This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Lynne V. McFarland, MS
University of Washington Seattle

John M. Kobayashi, MD, MPH
Office of Public Health Laboratories & Epidemiology Seattle

JAMA. 1985;253(13):1878.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

We would like to address four points Mr Haarmann raised about our study of fireworks-related injuries. First, we did not conclude that "all fireworks are dangerous." In fact, we demonstrated that although 36% of injuries identified by active surveillance were caused by ground-display devices, the high proportion reflected device popularity, and not an increased risk of injury associated with use (odds ratio [OR], 0.9). However, firecrackers and aerial devices were associated with an elevated risk of injury above and beyond their popularity (OR, 3.3 and 2.9, respectively).

Second, circumstances at the time of injury were not substantially different for devices that were legal or illegal under federal law. Of 66 injuries associated with legal devices, 62% were attributable to misuse, 17% to malfunction, and 21% to other circumstances. Of 22 injuries associated with illegal devices, 82% were attributable to misuse, 9% to malfunction, and 9% to other circumstances. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?