CPSC NEISS · code 713

Fire Sprinklers

Fire Sprinklers: danger rank #622 of 838 is not ER-volume rank #749 of 838 (120 estimated ER visits a year; rising by about 54% over the last five years).

Home Heating & Cooling Equipment CPSC NEISS through 2024

Danger score versus ER volume

Danger score versus ER volume

According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Fire Sprinklers ranks #622 of 838 by danger score (31/100) at ER-volume #749 of 838 (120/yr). They are not the same ranking.

#622
danger rank of 838
#749
ER-volume rank of 838
31/100
danger score
120/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 (31/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories

31 Lower than most lower than 74% 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: 35/100

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.

B
Dimension Value National percentile Weight applied Source
Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) 4 32nd 35% CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index
Annual ER injury volume 120 10th 30% CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries
5-year injury trend +54% 94th 15% CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries
Consumer incident reports 5 34th 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 2,277 estimated ER injuries land on the body

Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 713. Segments sum to 2,277 - 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 Home Heating & Cooling Equipment 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.

Home Heating & Cooling Equipment danger scores

1. Fire Escape Devices48/1002. Electric Timers44/1003. Fire Or Smoke Alarms40/1004. Safes34/1005. Carbon Monoxide Detectors33/1006. Padlocks, Chain Locks Or …33/1007. Burglar Alarms33/1008. Fire Sprinklers31/100
Higher score = higher composite danger in this group. Peer set is other scored products sharing the same CPSC group.
0/100100/10031/100
PlainSafety danger score · Fire Sprinklers

Source: CPSC NEISS danger-score model As of 2024

How this 31/100 score is built

The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for fire sprinklers - no opinion, no editorializing:

  • Injury volume 120 ER visits/yr Low volume
  • Severity (hospitalization rate) 3.8% Below median admission rate
  • Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
  • 5-year trend+54%

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 fire sprinklers are rising by about 54% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2014 (562 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2011 (16 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is laceration to the head, accounting for approximately 389 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by poisoning to the all parts body (259 cases). The 35-44 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 542 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 3.8% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.

Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 5 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how fire sprinklers 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)

0200400600 2005200820122015201820212024 408
Estimated annual emergency-room visits for Fire Sprinklers, CPSC NEISS

Source: CPSC NEISS national injury estimates As of 2024

Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only

Who Gets Injured?

Age Group Male Female Total
0-4 144 6 150
5-14 284 120 404
15-24 138 318 456
25-34 87 245 332
35-44 333 209 542
45-54 49 46 95
55-64 132 17 149
65-74 0 51 51
75+ 17 80 97

Most Common Injuries

Body Part Diagnosis Est. Injuries
Head Laceration 389
All Parts Body Poisoning 259
Not Stated/unk Derma/conjunct 223
Head Internal Injury 219
All Parts Body Other 108
Eyeball Other 108
Hand Laceration 106
Foot Other 98
Finger Laceration 89
All Parts Body Anoxia 82
Eyeball Contusions, Abr. 80
Not Stated/unk Other 78
All Parts Body Burns, Thermal 56
Neck Other 56
Hand Contusions, Abr. 55

Severity Breakdown

Treated/examined And Released 94.6% (2,154)
Treated And Admitted/hospitalized 5.4% (123)

ER Visit Narratives

Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.

Age 55 · Male · All Parts Body · Burns, Thermal · 2024

55 YOM WAS FOUND DOWN IN HIS BED AFTER AN APARTMENT FIRE. SPRINKLER PUT OUT THE FIRE, HOWEVER PT WAS FOUND SIGNIFICANTLY ALTERED WITH ESTIMATED 50-60% TBSA BURNS TO TORSO, BILATERAL ARMS, GROIN AND LEGS, POSSIBLE OPIATE OVERDOSE. +FD. DX: BURN, ENDOTRACHEALLY INTUBATED.

Age 63 · Male · Head · Internal Injury · 2024

63YOM, ON ***, STOOD UP AND ACCIDENTALLY STRUCK HEAD ONTO A WATER SPRINKLER ON A CEILING NO LOSS OF CONSCIOUS, DX: INJURY OF HEAD; LACERATION OF SCALP

Age 39 · Male · Hand · Burns, Thermal · 2023

39 YOM WAS COOKING ON WEDNESDAY WHEN THE SMOKE FROM THE DISH ACTIVATED THE OVERHEAD SPRINKLERS. WHEN THE WATER HIT THE COOKING OIL, THE FLAME BURNED HIS HAND. PT WAS NOT EVALUATED AT THE TIME. +FD. DX: BURN BACK OF RIGHT HAND.

Age 62 · Female · Head · Burns, Thermal · 2023

62 YOF WAS IN HER APARTMENT WHEN A FIRE STARTED. PT'S APARTMENT WAS VERY SMOKY BUT SPRINKERS TURNED ON AND THE FIRE WENT OUT. +BURNS SCALP, UPPER BACK, NECK. FD NSDX: BURNS INVOLVING LESS THAN 10% OF BODY.

Age 37 · Male · Neck · Strain, Sprain · 2022

37YOM INMATE IN THE JAIL WHEN THE FIRE SPRINKLERS STARTED GOING OFF HE TRIED TO GET AWAY FROM THE WATER AND SLIPPED AND FELL ON THE WET FLOOR DX: STRAINED NECK; STRAINED RIGHT KNEE

Age 40 · Male · Head · Laceration · 2022

40 YOM HIT HEAD ON A SPRINKLER WHILE CLEANING IN THE ATTIC, DX: LACERATION OF SCALP

Age 60 · Male · Head · Laceration · 2020

60YOM WAS WORKING ON A CEILING AND HIT HEAD ON A SPRINKLER (INDOOR) DX: LAC TO HEAD

Age 47 · Male · Lower Leg · Laceration · 2020

47YOM C/O R LEG LAC. PT HAD WALKED INTO AN ELEVATED SPRINKLER APPROX 1 FOOT HIGH ABOVE THE GROUND. THIS CAUSED A LAC TO HIS R LEG NEAR THE TIBIA/FIBULAR AREA. DX: LEG LAC, R; IV DRUG ABUSE; METHAMPHETAMINE ABUSE; MUSCLE LAC

Age 24 · Male · Hand · Contusions, Abr. · 2019

24 YOM STAYING AT LOCAL CENTER WAS MESSING AROUND WITH FRIENDS WHEN HE JUMPED UP AND HIT HIS HAND ON A RUSTY CEILING SPRINKLER DX HAND ABRASION

Age 39 · Female · Head · Laceration · 2018

39 YOF SCALP LAC, IN A CRAWL SPACE WHEN SHE STRUCK HEAD ON A FIRE SPRINKLER, NO LOC, 4 STAPLES

Age 24 · Male · Head · Laceration · 2017

24YOM WAS IN A CELLAR WHEN HE HIT HIS HEAD ON A FIRE SPRINKLER DX: SCALP LACERATION

Age 40 · Male · Head · Laceration · 2016

40 YO M C/O CUT TO HEAD PTA WALKING INTO SPRINKLER HEAD ON LOW HANGINGCEILING WHILE WORKING AT HOME DX HEAD LAC

Consumer Incident Reports

Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.

5/9/2011 · Incident, No Injury · GLOBE FIRE SPRINKLER CORPORATION · Colorado

The sprinkler head is located inside of an Independent living facility. There is one in particular that is located outside on a porch. There was a fire that started in a trash receptacle on the porch the fire did not trigger the sprinkler did not go off. He was able to extinguish the fire with no injuries involved. He contacted the local representative (from the firm) and has not received a response from his as of yet. While doing some research online he noticed a recall (see Release #07-209) where the hazard was the sprinkler heads can deteriorate over time and fail to operate in a fire and his model was affected by a recall . He has not contacted the firm but plans on doing so since there is now a deadline for the replacement of the Sprinkler heads (see Release #11-203).

3/12/2018 · Incident, No Injury · The Viking Corporation · California

I have defective fire sprinklers throughout my new home which go off without warning and it has nothing to do w heat sensitivity. The model is Viking VK457 and it is throughout my Lennar home built in 2016. Already 4 homes, neighbors have had their house damaged to great depths. I have 4 children, all under the age of 5, one being just 7 months, plus animals. As the fire sprinklers goes off and ruins/destroys not only personal but property damages but can also cause personal injury. Not only to myself, but my 4 helpless children, one having autism and my small kittens. I need these defective fire sprinklers to be replaced throughout the house immediately. I have contacted 3 times Lennar builders and have failed to get a response. I will be contacting Viking Corp., Scott as well. This is an ongoing issue, with all the homeowners in WEST PARK area of Roseville as the fire sprinklers are a ticking time bomb.... wait to exploded.

3/10/2018 · Incident, No Injury · The Viking Corporation · California

I purchased a home in April 2015 that has a California required fire protection system installed in it. It has come to our attention that the materials used, specifically the Viking VK457 sprinker head, is possibly defective and can initiate when not subjected to fire conditions. There have been 4 instances of this in my community in the past couple of years causing considerable damage to homes. Viking has been sued by other contractors in southern California for this specific defect and have been working to replace these heads for them. They have not considered a similar program in our community. The sprinkler heads have been discontinued by Viking but have not been recalled. It appears that the defect in some of the heads is due to manufacturing processes for heads that were built between 2013 and 2015. Not all heads are defective but it is reported that it cannot be determined which is impacted unless it fails and floods a home.

12/5/2019 · Incident, No Injury · Honeywell International Inc., Fire Systems · New Jersey

We have 8 Honeywell System Sensor Flow switches installed on our fire sprinkler risers. Model number WFD60N. These flow sensors were installed about a year and a half ago. The sensors were activated due to water leaking into the sensors which caused them to short circuit, when the fire department showed up they found that 4 out of the 8 sensors had signs of corrosion. water was leaking through. I contacted Honeywell and they advised that I should contact the distributor. I contacted the distributor and had the sensors switched out to different brands. the distributor charged us labor but we do not agree since we are under the impression that this is a known issue and believe a recall should be issued. The device is faulty and the sensors are used for fire protection.

11/17/2022 · Incident, No Injury · RELIABLE AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER CO INC · Delaware

Failure of Reliable Model F3-56 Dry 200Degree F K5.6 Standard Response Standard Spray Sprinkler R5314

Product Recalls

Search for active and past recalls related to fire sprinklers on the CPSC website.

Compare beyond Home Heating & Cooling Equipment

Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization

Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Fire Sprinklers: cross-group products nearest on danger score (31/100), estimated annual ER visits (120/yr), and hospitalization share (3.8%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.

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, Fire Sprinklers ranks #622 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #749 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does fire sprinklers rank on danger score versus ER volume?

Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, fire sprinklers ranks #622 by PlainSafety danger score (31/100) and #749 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (120/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.

What are the most common injuries from fire sprinklers?

The most common injury is laceration to the head, accounting for approximately 389 injuries over 20 years.

Are injuries from fire sprinklers increasing or decreasing?

Up 54% over 5 years.

Who is most at risk for fire sprinklers injuries?

The 35-44 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 542 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.

What happens when someone is injured by fire sprinklers?

Of all ER visits involving fire sprinklers, approximately 3.8% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (96.2%) are treated and released from the emergency department.

How can I report a safety problem with fire sprinklers?

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.

Data on Fire Sprinklers is compiled directly from CPSC NEISS and SaferProducts.gov records, current through 2024. See our methodology for details.

Disclaimer: This page is for informational purposes only and is not affiliated with the CPSC.

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.