Building Sets
Twenty years of CPSC NEISS emergency-room records for this consumer product category, combined with demographic breakdowns, multi-year injury trends, and matching recall notices.
Toys & Children's Recreation · CPSC Code 1345
Stable over 5 years
The verdict
Building Sets carry a danger score of 38/100 (low risk), driven by roughly 6,840 ER-treated injuries a year that are roughly flat over the last five years.
- 38/100
- danger score (low risk)
- 6,840
- ER visits per year (avg)
- 4.1%
- end in hospital admission
- 0-4
- most-injured age group
Every figure is rendered from the CPSC NEISS record for product code 1345 - last data year 2024.
PlainSafety danger score
How this 38/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for building sets - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume6,840 ER visits/yr
- Severity (hospitalization rate)4.1%
- Fatality rate0.00%
- 5-year trend+9%
See the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Building Sets (CPSC product code 1345, in the Toys & Children's Recreation category) generate an estimated 6,840 emergency-room visits every year in the United States, adding up to roughly 136,796 ER-treated injuries across the 20-year span from 2005 to 2024. PlainSafety derives a danger score of 38/100 for this category (low risk), combining raw injury volume, demographic reach, severity of outcome, and multi-year trend. The five-year trajectory shows that injury counts are roughly flat over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2021 (10,713 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2005 (1,372 estimated visits).
The single most common ER diagnosis for building sets is foreign body to the face, accounting for approximately 46,575 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by ingestion to the internal (40,345 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 77,087 cases over the NEISS window, and males appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 4.1% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 163 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how building sets fail in real households. Every figure on this page comes from CPSC-published data: NEISS projects national estimates from a probability sample of about 100 U.S. hospital emergency departments, while SaferProducts.gov collects voluntary reports from consumers, manufacturers, and clinicians. The danger score, trend indicators, and demographic breakdowns update automatically when CPSC releases a new yearly NEISS file, which is why this page is dated 2024-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.
Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2024)
Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 51,204 | 25,883 | |
| 5-14 | 39,257 | 11,274 | |
| 15-24 | 1,078 | 1,089 | |
| 25-34 | 866 | 1,978 | |
| 35-44 | 864 | 1,330 | |
| 45-54 | 412 | 694 | |
| 55-64 | 17 | 397 | |
| 65-74 | 181 | 78 | |
| 75+ | 80 | 115 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Face | Foreign Body | |
| Internal | Ingestion | |
| Ear | Foreign Body | |
| Internal | Aspiration | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Mouth | Laceration | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Foot | Other | |
| Foot | Strain, Sprain | |
| Face | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Ankle | Strain, Sprain | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Lower Trunk | Foreign Body |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
4YOF WITH POSSIBLE FOREIGN BODY IN NASAL PASSAGEWAY. POSSIBLE *** IN NOSE. DX: NASAL FOREIGN BODY
7YOM C/O SWALLOWED A *** PLASTIC TOY THAT HE PUT IN HIS MOUNTH ABOUT ONE HOUR AGO. DX: SWALLOWED FOREIGN BODY
4 YOF *** IN L NARE DX; FOREIGN BODY
5 YOM SWALLOWED A *** DX; FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
8YOM WAS PLAYING WITH SMALL TOY BEAD MAGNETS AND SWALLOWED TWO OF THEM DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
5 YOM SWALLOWED A *** PIECE, DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
2 YOF HIT IN HEAD WITH WOODEN BLOCK AT DAYCARE DX FACIAL ABRASION
2YOM STUCK A *** PIECE UP HIS RIGHT NOSTRIL DX: FOREIGN BODY NOSE
4YOM SWOLLOWED A *** PIECE DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION
5YOM STUCK A *** PIECE IN RIGHT NOSTRIL DX: FOREIGN BODY NOSE
2YOM PUT A *** PIECE UP HIS RIGHT NOSTRIL DX FOREIGN BODY NOSE
2YOM PRESENTS AFTER SWALLOWING A *** PRIOR TO ARRIVAL. DX: VOMITTING IN CHILD
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
My family and I purchased the small 3-d magnatiles. One cracked, and the magnet came loose. One of my kids fortunately spotted the loose magnet. Had a baby been visiting, this couldve been disastrous.
Briefly, [REDACTED] is a developmentally appropriate 5 year old male who ingested 10 high-powered magnets on 8/29 after playing with his older brother. His mother noted that he was initially acting fine but then developed abdominal pain and vomiting 2 days later which prompted attention for care. The high powered magnets were purchased online from Amazon after the child saw a YouTube video geared to young children. [REDACTED] asked his mother for the products, his mother saw no harm in them, did not see a warning when she purchased them online, and bought them. The product came to their home a couple days later in a non-descript manila envelope without any warning labels on the packaging. Imaging (x-ray) identified 10 magnets in the small bowel that did not pass on serial imaging. For this reason, [REDACTED] underwent surgery on 9/2/19, where a small bowel to colonic fistula was identified. Only 6 of the magnets could be removed during that initial surgery. Subsequently, [REDACTED] developed fevers and evidence of infection; antibiotics were started. After the magnets failed to pass on repeated imaging, he was again brought to the OR and had an exploratory laboratory on 9/6/19. The 4 additional magnets were identified in the cecum, removed surgically, and the bowel closed. No additional injuries were identified. [REDACTED] may be discharged from the hospital as early as tomorrow (9/10/19)
On 8/31/15 (estimated) the submitter's grandson and granddaughter played with the toy for the first time. The submitter's grandson threw the pieces up in the air and they fell in her granddaughter's hair. The submitter tried to remove the pieces from her granddaughter's hair but she was not able to. On 9/1/15 (estimated) the submitter took her granddaughter to a hair salon [REDACTED]. The submitter states the hairstylist; [REDACTED] took 7 hours to remove the pieces from her granddaughter's hair. The submitter states some of her granddaughter's hair was cut. The submitter paid $158 to have the pieces removed from her granddaughter's hair. The submitter believes there were about 100 pieces in her granddaughter's hair. The submitter states the hair stylist posted a picture of her granddaughter's hair on Facebook. On 9/29/15 the submitter contacted the firm (800-622-8339) to inform them of the incident and spoke with a rep named [REDACTED]. The submitter asked for a replacement toy or a reimbursement since she had to pay to get the pieces removed from her granddaughter's hair. The submitter states [REDACTED] refused to provide any assistance. The submitter contacted the NY Consumer Affairs Office but they referred her to CPSC. The consumer believes there should be a warning on the packaging to warn consumer about keeping it away from hair.
My ten year old son accidentally swallowed two Speks rare earth magnets. He has been in the hospital under observation waiting for the magnets to pass.
Magnetic blocks very easily cracked open and magnets are missing
Toddler swallowed 28 neodymium magnets (buckyballs) from father's desk. 1st endoscopy attempt to remove magnets was unsuccessful as they were too distal in the small intestine. Serial x-rays showed that the magnets had not moved. F/U enteroscopy (special endoscopy technique) was successful in removal of magnets. Magnets were viewed as adherent on mucosa, which showed early evidence of injury.
It is my understanding that small magnetic ball toys have been banned in the US. On 9/27/23 I saw an ad on [REDACTED] for magnetic ball kits being sold by gepodge.com. Their [REDACTED] page is Gepodge-3.
I just received my order of micro mag tiles from Magna-Tiles and the tiles are missing the fasteners that hold the magnets in place, the strong magnets fell out
Showing 8 of 163 reports.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to building sets on the CPSC website.
Frequently Asked Questions
How dangerous are building sets?
Based on 20 years of CPSC data, building sets have a danger score of 38/100 (low risk). An estimated 6,840 ER-treated injuries occur annually in the U.S. related to this product category.
What are the most common injuries from building sets?
The most common injury is foreign body to the face, accounting for approximately 46,575 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from building sets increasing or decreasing?
Stable over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for building sets injuries?
The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 77,087 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by building sets?
Of all ER visits involving building sets, approximately 4.1% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (95.9%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with building sets?
You can file a consumer incident report at SaferProducts.gov, the official CPSC reporting portal. Reports help the CPSC identify emerging hazards and trigger investigations or recalls. You can also call the CPSC hotline at 1-800-638-2772.
Related Products in Toys & Children's Recreation
Safety Guides
What this means for you
Treat the 38/100 score as relative risk between products, not your personal odds of injury.
- See where this category ranks against every other tracked product. Full rankings
- Injuries cluster in the 0-4 age group, take extra care if that describes your household.
- Check for active recalls on this product before you assume it is safe. CPSC recalls
NEISS estimates ER-treated injuries from a national probability sample of hospitals; they do not capture injuries treated elsewhere or not treated at all.
Data: CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments. This page is for informational purposes only and is not affiliated with the CPSC.
Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, scored, and verified.
