How Well Do Popular Bicycle Helmets Protect from Different Types of Head Injury?
C. E. Baker,X. Yu,B. Lovell,R. Tan,S. Patel,M. Ghajari
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-024-03589-8
IF: 3.8
2024-09-19
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
Abstract:Abstract Bicycle helmets are designed to protect against skull fractures and associated focal brain injuries, driven by helmet standards. Another type of head injury seen in injured cyclists is diffuse brain injuries, but little is known about the protection provided by bicycle helmets against these injuries. Here, we examine the performance of modern bicycle helmets in preventing diffuse injuries and skull fractures under impact conditions that represent a range of real-world incidents. We also investigate the effects of helmet technology, price, and mass on protection against these pathologies. 30 most popular helmets among UK cyclists were purchased within 9.99–135.00 GBP price range. Helmets were tested under oblique impacts onto a 45° anvil at 6.5 m/s impact speed and four locations, front, rear, side, and front-side. A new headform, which better represents the average human head’s mass, moments of inertia and coefficient of friction than any other available headforms, was used. We determined peak linear acceleration (PLA), peak rotational acceleration (PRA), peak rotational velocity (PRV), and BrIC. We also determined the risk of skull fractures based on PLA (linear risk), risk of diffuse brain injuries based on BrIC (rotational risk), and their mean (overall risk). Our results show large variation in head kinematics: PLA (80–213 g), PRV (8.5–29.9 rad/s), PRA (1.6–9.7 krad/s 2 ), and BrIC (0.17–0.65). The overall risk varied considerably with a 2.25 ratio between the least and most protective helmet. This ratio was 1.76 for the linear and 4.21 for the rotational risk. Nine best performing helmets were equipped with the rotation management technology MIPS, but not all helmets equipped with MIPS were among the best performing helmets. Our comparison of three tested helmets which have MIPS and no-MIPS versions showed that MIPS reduced rotational kinematics, but not linear kinematics. We found no significant effect of helmet price on exposure-adjusted injury risks. We found that larger helmet mass was associated with higher linear risk. This study highlights the need for a holistic approach, including both rotational and linear head injury metrics and risks, in helmet design and testing. It also highlights the need for providing information about helmet safety to consumers to help them make an informed choice.
engineering, biomedical