To change from walking to rolling while using roller shoes, wearers place one foot in front of the other foot and shift their body weight backward over the wheels in the heels (crocodile stance). The skating position of roller shoes is a balanced position from which individuals tend to fall backward. This position can be maintained by contracting the hip extensors, flattening the lumbar lordosis, and pushing the shoulder and neck forward.
Hand and wrist injuries were most common (6 cases, 25.0 %), followed by injuries to the face (5 cases, 20.8 %), arm (4, 16.7 %), and leg (4, 16.7 %) (
Table 1). Compared to previous studies, the present study had significantly less frequency than other studies (P < 0.05, [independent two samples t-test]) ( Table 6, upper) ( 1- 6).
Table 6. Most Common Site, Proportion of Fractures, Wearing of Protective Equipment in Roller Shoes Injuries
Author Year Nation Mean Age (y) Area % No. of Children Most common site of injuries Hwang Present Korea Hand and wrist 25.0 6/24 Beach ( 3) 2009 USA 10.0 Upper extremity 57.3 75/131 Thing ( 4) 2008 UK 9.6 Hand 57.1 20/35 Aarons ( 5) 2008 USA 8.9 Upper extremity 94.1 16/17 Vioreanu ( 1) 2007 Ireland 9.6 Upper limb 86.6 58/67 Lenehan ( 6) 2007 Irealnd 9.1 Upper limb 71.8 28/39 Oh ( 2) 2006 Singapore 8.8 Upper limb 97.3 36/37 Proportion of fractures Hwang Present Korea 21.7 5/23 Beach ( 3) 2009 USA 10.0 50.4 66/131 Thing ( 4) 2008 UK 9.6 48.6 17/35 Aarons ( 5) 2008 USA 8.9 100.0 17/17 Vioreanu ( 1) 2007 Ireland 9.6 73.1 49/67 Lenehan ( 6) 2007 Ireland 9.1 71.8 28/39 Inquiry into the wearing of protective equipment Hwang Present Korea 1.0 1/100 Thing ( 4) 2008 UK 9.6 0.0 0/35 Aarons ( 5) 2008 USA 8.9 30.8 4/13 Vioreanu ( 1) 2007 Ireland 9.6 0.0 0/67 Lenehan ( 6) 2007 Ireland 9.1 0.0 0/39
In the present study, contusion was the most common type of injury (9 cases, 39.1 %), followed by laceration (6 cases, 26.1 %) and fractures (5 cases, 21.7 %) (
Table 1). In most of other studies, fracture was the commonest injury caused by the roller shoes (P < 0.05, [independent two samples t-test]) ( Table 6, middle) ( 1, 3- 6).
Most RSWs enjoyed rolling at the park or playground (40, 22.1 %), shopping mall or department stores (38, 21.0 %), and apartment complexes or near their home (33, 18.2 %) (
Table 2). Parks and playgrounds are used for practice because of their open spaces. Shopping malls and department stores have flat and smooth floors.
Most of the RSWs had engaged in rolling in multiuse facilities. The most frequently visited multiuse facilities were department stores (50, 72.5 %), shopping malls (34, 49.3 %), and food courts or cafés (39.1 %) (
Table 4). Since many unspecified users are in multiple facilities, there is a high possibility of safety accidents, such as collisions with other pedestrians. When falling down in an indoor commercial facility, secondary damage may occur by knocking down items from a shelf. Overseas, some large markets and restaurants have signs prohibiting the wearing of roller shoes for the safety of pedestrians and children inside the facility. Crosswalks and parking lots are subject to traffic accidents due to heavy vehicular traffic. On downhill roads and stairs, slopes are steep and it is difficult to decelerate.
Approximately two-thirds (45 of 69, 65.2 %) of RSWs did not remove the wheel while walking, while only one-third (24, 34.8 %) removed the wheel or pushed it into the shoes. The most frequent reason for not removing the wheel was the inconvenience of removing or attaching it (12 responders), the inability of removing it alone (8), rolling while walking (4), and loss of the removing device (2).
Since roller shoes have a wheel on the heel that touches the ground, there is a high risk of falling backwards when unconsciously walking without removing the wheel. It is difficult to remove or attach the wheel using the appropriate tool or pushing the wheel while pressing the button. Therefore, it is necessary for the adult care provider to remove the wheel, not the children themselves.
Most of the RSWs (57, 82.6 %) answered they did not wear protective equipment. Only 17.4 % (12 children) claimed that they wore protective equipment. The reasons for not using protective equipment were inconvenience (12, 36.8 %), lack of equipment (20, 35.1 %), and no reason (16, 28.1 %).
Wearing protective equipment has not been emphasized in previous studies (
Table 6, lower) ( 1, 4- 6). In the present study, among the 100 children wearing roller shoes, 99 % (99 children) did not wear any kind of protective device.
A case of extradural hematoma which required craniotomy and evacuation has been reported (
6). Wearing protective gear is very important because it can prevent serious injuries in case of accidents.
It is thought that RSWs are less likely to buy protective equipment because they think of roller shoes as a kind of ‘running shoes’. RSWs are recommended to wear protective equipment and to be accompanied by their parents. Inside commercial facilities, signs prohibiting the wearing of roller shoes should be affixed.