy between 1 January 2007 and 1 August 2018. Patients were wearing 2 types of crash helmets at the time of the trauma, full face ones or open-face ones, and were compared using the Facial Injury Severity Scale (FISS). Those wearing open-face helmet were 3 times more than those wearing full-face helmet, with a higher FISS score.The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of Italy's compulsory helmet law on the change in helmet use and in particular if protection offered by helmets w4as different according to helmet type. The authors correlated the FISS scores among motorcyclists wearing these 2 tipologies of crash helmet.

Effectiveness of using hydrocolloid dressing combined with 3M Cavilon No-Sting Barrier Film to prevent facial pressure injury on medical staff in a COVID-19 designated hospital in China: a self-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is rapidly transmitted and has aroused enormous concern globally. This study aimed to investigate the effect of hydrocolloid dressing combined with 3M Cavilon No-Sting Barrier Film on the prevention of facial pressure injury in medical staff tasked with preventing and controlling COVID-19. METHODS: This was a self-controlled study. Medical staff who treated patients with COVID-19 infection in isolation wards from 6 January to 2 February, 2020, were selected to participate. Phase I was defined as the first 2 weeks of medical personnel entering the isolation ward, with phase II being the following 2 weeks. In phase I, medical workers only used hydrocolloid dressing on their faces, and in phase II, they used both hydrocolloid dressing and 3M Cavilon No-Sting Barrier Film. RESULTS: A total of 116 medical workers were selected as research subjects. The average facial local temperature in phase I was higher than that in phase II from the baseline (day 1) to the end of the study (day 14); however, there was no statistically significant difference (P>0.05). The incidence of facial pressure injury in phase II was lower than that in phase I (P<0.05); the facial skin comfort level among medical staff in phase II was higher than that in phase I (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Hydrocolloid dressing combined with 3M Cavilon No-Sting Barrier Film for facial skin care can effectively reduce the incidence of facial pressure injury and can improve skin comfort level while ensuring isolation and a protective effect.

Determination of the effect of prophylactic dressing on the prevention of skin injuries associated with personal protective equipments in health care workers during COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: The present study was carried out as a comparative observational study in order to determine the effect of prophylactic dressing on the prevention of skin injuries due to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in health care workers (HCWs) working with COVID-19 patients. In addition, the effect of nasal strip on the prevention of discomfort in breathing with mask was also investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study was carried out with 48 HCWs (Control Group-CG, n = 20; Experimental Group 1-EG1, n = 20; Experimental Group 2-EG2, n = 8) who use PPE on the face region and work with COVID-19 patients. Data was collected with Data Collection Form developed by researchers. In participants in CG, normal procedures of the institution in using PPE were followed. In EG1, prophylactic dressing was used on risky areas on the face. In EG2, nasal strip sticky on one side was used in addition to prophylactic dressing. The evaluation of the facial skin was made once a day by a researcher with expertise in wound management. RESULTS: Groups were similar in terms of demographic characteristics of participants. Overall rate of skin injuries associated with PPE use was 47.9%. Skin injuries developed in all participants in CG (n = 20), and in two and one participants in EG1 and EG2 respectively, with significant difference between groups. The most common skin injuries were Stage 1 pressure injury (29.2%), blanchable erythema of intact skin (27.1%) and itching (18.8%). No participant in EG2 reported discomfort in breathing (n = 8). Significant difference was found between groups in favor of EG2 in terms of experiencing discomfort in breathing (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, it was established that using prophylactic dressing under PPE prevents skin injuries on the facial skin and using nasal strip prevents discomfort in breathing with mask. In view of these results, it was recommended that prophylactic dressing should be used under PPE.

The prevalence of head and facial injuries among children in Saudi Arabia following road traffic crashes.

BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) are the leading cause of death among children in Saudi Arabia. Childhood injuries can be prevented or minimized if safety measures, such as car seats, are implemented. The literature on the epidemiology of head and facial injury among children is limited, which affects the ability to understand the extent of the burden and hinders investment in public health prevention. OBJECTIVE: Describe the epidemiology of head and facial injuries among children admitted to the hospital following MVCs. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Five hospitals in several regions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We collected data on all patients ≤16 years old, who were admitted to the hospital following MVCs between 2016-2019. Differences in various characteristics like head injury status and age groups were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Head and facial injuries. SAMPLE SIZE: 253 patients. RESULTS: Of the injured population, 97 (38.3%) sustained a head injury, and 88 (34.8%) had a facial injury. Thirteen (9.1%) children were driving the car at the time of the crash. About half of the children were seated in the back (53.8%) without a seatbelt or safety seat. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of head and facial injuries is striking. In addition, the study revealed that driving among children is not uncommon, which warrants monitoring and implementing interventions. Improved documentation of restraint use and police enforcement of safety laws can play a significant role in reducing associated injuries. The study findings highlight the importance of combination or rear seating as well as age-appropriate restraint in order to reduce the likelihood of head or facial injuries among children. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study using the electronic search system to identify patients, but may have missed cases that were not coded correctly. Large amount of missing data for some variables. Additionally, the analysis was limited to those admitted to the hospital. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.

Mouthguards for the Prevention of Orofacial Injuries in Military and Sports Activities: Part 2, Effectiveness of Mouthguard for Protection From Orofacial Injuries.

This is second of a two-part series on the history and effectiveness of mouthguards (MGs) for protection from orofacial injuries. MGs are hypothesized to reduce orofacial injuries by separating the upper and lower dentation, preventing tooth fractures, redistributing and absorbing the force of direct blows to the mouth, and separating teeth from soft tissue which helps prevent lacerations and bruises. The single study on MG use in military training found that when boil-and-bite MGs were required for four training activities, orofacial injury rates were reduced 56% compared with when MGs were required for just one training activity. A recent systematic review on the effectiveness of MGs for prevention of orofacial injuries included 23 studies involving MG users and nonusers and a wide variety of sports. For cohort studies that directly collected injury data, the risk of an orofacial injury was 2.33 times higher among MG nonusers (95% confidence interval, 1.59-3.44). More well-designed studies are needed on the effectiveness of MGs during military training. Despite some methodological limitations, the current data suggest that MGs can substantially reduce the risk of orofacial injuries in sport activities. MGs should be used in activities where there is a significant risk of orofacial injuries.

A decade of head, neck and facial cricket injury hospitalisations in Victoria, Australia: From 2007/08 to 2016/17.

OBJECTIVES: To present an epidemiological profile of hospital-treated head, neck and facial cricket injuries from 2007/08 to 2016/17 in Victoria, Australia. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of emergency department and hospital admission data. METHODS: An analysis of Victorian hospital-treated head, neck and facial cricket injuries of all cricket participants over 5 years old between July 2007 and June 2017. RESULTS: Over the decade, 3907 head, neck, facial (HNF) cricket injuries were treated in Victorian hospitals. The number of HNF cricket injuries substantially increased in the 2014/15 season from 367 to 435 injuries and remained over 400 in the subsequent years. More injuries were reported for male compared to female participants, 3583 compared to 324 injuries. When adjusted for participation in competitive cricket, the injury incidence rate was 1.3 per 1000 participants for males and 0.4 per 1000 participants for females. The 10-14year age group most frequently required hospital treatment. Open wounds were the most common type of injury (1166, 29.8%) and the main mechanism for HNF cricket injury for this decade was hit/struck/crush (3361, 86.0%). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a novel and current insight of the incidence and details of HNF injuries among cricket participants in Victoria over a decade. It is evident that males and younger participants, regardless of gender, have a higher risk of sustaining a HNF injury. This study provides a solid evidence base for stakeholders in developing strategies to minimise head, neck and facial injuries to make cricket a safe sport for all.