Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Electric Blenders ranks #419 of 838 by danger score (35/100) at ER-volume #255 of 838 (6,908/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #419
- danger rank of 838
- #255
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 35/100
- danger score
- 6,908/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 (35/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
35 Lower than most lower than 50% 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: 51/100
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) | 1 | 6th | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 6,908 | 64th | 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 | 386 | 100th | 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 138,168 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 215. Segments sum to 138,168 - 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 Kitchen Cooking Appliances 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.
Kitchen Cooking Appliances danger scores
How this 35/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for electric blenders - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 6,908 ER visits/yr Above median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 0.9% Low admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
- 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 electric blenders are roughly flat over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2024 (10,123 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2005 (2,349 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is laceration to the finger, accounting for approximately 86,922 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by laceration to the hand (13,018 cases). The 25-34 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 27,848 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 0.9% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 386 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how electric blenders 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 | 4,500 | 2,047 | |
| 5-14 | 6,813 | 6,352 | |
| 15-24 | 6,482 | 10,676 | |
| 25-34 | 7,487 | 20,361 | |
| 35-44 | 6,426 | 19,361 | |
| 45-54 | 4,509 | 14,952 | |
| 55-64 | 3,574 | 12,602 | |
| 65-74 | 2,274 | 5,883 | |
| 75+ | 801 | 3,049 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Finger | Laceration | |
| Hand | Laceration | |
| Foot | Laceration | |
| Finger | Fracture | |
| Finger | Avulsion | |
| Face | Burn, Scald | |
| Toe | Laceration | |
| Lower Leg | Laceration | |
| Finger | Amputation | |
| Lower Arm | Laceration | |
| Wrist | Laceration | |
| Foot | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Internal | Ingestion | |
| Head | Internal Injury |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
35YOM STS CUT FINGER ON THE BLENDER DX THUMB LACERATION
68 YOM CUT TO RT THUMB ON A BLENDER BLADE 20 MIN PRIOR TO ARRIVAL. DX: LAC TO RT THUMB
60YOF REPORTS WITH FINGER LACERATION WHEN SHE CUT IT ON A BLENDER 3 DAYS AGO. DX HEALING LACERATION
3 YOM ACCIDENTALLY STEPPED ON A BLENDER BLADE. DX: LACERATION LEFT FOOT.
43 YOF PRESENTS WITH SALAD BLENDER BLADE STUCK IN HER DORSAL RIGHT INDEX FINGER AFTER ATTEMPTING TO CLEAN THE DEVICE WHILE IT WAS PLUGGED IN. DX: LACERATION WITH FOREIGN BODY RIGHT INDEX FINGER.
27YOM PATIENT REPORTS HE CUT HIS FINGER IN ELECTRIC BEATER DX: LACERATION OF LEFT INDEX FINGER WITHOUT FOREIGN BODY WITHOUT DAMAGE TO NAIL
78YOF STATES THAT SHE JUST GOT A NEW BLENDER AND THE BLADES SEEM TO HAVE BEEN BREAKING DOWN SHE BELIEVES SHE SWALLOWED METAL FRAGMENTS NOW HAS ABDOMINAL PAIN DX: SWALLOWED FOREIGN BODY
36YOF PATIENT CUT HER FINGER WHILE CLEANING A BLENDER, ELOPED DX: LACERATION OF RIGHT MIDDLE FINGER WITHOUT FOREIGN BODY WITHOUT DAMAGE TO NAIL
62YOM WITH LAC TO FINGER FROM BLENDER DX; LAC TO FINGER
38YOM PRESENTED TO ED C/O LACERATION TO FINGER, PT STATED HE WAS USING A ELECTRIC BLENDER AND ATTEMPTED TO CLEAN IT AND IT TURNED ON CAUSING LACERATION. DX; OPEN FRACTURE OF DISTAL PHALANX, FINGER LACERATION
48YOM PRESENTED TO ED C/O LACERATION OF FINGER, PT STATED HE WAS CLEANING INSIDE OF BLENDER WHEN HIS FINGER WAS CUT BY THE BLADE. DX; LACERATION
30YOF PRESENTS AFTER SHE WAS TAKING A BLADE OUT OF BLENDER WHEN SHE GOT CUT ON RIGHT THUMB. DX: LACERATION OF RIGHT THUMB
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
August 19, 2016 at approximately 5:00 pm I was making a smoothie that consisted of almond milk, ½ a banana, peanut butter and ice. When the blades stopped, which they usually due if I need to add more fluid, I went to take it off. Although the NutriBullett claims it can crush ice without liquid, this is not the case. I have found the blades frequently stop due to a lack of fluid and the blades being obstructed. As I went to remove the canister, pushing down and turning to the left, enough fluid hit the blades and they started. In the meantime the cup was not secured tight enough to the blades and the cup began to dislodge from the blades and the base. Part of my shake came up the side of the cup and my right hand slid on to the partial exposed blades. The blades continued to work because of at least one of the nubs stayed in the base until the cup became complete dislodged from the base. The trajectory of my shake and blood from my hand went across the kitchen a minimum of 10 feet and as high as approximately six feet. The injury was to my right pinky finger and the base/palm of that finger. I required 27 stitches. Witnesses: [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]
While cleaning the Ninja Blender I poured the warm water soap solution out (as indicated by the directions) at which point the blades fell out of the blender hitting my right hand creating deep lacerations across my middle and ring fingers. This immediately caused loss of control and sensation in my ring finger. I was taken to the emergency department for medical treatment, I have since been under the care of a hand surgeon who was able to surgically reattach my tendons, though I may have some permanent nerve damage. This product has caused me a great deal of unnecessary pain and suffering. The Ninja blender product design is flawed and needs to be removed from the market to prevent any future injuries.
Oster blender Duralast Classic. While my husband was twisting the blender onto the base, a small glass shard broke off the blender and shot into my 9-year-old son's neck. He was standing about two feet away. He has scratch marks but is otherwise fine. If the glass had gone into his eye or other location, he could have been seriously injured.
Blending a protein shake (powder and water, 3 small ice cubes) in my Cuisinart Velocity Ultra blender which has been used less than 10 times in the past couple years. A blade detached and was in the shake as I poured it. The blade is whole, unbroken just no longer attached to the blender. I have sent in a note to Cuisinart consumer support.
It exploded hot content burning my face , arms and chest. It also explodes cold content and motor continues with blender cup removed
Blendjet plug melted in product. Smelled saved before possible fire.
the blender started smoking while it was plugged in and when my son went to unplug it, it burned his finger and fried the charging cable.
Preemie baby was pooping very frequently (small amounts nearly every time she ate) and then only gained 2 oz at her weight check. I couldnt figure out why but then checked my Brezza and formula seemed watery. I pulled water container out a bit so it wouldnt dispense water when used - only powder - and found it was only dispensing half the amount of formula needed for a 2 oz bottle. The risk to a newborn baby, especially a preemie, of having watered down formula is significant. This item should be recalled and I find the behavior of the company abhorrent.
Showing 8 of 386 reports.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to electric blenders on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Kitchen Cooking Appliances
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Electric Blenders: cross-group products nearest on danger score (35/100), estimated annual ER visits (6,908/yr), and hospitalization share (0.9%). 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.
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
Related Products in Kitchen Cooking Appliances
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, Electric Blenders ranks #419 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #255 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does electric blenders rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, electric blenders ranks #419 by PlainSafety danger score (35/100) and #255 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (6,908/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from electric blenders?
The most common injury is laceration to the finger, accounting for approximately 86,922 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from electric blenders increasing or decreasing?
Stable over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for electric blenders injuries?
The 25-34 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 27,848 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by electric blenders?
Of all ER visits involving electric blenders, approximately 0.9% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (99.1%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with electric blenders?
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.