Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Carts, Other Or Not Specified ranks #213 of 838 by danger score (39/100) at ER-volume #223 of 838 (8,551/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #213
- danger rank of 838
- #223
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 39/100
- danger score
- 8,551/yr
- estimated ER visits (avg)
Danger score combines injury volume, hospitalization, fatality, and five-year trend. ER volume is the average annual NEISS estimate alone. Rank 1 is highest on each list.
Where this category's danger score sits nationally
Danger score (39/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
39 Around the middle lower than 25% of 838 product categories
scored CPSC product categories, bucketed by value
Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more product categories. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.
Source CPSC NEISS, PlainSafety danger-score model · 2024
Composite verdict
Composite Safety Score: 59/100
One verdict blending 4 independently-sourced dimensions from two separate CPSC systems, each benchmarked against all 838 scored product categories by percentile rather than raw value, so no single huge-volume category can dominate the scale.
| Dimension | Value | National percentile | Weight applied | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) | 7 | 59th | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 8,551 | 69th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | +1% | 67th | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 7 | 40th | 20% | CPSC SaferProducts.gov public incident report count |
Methodology: each dimension is ranked against the full population's p10/p25/p50/p75/p90 breakpoints and interpolated to a 0-100 percentile; the composite is the weighted average of available percentiles. See methodology for the full benchmark table.
Where 171,045 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1684. Segments sum to 171,045 - a body-map mix, not a danger score or ER-volume rank.
Two danger lenses
Same-group peer scores and this product's dial
The bars compare PlainSafety danger scores inside the Personal Care & Safety Products group (same CPSC NEISS extract). The dial is this product's score alone on the Low/Moderate/High bands. Do not read a peer bar as an ER-visit count.
Personal Care & Safety Products danger scores
How this 39/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for carts, other or not specified - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 8,551 ER visits/yr Above median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 6.9% Above median admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.02% Low fatality rate
- 5-year trend+1%
Band labels compare this category against the corpus of 838 scored CPSC product categories, see the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Across the 20-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2024, injury counts for carts, other or not specified are roughly flat over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2024 (12,281 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2009 (6,784 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is internal injury to the head, accounting for approximately 15,560 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by laceration to the face (7,991 cases). The 75+ age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 25,296 cases over the NEISS window, and females appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 6.9% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.02%) result in fatality.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 7 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how carts, other or not specified 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 Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 10,857 | 7,223 | |
| 5-14 | 9,262 | 8,066 | |
| 15-24 | 7,337 | 8,762 | |
| 25-34 | 7,071 | 7,886 | |
| 35-44 | 7,186 | 8,451 | |
| 45-54 | 9,608 | 12,878 | |
| 55-64 | 9,737 | 12,525 | |
| 65-74 | 7,165 | 11,718 | |
| 75+ | 9,518 | 15,778 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Lower Trunk | Other | |
| Foot | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Leg | Laceration | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Face | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Leg | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Knee | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Ankle | Strain, Sprain | |
| Upper Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Knee | Other |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
47YOF PUSHING A CART AND FELT SHARP PAIN TO WRISTDX WRIST PAIN
47YOM PRESENTS TO ED FOR DIZZINESS, LOC. THIS EVENING IN KITCHEN STOOD UP TO GO TO BATHROOMA ND SUDDENLY BECAME DIZZY. WIFE WAS THERE ADN WITNESSED EVENT REPORTS TRIED STEADY HIMSELF BY GRABBING ONTO CART IN KITCHEN. PT PASSED OUT, PULLED CART ON TOP OF HIM. DENIES HEADACHE OR OTHER INJURIES. DX: SYNCOPE
84YOF PATIENT COMES FROM A LOCAL NURSING FACILITY, SHE HAD A FALL WHILE TRYING TO MOVE A CART WHEN IT SLIPPED FROM UNDERNEATH HER, ABRASION ON HER LEFT EYEBROW DX: FALL, ABRASION OF LEFT EYEBROW
61YOF C/O FALL WHILE PUSING A CART AROUND AT THE LAUNDRY MAT IN WHICH SHE FELL AND SLIPPED ONTO THE CART. PAIN TO RIGHT SIDE OF HER NECK, RIGHT SHOULDER, LOWER ABDOMEN, SUPRAPUBIC PAIN, AND RIGHT KNEE PAIN. SCANS WERE NEGATIVE. DX: FALL, CLOSED HEAD INJURY, LOWER ABDOMINAL PAIN, PAIN OF RIGHT LOWER EXTREMITY
59 YOM REPORTS RIGHT SHOULDER PAIN WHICH STARTED WHILE PULLING A HEAVY CART TO AND FROM THE FOOD BANK. DX: SYNCOPE, RIGHT SHOULDER INJURY, INJURY OF RIGHT ROTATOR CUFF.
3YOF FATHER OF CHILD REPORTS THE CHILD WAS STANDING IN A CART AT A LOCAL HOME IMPROVEMENT STORE *** WHEN THEY RAN INTO A SMALL CONCRETE LEDGE WITH THE CART WHICH CAME TO AN ABRUPT, CAUSING THE CHILD TO FALL FORWARD ONTO THE GROUND, ONTO HER HEAD DX: INJURY OF HEAD IN PEDIATRIC PATIENT
45YOM STATES THAT HE BUMPED HIS LEFT LOWER LEG ON A CART A FEW DAYS AGO SUSTAINED AN ABRASION DX: ABRASION TO LEFT LOWER LEG
84YOM WAS PULLING A CART DOWN SIDEWALK WHEN HE TRIPPED ON UNEVEN PAVEMENT AND FELL LANDING ON HEAD DX:CLOSED HEAD INJURY
21YOF BIBEMS AFTER PED STRUCK BY VAN WHILE PUSHING A CART. PT HAS LOW BACK AND NECK PAIN DX: ACUTE BILATERAL LOW BACK PAIN WITHOUT SCIATICA
79YOF WAS PUSHING A CART AT THE NURSING HOME AND HAD A FALL ONTO HEAD DX: CLOSED HEAD INJURY
4 YOM C/O FINGER PAIN GOT FINGER CAUGHT IN SHOPPING CART WHEEL DX CRUSHING INJURY FINGER
26YOM PRESENTS WITH A FINGER INJURY AFTER CRUSHING HIS FINGER WITH A METAL CART. DX: CRUSHING INJURY OF FINGER
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
On September 3, 2016, In purchased the Guerilla Wagon from Home Depot. As soon as I opened the box I noticed the awful smell. I realized it was the tires. The smell gave me a sever headache and caused my face to burn. I thought the smell would go away after a couple of days but it did not. The smell is strong and can be smelled from several meters away. I will be returning the product immediately. Store SKU 824220
Product is : MAC SPORTS HEAVY DUTY STEEL FRAME COLLAPSIBLE FOLDING 150 POUND CAPACITY OUTDOOR BEACH GARDEN UTILITY WAGON The issue is: THE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN OF THIS WAGON IS SUBSTANDARD AND UNACCEPTABLE. IT IS COMPLETELY UNSTABLE, EVEN ON FLAT SURFACES, AND CAN REPRESENT A SERIOUS HAZARD TO USERS AND DAMAGE TO CARTED CONTENTS. With a 3-point wheel configuration, the slightest turn of the centered front wheel assembly causes the wagon to topple sideways. It cannot be pulled across multiple surfaces. It is totally unstable on beach sand and even on flat road surfaces. If the slightest turn is made the wagon topples over sideways. The attachment of the handle to the front wheel axle instead of the wagon frame causes the wagon to have a front lift when the handle is grasped at waist height. This tilt causes the wagon to topple backwards and/or collapse (foldup) at the point of any modest elevation or uneven surface. On any encounter with a rise of elevation, even a slight ramp from ground to a 2x6 walking deck, the wagon topples backward and/or sideways, emptying its contents. Mac Sports does not provide sufficient warning to "Never place a child in this wagon." Wagon has an interior box length of only 33 and the side walls are only 10 ½. Beach chairs will not fit in the box and/or will be unstable (top-heavy). Pulling this wagon while crossing roads may result in upset of contents and exposure to traffic issues. Mac Sports does not provide sufficient warnings about hazards in use of this wagon, misrepresents the wagon's utility. Injuries and damages to property may occur.
I purchased a kayak cart to transport my kayak to a nearby river. I purchased the cart available here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0082365AQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 from River Colony Trading Company. After inflating and instilling the two tires as instructed, I strapped my kayak to the cart. I turned around to pick up my water bottle, and heard an explosion. The inner tube burst and shattered the plastic hub on the wheel. The plastic parts were strewn as far as 3-5 feet. Had I been standing closer, I likely would have been injured. Upon contacting the company, it seemed unconcerned about the safety hazard.
[REDACTED] I about [REDACTED] years ago I was made aware of a child who died while trying to climb on one of our products. I also learned there had been multiple other children who had similar incidents where they also perished as results to their injuries. As far as I know all lawsuits were settled. In each case heavy items were placed on top of these products. and a small child was either able to pull it down or a component failed causing the cart to collapse on the child. Since the [REDACTED] incident I have a sense of guilt for not pushing my supervisors harder to recall the products. They felt it wasn't necessary and feared the financial cost if they do have to recall the product. They also didn't want this information disclosed to the rest of the employees in the company. Today they still have weight ratings on their products I know are unsafe and false. I feel this should be looked into as there are 10,000- 100,000 units if not more in our public schools. I am giving my best guess on when I first learned about this. There are legal cases for every instance. I can also provide a lot more history on this if and their testing processes if the agency feels it is necessary. [REDACTED]
What happened that made you want to report? Received the recall email What type of product(s) were being used? LUXOR AVJ42KB Presentation Cart, 24" W x 18" D x 24"-42" H Who was using the product(s)? Employees at the warehouse How were the product(s) being used? Order processing Were there any injuries that happened or may have happened while using the product? Yes How did any injuries occur? Its not stable
2 metal pieces on utility wagon snapped in half resulting in extremely sharp dangerous edges
EZ Entry Horse Cart manufactured by Tough-1 Company and sold by Stateline Tack has manufacturing defects which could result in injury. Shafts are manufactured incorrectly, (shafts turn in instead of out), and one shaft does not fit inside the other part correctly, resulting in a tear in the metal piece over time. Also, there is no pre-drilled hole into which to fasten a bolt which secures the seat. This could result in throwing the driver out of the seat, should the cart hit a bump. Defects have caused issues with the cart identified by professional horse driving instructor on the below date.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to carts, other or not specified on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Personal Care & Safety Products
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Carts, Other Or Not Specified: cross-group products nearest on danger score (39/100), estimated annual ER visits (8,551/yr), and hospitalization share (6.9%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.
Similar danger score
Nearest cross-group products by PlainSafety danger score (100-point scale).
Similar ER visit volume
Nearest cross-group products by NEISS estimated annual ER visits.
- Flying Discs And Boomerangs Swimming, Water & Beach Equipment 8,550/yr
- Musical Instrmnts, Not Elect. Or Battery Or Not Spec. Home Structures & Construction Materials 8,521/yr
- Public Use Items, Not Elsewhere Classified Home Medical & Assistance Devices 8,606/yr
- Plastic Bags Containers & Packaging 8,486/yr
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
- Christmas Decorations (nonelectric) Home Medical & Assistance Devices 6.8%admitted
- Gas, Air Or Spring-operated Guns Sports & Recreation Equipment 6.8%admitted
- Desks, Chests, Bureaus Or Buffets Home Furnishings & Fixtures 6.8%admitted
- Pine Oil Cleaning And Disinfectant Preparations Home Workshop Tools & Equipment 6.8%admitted
Related Products in Personal Care & Safety Products
Read with this product
About this data
CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports form the basis of this page. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments.
According to PlainSafety's CPSC NEISS corpus ranking, Carts, Other Or Not Specified ranks #213 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #223 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does carts, other or not specified rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, carts, other or not specified ranks #213 by PlainSafety danger score (39/100) and #223 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (8,551/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from carts, other or not specified?
The most common injury is internal injury to the head, accounting for approximately 15,560 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from carts, other or not specified increasing or decreasing?
Stable over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for carts, other or not specified injuries?
The 75+ age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 25,296 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by carts, other or not specified?
Of all ER visits involving carts, other or not specified, approximately 6.9% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (93.1%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with carts, other or not specified?
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.
PlainSafety is rendered directly from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall and incident records, no number is typed in by an editor. Product recall timelines and hazard labels are drawn from CPSC recall records for this product. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.