Practices and attitudes of mountain bikers towards the use of protective equipment

Abstract

Background: Unfortunately, mountain biking is associated with significant injury-related costs. There is evidence to support the use of helmets, with full face helmets being more effective. Eyewear is also proven to be protective. Aim: The primary aims were to assess the attitudes of mountain bikers to the use of protective equipment, and to quantify the rates of use of protective equipment in this group. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted. An online questionnaire assessed use of different types of equipment, and the rider’s attitudes towards these. The responses for each rider were evaluated under various theme domains and correlated with their reported equipment use under 4 categories: Full face helmet, eyewear, other equipment and overall total. Results: 263 questionnaires were completed. 55% had experienced an injury requiring a week off work. 41% had ongoing symptoms from a previous injury. Equipment use during racing and non-racing was similar. Standard helmets were used more than full face. 36.9% used eyewear most of the time. Glove use was high at 89%, and knee pads at 74%. Elbow pads are used infrequently with 61% never using them, and body armour use was very low (never used by 87.8%). Perceptions of benefits, barriers and potential injury severity proved to be most well correlated with equipment use. Conclusion and Key Points: Use of full face helmets was relatively low; eyewear was also only moderate. The current study confirms that at least in this group of riders, time off work and morbidity from injuries is high and use of full face helmets and eyewear could be increased. Interventions to increase use should focus on the benefits of protective equipment and possible severity of injuries, in order to be most effective.