Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Lunch Boxes Or Pails ranks #717 of 838 by danger score (28/100) at ER-volume #610 of 838 (490/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #717
- danger rank of 838
- #610
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 28/100
- danger score
- 490/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 (28/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
28 Among the lowest lower than 85% 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: 20/100
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 | 5th | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 490 | 26th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | -20% | 35th | 15% | CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries |
| Consumer incident reports | 2 | 25th | 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 9,814 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1719. Segments sum to 9,814 - 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 Medical & Assistance Devices 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 Medical & Assistance Devices danger scores
How this 28/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for lunch boxes or pails - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 490 ER visits/yr Below median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 0.7% Low admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
- 5-year trend-20%
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 lunch boxes or pails are declining by about 20% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2024 (1,054 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2021 (207 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is laceration to the face, accounting for approximately 782 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by internal injury to the head (690 cases). The 5-14 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 4,453 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 0.7% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 2 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how lunch boxes or pails 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 | 719 | 263 | |
| 5-14 | 2,419 | 2,034 | |
| 15-24 | 474 | 142 | |
| 25-34 | 489 | 254 | |
| 35-44 | 789 | 283 | |
| 45-54 | 623 | 269 | |
| 55-64 | 364 | 324 | |
| 65-74 | 123 | 104 | |
| 75+ | 130 | 0 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Face | Laceration | |
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Finger | Laceration | |
| Face | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Upper Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| All Parts Body | Poisoning | |
| Mouth | Laceration | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Hand | Other | |
| Knee | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Head | Concussion | |
| Wrist | Strain, Sprain |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
15 YOM HIT FACE WITH LUNCH BOX AND CUT IT DX:LAC
5YOM PRESENTS FOR EVALUATION OF LEFT MIDDLE FINGER REDNESS AND PAIN. MOM VERBALIZED PATIENT LACERATED THE AFFECTED FINGER OVER 2 WEEKS AGO AFTER TRYING TO OPEN A LUNCH CAN. MOM HAS NOTICED PERSISTENT REDNESS, PAIN AND SWELLING. DX: CELLULITIS FINGER LEFT
32YOM COMES TO THE ER WITH PARANOIA. HE BELIEVES HE WOULD HAVE SWALLOWED OR NEEDLE OR BEEN POKED WITH ONE. HE STATES HE WAS WITH A FRIEND AND THEY NOTICED A SYRINGE HAD A NEEDLE MISSING. HE WAS MAKING DINNER AT THE TIME HE NOTICED IT WAS MISSING. HE DENIES RECENT DRUG INJECTION. HE DOES USE METHAPHETAMINES. DX: ENCOUNTER FOR OBSERVATION FOR SUSPECTED INGESTION FOREIGN BODY RULED OUT
7YOF WITH LAC. TO THE RIGHT LOWER LEG, PT. WAS STANDING ON A PLASTIC LUNCH BOX, SHE FELL AND HIT HER LOWER LEG ON THE BOX AND CUT IT.DX: SINGLE SUPERFICIAL LAC. RIGHT LOWER LEG.
53 YOF FELL LANDED ON A LUNCH BOX HIT RIB AND HEAD DX: HEAD INJURY RIB CONTUSION
12YOM HE WAS AT SCHOOL WHEN HE GOT HIT WITH A PLASTIC LUNCH BOX IN THE FACE DX: LEFT FACIAL SWELLING, PAIN OF LEFT ORBIT, PAIN OF CHEEK
56YOF PRESENTS TO THE ED AFTER SHE TRIPPED GETTING OFF THE BUS ON HER WAY TO WORK. PATIENT BROKE HER FALL WITH HER LUNCHBOX, DENIES HEAD STRIKE, BUT STATES SHE TWISTED HER ANKLE IN THE PROCESS. PT HAS ANKLE SWELLING DX: CLOSED FX OF BASE OF 5TH METATARSAL BONE OF LEFT FOOT
9YOF WHO PRESENTS TO THE ER WITH A COMPLAINT OF FOREHEAD LACERATION. PT STATES THAT SHE WAS IN THE SCHOOL BUS MESSING AROUND WITH SOME FRIENDS WHEN SHE GOT HIT IN THE HEAD WITH A LUNCH BOX DX: LAC OF FOREHEAD
12YOF, WAS AT CAMP WHEN SHE DROPPED HER LUNCH BOX ON HER FINGER, DX: CLOSED DISPLACED FRACTURE OF MIDDLE PHALANX OF RIGHT INDEX FINGER
11 YOM WAS HIT IN THE FACE WITH A LUNCH BOX WHILE AT SCHOOL. DX: CONCUSSION
11YOM WAS ASSAULTED BY ANOTHER STUDENT AT SCHOOL, WHO HIT HIM ACROSS THE FACE WITH A LUNCH BOX DX: LACERATION TO FOREHEAD, CLOSED HEAD INJURY
59YOM PRESENTS WITH BACK PAIN THAT BEGAN ON MONDAY AFTER BENDING OVER TO REACH FOR HIS LUNCH BOX. DX: LOW BACK PAIN
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
My infant son's lead blood levels came back elevated, and his lunch box tested positive for lead. His lunch box was used for transporting his food to and from school. My son's blood levels were elevated from ingesting lead or lead contaminated food.
We purchased the Simple Modern Pixar Bento Lunch Box for Kids for our 3.5 year old and our 22 month old sons in December 2024. My son took it to preschool for the first time at the end of December 2024 and when he came home, the white plastic cap in the hinge was missing, as was the metal piece inside the hinge. Upon opening his lunch box, the small metal piece (a rod about an inch long) was sitting inside of the bento box. We had a replacement, in the same color and style, and began to use that one instead. Today, January 15, 2025, the white piece popped out of his new lunch box hinge and the metal rod fell out shortly after. We were at home, so we witnessed it happen. The lunchbox was always hand washed and only used a total of 12 times. It was never microwaved or put in the dishwasher. There was no known drops or trauma to the lunch box to dislodge the product. While there were no injuries, the piece is small enough that if either of our young children discovered the metal piece in their lunch, and ate it, it could crack a tooth or be swallowed.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to lunch boxes or pails on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Home Medical & Assistance Devices
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Lunch Boxes Or Pails: cross-group products nearest on danger score (28/100), estimated annual ER visits (490/yr), and hospitalization share (0.7%). 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.
- Unpowered Models Or Parts Toys & Children's Recreation 0.7%admitted
- Ear Protection Devices Personal Care & Safety Products 0.8%admitted
- Field Hockey (activity, Apparel Or Equipment) Sports & Recreation Equipment 0.7%admitted
- Metal Chimneys, Stovepipes Or Flues Kitchen Small Appliances & Housewares 0.8%admitted
Related Products in Home Medical & Assistance Devices
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, Lunch Boxes Or Pails ranks #717 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #610 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does lunch boxes or pails rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, lunch boxes or pails ranks #717 by PlainSafety danger score (28/100) and #610 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (490/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from lunch boxes or pails?
The most common injury is laceration to the face, accounting for approximately 782 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from lunch boxes or pails increasing or decreasing?
Down 20% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for lunch boxes or pails injuries?
The 5-14 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 4,453 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by lunch boxes or pails?
Of all ER visits involving lunch boxes or pails, approximately 0.7% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (99.3%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with lunch boxes or pails?
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.