Fowler KA, Dahlberg LL, Haileyesus T, et al. Childhood Firearm Injuries in the United States. <i>Pediatrics</i>. 2017;140(1):e20163486

doi:10.1542/peds.2017-2298

Cited by 21 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 Firearm related injuries in children are a significant public health problem in the United States, with 1300 children dying annually from firearm related injuries. 2 A paucity of data exists with respect to how firearm related penetrating injury compares to non-firearm related injury in this vulnerable population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it time for firearm injury to be a separate activation criteria in children? An assessment of penetrating pediatric trauma using need for surgeon presence

McGaha

Stewart

Garwe

et al. 2021

The American Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Penetrating injury independently predicts the need for surgeon presence (NSP) upon arrival. Penetrating injury is often used as a trauma triage indicator, however, it includes a wide range of specific mechanisms of injury. We sought to compare firearm-related and non-firearm related pediatric penetrating injuries with respect to NSP, ISS and mortality. Methods: Patients <18 from the 2016 National Trauma Quality Improvement Program Database were included. Penetrating injury was identified and grouped using ICD-10 mechanism codes into firearm and non-firearm related injury. NSP, ISS, and mortality were compared between the two groups. Results: A total of 1715 (4.2%) patients with penetrating injury were; 832 firearm-related and 883 nonfirearm. No deaths occurred among the non-firearm group compared to 94 (11.3%) among firearmrelated patients. Among non-firearm patients, 22.7% had a NSP indicator compared to 51.2% of patients injured by a firearm. Conclusion: There is a significantly higher proportion of severe injury and mortality with firearm penetrating injury when compared to non-firearm pediatric penetrating injury. Consideration should be given to dividing it into firearm and non-firearm penetrating injury.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it time for firearm injury to be a separate activation criteria in children? An assessment of penetrating pediatric trauma using need for surgeon presence

McGaha

Stewart

Garwe

et al. 2021

The American Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluation of Injury Severity and Resource Utilization in Pediatric Firearm and Sharp Force Injuries

Wolf

Garrison²,

Mills

et al. 2019

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key PointsQuestionDo injury severity and resource utilization differ between firearm injuries and other penetrating trauma mechanisms in children in the United States?FindingsIn this cohort study of 25 155 firearm and 21 270 cut or pierce encounters in US children 17 years or younger, critical and noncritical firearm injuries were associated with higher likelihood of intensive care unit admission, a higher Injury Severity Score, and higher likelihood of longer hospital or intensive care unit length of stay compared with cut or pierce injuries.MeaningThis study suggests greater injury severity and resource utilization associated with pediatric firearm injuries when compared with other penetrating trauma, even among children with critical injuries.

show abstract

Rural-Urban Variation in the Association of Adolescent Violence and Handgun Carrying in the United States, 2002-2019

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceAdolescent handgun carrying is associated with increased risk of firearm-related violence. Most evidence on adolescent handgun carrying is from urban areas, but these findings may not generalize to rural areas.ObjectiveTo examine differences in associations of adolescent interpersonal violence with handgun carrying across the rural-urban continuum.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study used nationally representative data from the US National Survey on Drug Use and Health among adolescents aged 12 to 17 years from 2002 to 2019 to estimate time-varying prevalence ratios (PRs) and prevalence differences (PDs) between interpersonal violence and handgun carrying across the rural-urban continuum. Analyses were conducted in April to July 2022.ExposuresAny past-year serious fighting, group fighting, and attacking with intent to harm.Main Outcomes and MeasuresAny past-year handgun carrying. Associations were estimated within county rural-urban strata using the US Department of Agriculture’s Rural-Urban Continuum Codes.ResultsIn each year, the sample included a weighted count of almost 25 million adolescents, with 50.9% (95% CI, 50.2%-51.6%) males and 24.7% (95% CI, 23.8%-25.6%) Hispanic adolescents, 13.5% (95% CI, 12.8%-14.2%) non-Hispanic Black adolescents, and 51.8% (95% CI, 50.8%-52.8%) non-Hispanic White adolescents in 2019. More rural counties had less racial and ethnic diversity. For example, 81.1% (95% CI, 75.9%-85.4%) of adolescents were non-Hispanic White in the most rural counties vs 43.1% (95% CI, 41.7%-44.6%) of adolescents were non-Hispanic White in the most urban counties in 2019. Adolescent handgun carrying increased over time, with the largest increases in the most rural counties, where the prevalence of adolescent handgun carrying increased from 5.2% (95% CI, 3.8%-7.0%) in 2003 to 12.4% (95% CI, 8.9%-16.9%) in 2019. PRs for the association of violence and handgun carrying were greater in more urban counties. For example, in the most urban counties in 2019, adolescents involved in a group fight had 3.7 (95% CI, 2.9-4.8) times the prevalence of handgun carrying vs those not involved in a group fight; this PR was 3.1 (95% CI, 1.6-5.6) in the most rural counties. PDs were similar and, in some cases, larger in rural areas. For example, in the most urban counties in 2019, handgun carrying prevalence was 7.5% (95% CI, 5.7%-9.5%) higher among adolescents who were involved in a group fight compared with those who were not; this PD was 21.8% (95% CI, 8.2%-37.8%) in the most rural counties, where handgun carrying was more common.Conclusions and RelevanceThis cross-sectional study found that associations of interpersonal violence with handgun carrying were stronger in relative terms in urban areas than in rural areas; however, a higher percentage of rural than urban adolescents carried handguns, resulting in a greater absolute prevalence of handgun carrying associated with violence in rural areas than in urban areas. These findings suggest opportunities for preventing handgun carrying–related harms may differ between rural and urban communities.

show abstract

Fowler KA, Dahlberg LL, Haileyesus T, et al. Childhood Firearm Injuries in the United States. Pediatrics. 2017;140(1):e20163486

Cited by 21 publications

References 0 publications

Is it time for firearm injury to be a separate activation criteria in children? An assessment of penetrating pediatric trauma using need for surgeon presence

Is it time for firearm injury to be a separate activation criteria in children? An assessment of penetrating pediatric trauma using need for surgeon presence

Evaluation of Injury Severity and Resource Utilization in Pediatric Firearm and Sharp Force Injuries

Rural-Urban Variation in the Association of Adolescent Violence and Handgun Carrying in the United States, 2002-2019

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About