Rodeo related large animal injury: is protective head-gear warranted?

To compare rodeo associated large animal injuries to large animal associate d trauma from other aetiologies in order to determine whether mandatory pro tective head-gear during rodeo is warranted. Retrospective analysis related to injury involving large animal admissions between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 1995. The setting is at the University of New Mexico Health Science Center, a lev er 1 trauma centre. All patients admitted with Injury Severity Scores of I or higher following large animal associated injuries. There were 140 admissions for which mechanism of injury was known. Thirty-n ine occurred during rodeo competition and 101 occurred during other activit ies. Bovine associated activities were the aetiology in 34 (87%) of rodeo r elated injuries while equine related activities were the aetiology in 97 (9 6%) of non-rodeo related injuries (P < 0.001). Rodeo related injuries invol ved the head and neck in five patients (13%) compared to 42 patients (42%) in non-rodeo activities (P = 0.001). Mean Regional Injury Severity Score he ad and neck was 0.4 for injured rodeo riders and 1.5 for injured non-rodeo riders (P < 0.001). Mean admission Glascow Coma Scale was 14.9 for rodeo-in jured patients and 13.3 for non-rodeo-injured patients (P < 0.001). Total I SS was significantly lower for rodeo injured patients (9.1 vs. 11.7, P= 0.0 3). No rodeo injured patient died as a result of head injury. Mechanism of injury, ISS head, GCS, total ISS, and outcome differ between r odeo and non-rodeo injuries. While routine helmet use during non-rodeo even ts appears justified, mandatory use of helmets in rodeo events is unwarrant ed. Orthotics to protect the chest and abdomen are more likely to reduce mo rbidity and mortality for rodeo participants. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd . All rights reserved.