Injury, Int. J.

Care Injured 45 (2014) 1215–1219

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Injury
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/injury

Longboard and skateboard injuries

Glenn Keays a,*, Alex Dumas b
a
McGill Health Centre, Montreal Children’s Hospital, 2300 Tupper, Room CB-27, Montreal, QC, Canada H3H 1P3
b
École des sciences de l’activité physiquejSchool of Human Kinetics, Université d’OttawajUniversity of Ottawa, 125 University, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Introduction: The causes and events related to skateboarding injuries have been widely documented.
Accepted 14 March 2014 However, little is known about longboard-related injuries. With five deaths linked to longboarding in the
United States and Canada in 2012, some cities are already considering banning the practice. This study
Keywords: compared the types and causes of longboarding-related injuries to those associated with skateboarding.
Adolescent Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, using an emergency-based surveillance system, on
Athletic injuries/epidemiology patients under the age of 18 who had been injured while longboarding or skateboarding between 2006
Accidental falls/statistics & numerical data*
and 2010.
Skating/injuries*
Results: A total of 287 longboarding and 4198 skateboarding cases were identified. There were more
females in the longboarding group (18.8%) than in the skateboarding one (10.7%, p < 0.002). All the
injured longboarders were older than 10 years of age while a fifth of the injured skateboarders were
under the age of 11. Longboarders’ injuries occurred mainly on streets and roads (75.3% vs. 34.3% in
skateboarders, p < 0.000) and rarely in skate parks (1.4% vs. 26.4% in skateboarders, p < 0.000).
Longboarders suffered twice as many injuries to their heads and necks (23.3% vs. 13.1%, p < 0.000) and
twice as many severe neurological traumas (8.6 vs. 3.7%, p < 0.000) while skateboarders suffered more
injuries to their lower extremities (33.7% vs. 24.7%, p < 0.002).
Conclusion: Longboarding is associated with a different pattern of injuries than skateboarding. Because
longboarders suffer more intracranial injuries, the importance of helmet use should be especially
strongly reinforced.
ß 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction rolling resistance, allowing for greater speeds. Whereas skateboards

With five deaths related to longboarding in the United States
and Canada in 2012, 4 in 2013 and already one in 2014, some
cities are now considering banning the activity [1–3]. Long-
boarding has been part of the sporting landscape since the late
1950s and became popular in the early 1990s in California [4,5].
By 2008, the number of longboarders in the United States was
estimated to be around 750,000 [6]. Despite the sport’s
popularity, only a small amount of research that is specific to
the injuries of longboarders has been published in the scientific
literature. In contrast, skateboarding injuries have been the
subject of over 60 papers.
Longboards are long skateboards (from 36 to 60 in.) while
skateboards are no longer than 33 inches. Longboards have wider
decks (or boards) and wheels with larger diameters; this decreases
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 514 412 4400x23167; fax: +1 514 412 4477.
E-mail addresses: glenn@keays.ca, Glenn.Keays@muhc.mcgill.ca (G. Keays).
are often used to perform special manoeuvres or tricks in skate parks
(jumps, sliding along guardrails, spins, etc.) [7], longboards offer
better stability at higher speeds and better comfort when tackling
long distances [8]. Longboards are also used for downhill racing,
with the present world record set at 81 m/h [9].
Falls and motor vehicle collisions have been identified as the
two major causes of skateboarding injuries [10]. The most frequent
injuries among skateboarders are musculoskeletal and involve the
upper (55–63%) [11,12] and lower (22–26%) [11–13] extremities.
Some researchers have estimated the incidence of head injuries to
be between 14% and 50% [11–14]. Skateboarding injuries show a
striking gender difference: between 77% and 91% of those injured
are males [11–16]. While the majority of skateboarders are older
teenagers and young adults [15,17], children who are 7-to-11 years
of age make up between 8% and 40% of all injured skaters [10,14].
Since longboards differ from skateboards in design, use and
place of practice, we postulated that each of the two activities is
associated with a different pattern of injuries. The aim of this study
was to compare the injury profiles of young longboarders and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.03.010
0020–1383/ß 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Busan National University from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on March 17, 2021.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2021. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1216 G. Keays, A. Dumas / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 45 (2014) 1215–1219

skateboarders who presented to emergency departments (EDs) in
Canadian hospitals.
Methods
Data source
Data were obtained from the Canadian Hospitals Injury
Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP), a national surveil-
lance system based on ED data from 14 hospitals in Canada [18,19].
Patients or parents of patients who go to the ED are asked to fill out
a one-page questionnaire and provide detailed information
regarding the injury that brought them there. Clinical data (nature
of the injury, body part and level of treatment) is extracted from
the ED record by CHIRPP coordinators at each site. All ques-
tionnaires are sent to the Public Health Agency of Canada to be
entered electronically by trained coders. Research has shown that
CHIRPP data represent common injury patterns of Canadian
children and youth [20,21].
Data extraction and analysis
Our study was restricted to children under the age of 18 who
visited an ED between 2008 and 2010 for an injury that occurred
while longboarding or skateboarding. Cases were identified using
the text that described the injury on the CHIRPP form. To ensure
complete capture, we searched narratives using the following
bilingual (French and English) text strings: ‘‘skateboard’’, ‘‘long-
board’’, ‘‘wakeboard’’ and ‘‘planche-a-roulette’’. Cleaning of the data
set involved excluding cases where the participant was neither
longboarding nor skateboarding (e.g., ‘‘a kid hit me with his
skateboard.’’)
Given that CHIRPP includes 100 different body parts and 80
different injury diagnostics, we grouped these in two broader
categories for the purpose of this study. The first included four
body parts: the head and neck, upper extremity, lower extremity
and trunk; the second covered six types of injuries: – intracranial
injuries (including concussion and suspected concussion, visible
injuries to the brain, skull fractures and spine injuries), dental
injuries, fractures, soft tissue injuries (including bruising, abra-
sions and lacerations), sprains and injuries to the internal organs.
Like most of the research that has already been done, we used
the level of treatment received in the ED to determine the severity
of the injury [22,23]. Injuries that were treated only in the ED were
classified as minor while those for which the patient was kept
under observation in the ED, or required a follow-up or admission
were considered severe.
In order to provide a more complete assessment of the injuries,
narrative descriptions (patients’ or parents’ written accounts of the
events) were individually reviewed and coded according to four
mechanisms: the subject fell while travelling, fell while going
down a hill or was injured while performing special manoeuvres or
the injury was caused by a motor vehicle. Six different locations
were used to categorise where the injury took place: spaces shared
by motor vehicles (streets and parking lots), bike paths, skate
parks, open spaces (parks and school yards), residential and
unspecified. Finally, the incidence of helmet use was also reported
for both activities.
Statistical analysis
Descriptive analyses based on age, gender, mechanisms of
injury, location, helmet use, body part, nature and severity of injury
were profiled according to longboarding and skateboarding. Means
with confidence intervals (95%) were calculated for age and
compared using t-test. Pearson’s Chi square statistics were used to
compare the categorical data between the two activities. Calcula-
tions and analyses were performed using SPSS 17.0, and results
were deemed significant at a = 0.05 (2-tailed).
Results
Demographics and location
The first table (refer to Table 1) shows the age, gender and
location (i.e., where the injury happened) of the 4485 selected
cases, 287 of which were due to longboarding and 4198 to
skateboarding. The mean age of the injured longboarders and

Table 1
Numbers and percentages of longboarding and skateboarding injuries by age, gender and location.

All cases Longboard Skateboard

n = 4485 % n = 287 % n = 4198 %

Age group
2–4 34 (0.8) 0 (0.0) 34 (0.8)
5–10 755 (16.8) 0 (0.0) 755 (18.0)
11–14 2464 (54.9) 153 (53.3) 2311 (55.1)
15–17 1232 (27.5) 134 (46.7) 1098 (26.2)
x2 = 94.25,
p < 0.000

Gender
Male 3980 (88.8) 233 (81.2) 3748 (89.3)
Female 504 (11.2) 54 (18.8) 450 (10.7)
x2 = 10.08, p < 0.002
Location
Vehicles 1819 (40.6) 219 (76.3) 1600 (38.1)
Road, street 1655 (36.9) 216 (75.3) 1440 (34.3)
Parking lot 163 (3.6) 3 (1.0) 160 (3.8)
Bike path 45 (1.0) 24 (8.4) 21 (0.5)
Skate park 1113 (24.8) 4 (1.4) 1109 (26.4)
Open spaces 601 (13.4) 11 (3.8) 590 (14.1)
Park 428 (9.5) 8 (2.8) 420 (10.0)
School 173 (3.9) 3 (1.0) 170 (4.0)
Residential 512 (11.4) 1 (0.3) 511 (12.2)
Unspecified 395 (8.8) 28 (9.8) 367 (8.7)
x2 = 256.41, p < 0.000

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Busan National University from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on March 17, 2021.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2021. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 G. Keays, A. Dumas / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 45 (2014) 1215–1219 1217

Table 2
Numbers and percentages of longboarding and skateboarding injuries by mechanisms and helmet use.

All cases Longboard Skateboard

n = 4485 % n = 287 % n = 4198 %

Mechanism
Fell while travelling 2579 (57.5) 228 (79.7) 2351 (56.0)
Doing tricks, special manoeuvres 1713 (38.2) 7 (2.4) 1706 (40.6)
Fell while going down a hill 138 (3.1) 49 (17.1) 89 (2.1)
Hit by motor vehicle 55 (1.2) 3 (1.0) 52 (1.2)
x2 = 325.51,
p < 0.000
Helmet use
Yes 1034 (23.1) 40 (13.9) 994 (23.7)
No 2074 (46.2) 94 (32.9) 1980 (47.2)
Unknown 1377 (30.7) 153 (53.3) 1224 (29.2)
x2 = 84.77,
p < 0.000

skateboarders was 14.3 years (CI, 95%; 12.6–16.1) and 12.7 years Table 3
Numbers and percentages of longboarding and skateboarding injuries by body parts
(CI, 95%; 10.1–15.4), respectively. One fifth of the injured
and nature of injury.
skateboarders were under the age of 11 while all the injuries
from longboarding involved children 11 years and older. The All cases Longboard Skateboard
proportion of girls injured while longboarding in relation to boys n = 4485, (%) n = 287, (%) n = 4198, (%)
was higher than it was for skateboarders, at 18.8% vs. 10.7% Head and neck 617 (13.8) 67 (23.3) 550 (13.1)
(p < 0.002), respectively. Longboarders’ injuries occurred mainly Intracraniala 296 (6.6) 47 (16.4) 249 (5.9)
on streets and roads (75.3% vs. 34.3% in skateboarders, p < 0.000) Fracture of neck, skull 29 (0.6) 3 (1.0) 26 (0.6)
Soft tissue injury 83 (1.9) 8 (2.8) 75 (1.8)
and rarely in skate parks (1.4% vs. 26.4% in skateboarders,
Sprain 6 (0.1) 1 (0.3) 5 (0.1)
p < 0.000). Laceration 162 (3.6) 5 (1.7) 157 (3.7)
Dental 41 (0.9) 3 (1.0) 38 (0.9)
Injury mechanisms and helmet use
Upper extremity 2282 (50.9) 144 (50.2) 2138 (50.9)
Fracture 1441 (32.1) 95 (33.1) 1346 (32.1)
Very few of the injuries suffered by the longboarders resulted Soft tissue injury 540 (12.0) 30 (10.5) 510 (12.1)
from special manoeuvres and tricks while these accounted for Sprain 242 (5.4) 18 (6.3) 224 (5.3)
more than 40% in the skateboarders (p < 0.000). By contrast, the Laceration 59 (1.3) 1 (0.3) 58 (1.4)

number of longboarders who were injured while going down a hill Lower extremity 1484 (33.1) 71 (24.7) 1413 (33.7)
was eight times higher than for skateboarders (17.1% vs. 2.1%, Fracture 535 (11.9) 21 (7.3) 514 (12.2)
Soft tissue injury 435 (9.7) 33 (11.5) 402 (9.6)
p < 0.000). Injuries caused by motor vehicles were rare, represent-
Sprain 453 (10.1) 15 (5.2) 438 (10.4)
ing 1% of all cases. Approximately 70% of the subjects answered the Laceration 61 (1.4) 2 (0.7) 59 (1.4)
question about whether or not they were wearing a helmet at the
Trunka 94 (2.1) 3 (1.0) 91 (2.3)
time of the injury; the prevalence of helmet use among these
Soft tissue injury 78 (1.7) 3 (1.0) 75 (1.8)
subjects was similar for longboarders (29.8%) and skateboarders Sprain 16 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 16 (0.4)
(33.4%), (see Table 2). Patients who reported wearing a helmet had
Internal organs 8 (0.2) 2 (0.7) 6 (0.1)
significantly lower proportion of severe intracranial injuries
(concussion, visible injury to the brain, skull fracture or spine Chi square for body part and activity = 35.76, p < 0.000; chi square for nature of
injury) than those who did not wear a helmet (1.9% vs. 5.0%, injury = 55.73, p < 0.000.
a
Intracranial: including suspected concussions and concussions.
p < 0.000).

Body part and nature of injury

The most frequent injuries among longboarders and skate-
boarders involved their upper extremities; these injuries
accounted for half of all those incurred for both activities (see
Table 3). Injuries to the head and neck were more prevalent in the
longboarders (23.3% vs. 13.1%, p < 0.000) while skateboarders
suffered more injuries to their lower extremities (33.7% vs. 24.7%,
p < 0.000). Fractures were the most common injury for both
activities, varying from 41.5% in longboarders to 44.9% in
skateboarders. Longboarders suffered more intracranial injuries
than skateboarders (16.4% vs. 5.9%, p < 0.000). If we consider only
neurological trauma that was severe (i.e., concussion, visible injury
to the brain, skull fracture or spine injury), these were twice as
prevalent in longboarders as in skateboarders (8.6% vs. 3.7%,
p < 0.000). With respect to injuries to the lower extremities,
noticeable differences between the activities were observed when
combining body part and nature of injury: skateboarders suffered
more lower-extremity fractures (12.2% vs. 7.3%, p < 0.014) and
sprains (10.4% vs. 5.2%, p < 0.002) than longboarders.
Injury severity
Overall, severity according to the level of treatment that was
given was similar for both activities: about 50% of the injuries
required a follow-up, and 6% were admitted to hospital (Table 4).
Discussion
We set out to compare the characteristics and injury profiles of
young participants who were injured while longboarding or
skateboarding, using data from an emergency department injury
information system. While skateboards and longboards may be
similar in design, variations in the equipment can lead to
significant differences in the nature of the injuries and the body
parts that are most at risk [24,25]. This study has identified several
key differences.
While 20% of the injured skateboarders were between the ages
of 2 and 10, the majority of those injured were teenagers and young
adults. This finding agrees with results reported in the literature

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Busan National University from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on March 17, 2021.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2021. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1218 G. Keays, A. Dumas / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 45 (2014) 1215–1219
Table 4
Numbers and percentages of longboarding and skateboarding injuries by severity.
Treated in the ED, no follow-up required
Treated in the ED, follow-up required
Admitted
[10,15,17]. None of the injured longboarders were under the age of
11. Our results suggest that longboarders are older than
skateboarders, which would not equate to a difference in risk
but rather in exposure. Longboards are more expensive and more
difficult to master than skateboards and are, therefore, best suited
to older teenagers and adults as opposed to children. Males made
up 89% of the subjects; this agrees with the literature, which
determines this figure to be between 77% and 91% [11–17].
Nonetheless, the proportion of females in the longboarding group
was significantly higher than in the skateboarding one, suggesting
that females may be more inclined to practice longboarding than
skateboarding.
Twice as many longboarders than skateboarders were injured
in spaces shared by vehicles (roads, streets and parking lots) while
more than 25% of skateboarders’ injuries occurred in skate parks
compared to less than 2% for longboarders. The differences in
injury mechanisms have similar characteristics: 40% of the injuries
in skateboarding resulted from tricks and special manoeuvres
compared to hardly any (only 3%) in longboarders, and the number
of injuries in longboarders when they were going down hills was
eight times higher than among skateboarders. This reflects the
inherent differences between longboards and skateboards, the
former assuring more stability and traction and thus better suited
to travelling long distances and high speeds while the latter are
often more suitable for acrobatic performances [8].
A third of the longboarders and skateboarders reported wearing
a helmet at the time of injury. Other studies on skateboarding have
observed much lower rates. Page[26] reported seeing no helmeted
skateboarding teenager in Toronto in an observational study
conducted in the summer of 2009 while McGeehan [27] observed
that only one skateboarder out of 43 who consulted the ED
between 2001 and 2002 had worn a helmet. Two other studies, one
using data collected from 2002 to 2006 [14] and another in 2003
[28], reported helmet use of 7.2% and 7.9%, respectively. Our results
showing lower proportions of injuries to the head and neck as well
as less severe neurological trauma in participants who wore
helmets has been observed by others as well [11,14].
The upper extremity was the most frequently body part that
was most frequently injured in both activities, at approximately
50%, a proportion that was also observed in the skateboarding
literature [11,12]. However, significant differences were observed
in the injury profiles of the two activities. Longboarders suffered
twice as many injuries to their heads and necks and twice as many
severe neurological traumas. Thygerson, who made a presentation
at the November 2013 APHA annual meeting, also observed a
higher incidence rate of head injuries in longboarders than in
skateboarders [29]. However, injuries to the lower extremities
were more prevalent among skateboarders. Longboards reach
higher speeds than skateboards [8], which may explain the higher
proportion of head injuries we observed in longboarders and
suggests that forward falls are more prevalent in longboarding.
Injury severity was similar between the groups, with an admission
rate of 6%. Other research has also observed low admission rates in
skateboarders, ranging from 2.9% to 3.2% [12,16]. Thygerson, who
used injury severity scores (ISS), reported that scores of over 15
were only seen in longboarders [29].
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Busan National University from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on March 17, 2021.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2021. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
All cases Longboard Skateboard
n = 4485, % n = 287, % n = 4198, %
2006 (44.7) 143 (50.0) 1863 (44.4)
2216 (49.4) 124 (43.4) 2092 (49.8)
263 (5.9) 20 (7.0) 243 (5.8)
x2 = 4.59, p < 0.101
We acknowledge several limitations in our study. CHIRPP data
is restricted to paediatric hospitals, which represent only a portion
of all injuries across Canada. Also, adolescents and youth (such as
those aged 14 and older) tend to be under-represented in CHIRPP.
Longboarders, because they are older than skateboarders and more
likely to be injured in areas with traffic, are less likely to be
transported to paediatric hospitals. This suggests that longboard
injuries may be under-reported in this study. We do not have
information regarding exposure, such as annual figures for
skateboarders vs. longboarders, which prevents us from deter-
mining whether longboarders suffer more injuries than skate-
boarders. Yearly rates for the numbers who participate in this
activity are unavailable as well, although the constant increase in
longboard sales in recent years is a good indicator of the growing
popularity of the sport [30]. Furthermore, the descriptive
information gathered by CHIRPP can be incomplete. In some
cases, details regarding the circumstances of the injury, such as the
mechanism and location, were absent. Also, a significant propor-
tion of the participants did not answer the helmet-related
questions. It could be that participants who were not wearing a
helmet are more likely to skip this question; in addition, those who
report wearing a helmet may not, in fact, have worn one. We do not
believe that these limitations affect our results the nature of
injuries, the body part involved or what caused the injury. We
believe that comparing the injuries between longboarders and
skateboarders clearly shows the existence of intra-sport injury
variations: although boarding sports share similar characteristics,
differences in design, use and place of practice produce distinctive
injury profiles.
Conclusions
Compared to skateboarders, the injuries of longboarders
included a higher proportion of females, involved more intracra-
nial injuries and were rarely the results of tricks or special
manoeuvres. The use of helmets was associated with a decreased
risk of intracranial injuries for both activities.
Conflict if interest statement
None declared.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Stephen McFaull and Robin Skinner,
analysts for CHIRPP, for maintaining and verifying the data, and
Sophie Laforest for her expert advice on skateboarders’ injuries.
References
[1] Burton C. Bombing’ Banned in Los Angeles. ABC News Los Angeles 2012, http://
abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/08/skateboard-bombing-banned-in-
los-angeles/ [accessed 16.9.13].
[2] Colebourn J. North Vancouver ponders what to do about longboarding. Post-
media News Don Mills Ont Canada 2012, http://www.theprovince.com/news/
North+Vancouver+district+eyes+longboarding/8506284/story.html [accessed
16.9.13].
 G. Keays, A. Dumas / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 45 (2014) 1215–1219
[3] Guzman J. Concerns growing over longboarding safety in Dallas. Itemizer
Observer Dallas 2013, http://www.polkio.com/ns/news/25948/concerns-
growing-over-longboarding-safety-in-dallas [accessed 16.9.13].
[4] Brooke M. The concrete wave: the history of skateboarding. Paw Prints 2008.
[5] Tadlock L. The history of longboarding; 2013, http://www.livestrong.com/
article/351382-the-history-of-longboarding/ [accessed 16.9.13].
[6] Krcmar S. Longboarding’s fans are on a roll. Los Angeles Times Los
Angeles 2008, http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/18/health/he-skate-
board18 [accessed 16.9.13].
[7] Wikipedia. Wikipedia Skateboarding tricks; 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Skateboarding_trick [accessed 16.9.13].
[8] Highland J. Skateboard vs. longboard; 2010, http://www.livestrong.com/arti-
cle/155017-skateboard-vs-longboard/ [accessed 16.9.13].
[9] Lavoie B. Un record Guinness en planche à roulettes: 129,94 km/h! Le Soleil.
Quebec City; 2012, http://www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/actualites/societe/
201206/18/01-4536218-un-record-guinness-en-planche-a-roulettes-12994-
kmh.php [accessed 16.9.13].
[10] Forsman L, Eriksson A. Skateboarding injuries of today. Brit J Sports Med
2001;35:325–8.
[11] Inoue N, Barker R, Scott DA. Injury bulletin 105: skateboard injury; 2009,
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/29476/1/Skateboard_QISU_2009.6.pdf [accessed
16.9.13].
[12] Schieber RA, Branche-Dorsey CM, Ryan GW. Comparison of in-line skating
injuries with rollerskating and skateboarding injuries. J Am Med Assoc
1994;271:1856–8.
[13] Osberg JS, Schneps SE, Di Scala C, Li G. Skateboarding: more dangerous than
roller skating or in-line skating. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1998;152:985.
[14] Lustenberger T, Talving P, Barmparas G, Schnüriger B, Lam L, Inaba K, et al.
Skateboard-related injuries: not to be taken lightly. A national trauma data-
bank analysis. J Trauma 2010;69:924.
[15] Keilani M, Krall C, Lipowec L, Posch M, Komanadj TS, Crevenna R. Skateboard-
ing injuries in Vienna: location, frequency, and severity. PMR 2010;2:619–24.
[16] Kyle SB, Nance ML, Rutherford Jr GW, Winston FK. Skateboard-associated
injuries: participation-based estimates and injury characteristics. J Trauma
2002;53:686.
[17] Tominaga GT, Schaffer KB, Dandan IS, Kraus JF. Epidemiological and clinical
features of an older high-risk population of skateboarders. Injury
2012;44:645–9.
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Busan National University from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on March 17, 2021.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2021. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1219
[18] Mackenzie SG, Pless IBCHIRPP. Canada’s principal injury surveillance program.
Injury Prev 1999;5:208.
[19] Macarthur C, Pless IB. Sensitivity and representativeness of a childhood injury
surveillance system. Injury Prev 1999;5:214–6.
[20] Pickett W, Brison RJ, Mackenzie SG, Garner M, King MA, Greenberg TL, et al.
Youth injury data in the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention
Program: do they represent the Canadian experience? Injury Prev 2000;6:9–
15.
[21] Macpherson AK, White HL, Mongeon S, Grant VJ, Osmond M, Lipskie T, et al.
Examining the sensitivity of an injury surveillance program using population-
based estimates. Injury Prev 2008;14:262–5.
[22] Hagel BE, Marko J, Dryden D, Couperthwaite AB, Sommerfeldt J, Rowe BH.
Effect of bodychecking on injury rates among minor ice hockey players. Can
Med Assoc J 2006;175:155–60.
[23] Kang J, Hagel B, Emery CA, Senger T, Meeuwisse W. Assessing the representa-
tiveness of Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Programme
(CHIRPP) sport and recreational injury data in Calgary, Canada. Int J Injury
Control Saf Promot 2013;20:19–26.
[24] Abu-Laban RB. Snowboarding injuries: an analysis and comparison with
alpine skiing injuries. Can Med Assoc J 1991;145:1097.
[25] Roberts DJ, Ouellet JF, Sutherland FR, Kirkpatrick AW, Lall RN, Ball CG. Severe
street and mountain bicycling injuries in adults: a comparison of the incidence,
risk factors and injury patterns over 14 years. Can J Surg 2013;56:E32–8.
[26] Page JL, Macpherson AK, Middaugh-Bonney T, Tator CH. Prevalence of helmet
use by users of bicycles, push scooters, inline skates and skateboards in
Toronto and the surrounding area in the absence of comprehensive legislation:
an observational study. Injury Prev 2012;18:94–7.
[27] McGeehan J, Shields BJ, Smith GA. Children should wear helmets while ice-
skating: a comparison of skating-related injuries. Pediatrics 2004;114:124–8.
[28] Kroncke EL, Niedfeldt MW, Young CC. Use of protective equipment by ado-
lescents in inline skating, skateboarding, and snowboarding. Clin J Sport Med
2008;18:38–43.
[29] Thygerson SM. Boarding injuries: the long and short of It. 141st APHA Annual
Meeting (November 2–November 6). APHA; 2013.
[30] Mahoney M. The longboard industry: a look forward [Longboard Retailer
Magazine web site]; 2013, http://www.axsgear.com/blog/longboard-busi-
ness-market/the-longboard-industry-a-look-forward [accessed 19.10.13].