Extension Cords
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.
Home Furnishings & Fixtures · CPSC Code 685
Down 13% over 5 years
The verdict
Extension Cords carry a danger score of 40/100 (moderate risk), driven by roughly 4,438 ER-treated injuries a year that are declining by about 13% over the last five years.
- 40/100
- danger score (moderate risk)
- 4,438
- ER visits per year (avg)
- 11.0%
- end in hospital admission
- 75+
- most-injured age group
Every figure is rendered from the CPSC NEISS record for product code 685 - last data year 2024.
PlainSafety danger score
How this 40/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for extension cords - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume4,438 ER visits/yr
- Severity (hospitalization rate)11.0%
- Fatality rate0.16%
- 5-year trend-13%
See the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Extension Cords (CPSC product code 685, in the Home Furnishings & Fixtures category) generate an estimated 4,438 emergency-room visits every year in the United States, adding up to roughly 88,752 ER-treated injuries across the 20-year span from 2005 to 2024. PlainSafety derives a danger score of 40/100 for this category (moderate risk), combining raw injury volume, demographic reach, severity of outcome, and multi-year trend. The five-year trajectory shows that injury counts are declining by about 13% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2018 (6,633 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2005 (2,309 estimated visits).
The single most common ER diagnosis for extension cords is internal injury to the head, accounting for approximately 6,684 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by electric shock to the all parts body (4,412 cases). The 75+ age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 17,912 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 11.0% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.16%) result in fatality.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 53 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how extension cords 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 | 2,193 | 1,542 | |
| 5-14 | 2,556 | 2,455 | |
| 15-24 | 3,268 | 3,366 | |
| 25-34 | 2,839 | 4,339 | |
| 35-44 | 4,085 | 5,518 | |
| 45-54 | 4,028 | 5,526 | |
| 55-64 | 4,730 | 9,447 | |
| 65-74 | 5,376 | 9,583 | |
| 75+ | 5,921 | 11,991 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| All Parts Body | Electric Shock | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Lower Trunk | Fracture | |
| Knee | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Face | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Ankle | Strain, Sprain | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Upper Arm | Fracture | |
| Upper Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Upper Trunk | Fracture | |
| Wrist | Fracture | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Wrist | Strain, Sprain |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
68YOF C/O TOE PROBLEM. PATIENT WITH LEFT GREAT TOE PAIN WHICH STARTED AFTER ACCIDENTALLY KICKING AN EXTENSION CORD. RADIOGRAPH NEGATIVE FOR ACUTE FRACTURE. DX: CONTUSION OF LEFT GREAT TOE WITHOUT DAMAGE TO NAIL, INITIAL ENCOUNTER
40YOF PRESENT TO ED W/ MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS.PT STATES SHE GOT AN ELECTRICAL SHOCK FROM AN EXTENSION CORD LAST NIGHT.TODAY FEELLING GITTERY,NUMBNESS IN L HAND,SOME CP.PT LWBSDX:NONE
33YOM, C/O SUICIDAL, DRANK 12 PACK, FOUND HANGING FROM CEILING W/ EXTENSION CORD AROUND NECK X 2 DAYS AGO, AGONAL BREATHING BAL 123 DX: DEPRESSIVE DISORDER, SUICIDAL IDEATION
78YOF BROUGHT IN BY EMS COMPLAINING OF GROUND LEVEL FALL AND RIGHT HIP PAIN. PATIENT TRIPPED OVER AN EXTENSION CORD. DX:DISPLACED FRACTURE OF RIGHT FEMORAL NECK.
64YOM PRESENTS TODAY AFTER FALLING IN HIS GARAGE AFTER TRIPPING ON AN EXTENSION CORD. HE HAS A SMALL LACERATION TO HIS CHIN. DX: LACERATION CHIN INITIAL.
80YOF PATIENT REPORTS THAT SHE TRIPPED OVER AN ELECTRICAL CORD AND FELL, LANDING ON HER FACE, SMALL CUT TO THE LOWER LIP, NECK PAIN DX: FALL FROM GROUND LEVEL, LACERATION OF INTRAORAL SURFACE OF LIP, VISUAL CHANGES, ACUTE NONINTRACTABLE HEADACHE
87 YOM TRIPPED ON AN EXTENSION CORD AND FELL LANDING ON HIS HIP AT HOME. DX: FRACTURE OF RIGHT HIP
3YOM WAS RUNNING AT HOME WHEN HE TRIPPED OVER AN EXTENSION CORD AND FELL ONTO FACE DX: CONTUSION TO CHIN
64 YOM PRESENTS FROM HOME AFTER HE TRIPPED ON AN EXTENSION CORD AND FELL HITTING HIS HEAD. C/O HEAD, NECK AND LEFT SHOULDER PAIN DX CONCUSSION, LEFT SHOULDER PAIN
7 MOM WAS CHEWING ON THE END OF AN EXTENSION CORD IN A STANDARD HOUSEHOLD OUTLET WHEN HE CRIED OUT. DX: ELECTROCUTION, NONFATAL EFFECTS OF ELECTRIC CURRENT
31YOM SAYS 2 DAYS AGO SLIPPED ON AN EXTENSION CORD & TWISTED HIS RIGHT FOOT, PT WENT TO UC WHO SAID HE HAD FRACTURE OF 2ND METATARSAL, PT CAME TO ER DX RIGHT FOOT PAIN, CLSD DISPLACED FRACTURE OF 2ND, 3RD & 4TH METATARSAL BONES IN RIGHT FOOT
80YOF, TRIPPED OVER AN EXTENSION CORD AND FELL AGAINST A CLOSET DOOR AND SLIDE DOWN TO THE GROUND LANDING ONTO SHOULDER, HEARD CRACKING NOISE DX: CLOSED DISPLACED FRACTURE OF SURGICAL NECK OF RIGHT HUMERUS
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
I was using a kintron kb-1 e186244 extension cord. Had it plugged into a wall socket & as soon as I plugged my iPhone in, the extension cord outlet where I plugged my phone shot out sparks, then a small fire started. My iPhone is now fried & won't turn on along with my tablet that was plugged into the socket as well. I was shocked in the process of trying to unplug it from the wal & have injuries.
Product set on fire on three separate occasions. I assumed the cords I was using were defective the first two times, until I realized that it was the extension cord. Broke multiple cords, overheated devices. Safety switch did not engage. I was using the product. I did get minor burns when attempting to unplug the product.
faulty home depot extension plug gave electric shock to my 15 year old son. it was used to plug in a floor lamp with a short cord. He went to unplug it and the hard plastic shell came aspart at the seam exposing all the wires to his hand. It appears the 2 halves of the plastic cover were held together by a sticker. Thankfully no professional medical attention was required. UPDATED ON 9/18/2023: [I tried to contact home depot by email and they were not interested in hearing about this. I also tried to get a safety rep contact through online chat but they would not help, kept saying I could only go into the store for a new one Dangerous.]
Found a listing for a Male-To-Male Extension cord on Amazon, which I was under the impression was an illegal type of cord to sell (Or at minimum a fire code violation) because they're incredibly dangerous: [REDACTED] The brand providing this listing is named LONGHAIYUAN, and the seller name is Guizhou Pre-Peizhong Trading Co., Ltd : [REDACTED] Based on the comments of the specific listing, it does not appear anyone has purchased this listing yet. As the only review is a single person warning others that this cord is Illegal in the U.S. However another comment on the sellers main page suggests they may sell other dangerous products. Quote: "1 out of 5 stars Item was defective and shocked my husband when he plugged it in! " from a reviewer named [REDACTED] on August 26, 2024. To be clear: I have not purchased this item myself, only reporting a listing, hopefully, before someone else gets hurt.
To who it may concern, My name is [REDACTED]the name of my company is US Asian Marketing and Manufacturing. I do consulting work for a number of different Asia based manufacturers my telephone number is [REDACTED]. I have been marketing testing products for 25 years and sit on some STP consumer boards at UL. Over the last 3 years there has been a mass exodus in China from listing products with UL over to ETL( Intertek). The reason for this is UL stepped up its after market monitoring of off spec products and went to a three strikes you lose your listings law. Meaning, if you products are found to be off spec in the market 3 times your listings are suspended and you cannot use the UL mark. Please note the three companies listed on my testing reports in China all changed from UL to ETL over the last 3 years. There products are in 10,000 Ace Hardware stores Wal-Mart and on line with Harbor Freight and in the 800 stores. After many months of presenting my testing data and making complaints at ETL they refuse accept my complaints which should be against the law. They are not investing cheating on products at all and should be suspended as a safety testing agency. These products are below spec making their maximum amperage capacity and everything listed as per spec false and should all be recalled. I will send you another few reports also as this is not only being done in extension cords but lighting products too. PLEASE TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST THIS TERRIBLE INJUSTICE TO THE AMERICAN COMSUMER [REDACTED]
To who it may concern, My name is [REDACTED]the name of my company is [REDACTED]. I do consulting work for a number of different Asia based manufacturers my telephone number is [REDACTED]. I have been marketing testing products for 25 years and sit on some STP consumer boards at UL. Over the last 3 years there has been a mass exodus in China from listing products with UL over to ETL( Intertek). The reason for this is UL stepped up its after market monitoring of off spec products and went to a three strikes you lose your listings law. Meaning, if you products are found to be off spec in the market 3 times your listings are suspended and you cannot use the UL mark. Please note the three companies listed on my testing reports in China all changed from UL to ETL over the last 3 years. There products are in 10,000 Ace Hardware stores Wal-Mart and on line with Harbor Freight and in the 800 stores. After many months of presenting my testing data and making complaints at ETL they refuse accept my complaints which should be against the law. They are not investing cheating on products at all and should be suspended as a safety testing agency. These products are below spec making their maximum amperage capacity and everything listed as per spec false and should all be recalled. I will send you another few reports also as this is not only being done in extension cords but lighting products too. PLEASE TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST THIS TERRIBLE INJUSTICE TO THE AMERICAN COMSUMER [REDACTED]
To who it may concern, My name is [REDACTED]the name of my company is [REDACTED]. I do consulting work for a number of different Asia based manufacturers my telephone number is [REDACTED]. I have been marketing testing products for 25 years and sit on some STP consumer boards at UL. Over the last 3 years there has been a mass exodus in China from listing products with UL over to ETL( Intertek). The reason for this is UL stepped up its after market monitoring of off spec products and went to a three strikes you lose your listings law. Meaning, if you products are found to be off spec in the market 3 times your listings are suspended and you cannot use the UL mark. Please note the three companies listed on my testing reports in China all changed from UL to ETL over the last 3 years. There products are in 10,000 Ace Hardware stores Wal-Mart and on line with Harbor Freight and in the 800 stores. After many months of presenting my testing data and making complaints at ETL they refuse accept my complaints which should be against the law. They are not investing cheating on products at all and should be suspended as a safety testing agency. These products are below spec making their maximum amperage capacity and everything listed as per spec false and should all be recalled. I will send you another few reports also as this is not only being done in extension cords but lighting products too. PLEASE TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST THIS TERRIBLE INJUSTICE TO THE AMERICAN COMSUMER [REDACTED]
To who it may concern, My name is [REDACTED] the name of my company is [REDACTED]. I do consulting work for a number of different Asia based manufacturers my telephone number is [REDACTED]. I have been marketing testing products for 25 years and sit on some STP consumer boards at UL. Over the last 3 years there has been a mass exodus in China from listing products with UL over to ETL( Intertek). The reason for this is UL stepped up its after market monitoring of off spec products and went to a three strikes you lose your listings law. Meaning, if you products are found to be off spec in the market 3 times your listings are suspended and you cannot use the UL mark. Please note the three companies listed on my testing reports in China all changed from UL to ETL over the last 3 years. There products are in 10,000 Ace Hardware stores Wal-Mart and on line with Harbor Freight and in the 800 stores. After many months of presenting my testing data and making complaints at ETL they refuse accept my complaints which should be against the law. They are not investing cheating on products at all and should be suspended as a safety testing agency. These products are below spec making their maximum amperage capacity and everything listed as per spec false and should all be recalled. I will send you another few reports also as this is not only being done in extension cords but lighting products too. PLEASE TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST THIS TERRIBLE INJUSTICE TO THE AMERICAN COMSUMER [REDACTED]
Showing 8 of 53 reports.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to extension cords on the CPSC website.
Frequently Asked Questions
How dangerous are extension cords?
Based on 20 years of CPSC data, extension cords have a danger score of 40/100 (moderate risk). An estimated 4,438 ER-treated injuries occur annually in the U.S. related to this product category.
What are the most common injuries from extension cords?
The most common injury is internal injury to the head, accounting for approximately 6,684 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from extension cords increasing or decreasing?
Down 13% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for extension cords injuries?
The 75+ age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 17,912 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by extension cords?
Of all ER visits involving extension cords, approximately 11.0% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (89.0%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with extension cords?
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 Home Furnishings & Fixtures
Safety Guides
What this means for you
Treat the 40/100 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 75+ 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.