Head and neck injury potential during water sports falls: examining the effects of helmets

Head and neck injuries sustained during water skiing and wakeboarding occur as a result of falls in water and collisions with obstacles, equipment, or people. Though water sports helmets are designed to reduce injury likelihood from head impacts with hard objects, some believe that helmets increase head and neck injury rates for falls into water (with no impact to a solid object). The effect of water sports helmets on head kinematics and neck loads during simulated falls into water was evaluated using a custom-made pendulum system with a Hybrid-III anthropometric testing device. Two water entry configurations were evaluated: head-first and pelvis-first water impacts with a water entry speed of 8.8 ± 0.1 m/s. Head and neck injury metrics were compared to injury assessment reference values and the likelihoods of brain injury were determined from head kinematics. Water sport helmets did not increase the likelihood of mild traumatic brain injury compared to a non-helmeted condition for both water entry configurations. Though helmets did increase injury metrics (such as head acceleration, HIC, and cervical spine compression) in some test configurations, the metrics remained below injury assessment reference values and the likelihoods of injury remained below 1%. Using the effective drag coefficients, the lowest water impact speed needed to produce cervical spine injury was estimated to be 15 m/s. The testing does not support the supposition that water sports helmets increase the likelihood of head or neck injury in a typical fall into water during water sports.

Pantomime horsemen: “cavalry-sports“ helmets and popular culture in the frontier provinces

Decorated helmets fitted with a metal mask in the form of a human face have been found throughout the lands of the Roman empire, and sometimes beyond it. Despite the significant number of examples (whole or in part) surviving from the 1st to the 3rd c. A.D., these helmets remain an enigma to students of the Roman army. They have usually (though not exclusively) been found either at or close to forts garrisoned by cavalry or in hoards or graves containing other military equipment, often cavalry-specific such as horse-chamfrons. Most have therefore been identified as cavalry helmets, and it is widely accepted that many are of the type referred to by the 2nd-c. general Arrian in his treatise Tactica whilst describing cavalry exercises (hippika gymnasia): these helmets, unlike those made for battle, do not protect just the head and cheeks, but are made to fit the faces of the cavalrymen completely, with openings for the eyes so as not to interrupt the vision whilst nevertheless providing protection for the eyes.1

Craniofacial injuries in professional cricket: no more a red herring

The issue of head injury in a noncontact sport like cricket is a matter of great debate and it carries more questions than answers. Recent incidents of fatal head injuries in individuals wearing a helmet have caused some to question the protective value of the helmet. The authors discuss the pattern, type of injury, incidents, and location of cranio-facio-ocular injuries in professional cricket to date. They evaluate the history of usage of the helmet in cricket, changes in design, and the protective value, and they compare the efficacy of various sports' helmets with injury profiles similar to those in cricket. The drop test and air cannon test are compared for impact energy attenuation performance of cricket helmets. A total of 36 cases of head injuries were identified, of which 5 (14%) were fatal and 9 (22%) were career-terminating events. Batsmen are the most vulnerable to injury, bearing 86% of the burden, followed by wicketkeepers (8%) and fielders (5.5%). In 53% of cases, the ball directly hit the head, while in 19.5% of cases the ball entered the gap between the peak and the faceguard. Ocular injuries to 3 wicketkeepers proved to be career-terminating injuries. The air cannon test is a better test for evaluating cricket helmets than the drop test. Craniofacial injuries are more common than popularly believed. There is an urgent need to improve the efficacy and compliance of protective restraints in cricket. A strict injury surveillance system with universal acceptance is needed to identify the burden of injuries and modes for their prevention.