Pruning Or Trimming Equipment, Not Specified
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.
Lawn & Garden Equipment · CPSC Code 1447
Down 23% over 5 years
The verdict
Pruning Or Trimming Equipment, Not Specified carry a danger score of 41/100 (moderate risk), driven by roughly 21,939 ER-treated injuries a year that are declining by about 23% over the last five years.
- 41/100
- danger score (moderate risk)
- 21,939
- ER visits per year (avg)
- 7.4%
- end in hospital admission
- 55-64
- most-injured age group
Every figure is rendered from the CPSC NEISS record for product code 1447 - last data year 2024.
PlainSafety danger score
How this 41/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for pruning or trimming equipment, not specified - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume21,939 ER visits/yr
- Severity (hospitalization rate)7.4%
- Fatality rate0.14%
- 5-year trend-23%
See the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
Pruning Or Trimming Equipment, Not Specified (CPSC product code 1447, in the Lawn & Garden Equipment category) generate an estimated 21,939 emergency-room visits every year in the United States, adding up to roughly 438,783 ER-treated injuries across the 20-year span from 2005 to 2024. PlainSafety derives a danger score of 41/100 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 23% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2015 (27,627 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2021 (14,910 estimated visits).
The single most common ER diagnosis for pruning or trimming equipment, not specified is laceration to the finger, accounting for approximately 162,011 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by contusions, abr. to the eyeball (22,944 cases). The 55-64 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 84,834 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 7.4% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.14%) result in fatality.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 8 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how pruning or trimming equipment, 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 CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 1,308 | 657 | |
| 5-14 | 7,455 | 2,646 | |
| 15-24 | 25,138 | 3,862 | |
| 25-34 | 37,843 | 12,137 | |
| 35-44 | 44,461 | 18,205 | |
| 45-54 | 52,744 | 28,107 | |
| 55-64 | 54,197 | 30,637 | |
| 65-74 | 49,267 | 21,976 | |
| 75+ | 33,008 | 15,064 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Finger | Laceration | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Hand | Laceration | |
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Finger | Fracture | |
| Lower Arm | Laceration | |
| Lower Leg | Laceration | |
| Lower Trunk | Fracture | |
| Upper Trunk | Fracture | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Lower Trunk | Other | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Knee | Laceration |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
72YOM WITH LEFT EYE PAIN. STATES HE WAS TRIMMING A TREE ONE OF THE BRANCHES SWEPT DOWN AND SCRAPED ACORSS HIS LEFT EYE. HE HAS BLURRED VISION AND IS HAVING A FOREIGN BODY SENSATION TO THE CENTER OF EYE. DX; CORNEAL ABRASION
68YOM WAS OUTSIDE TODAY TRIMMING HEDGES WHEN HE DEVELOPED CHEST PAIN AND SHORTNESS OF BREATH DX: ACUTE CHEST PAIN
74YOF STATES THAT SHE WAS DOING A LOT OF EXERTIONAL ACTIVITY OVER THE WEEKEND TRIMMING AN 8 FOOT HEDGE DOWN AND WAS DOING A LOT OF BENDING AND TWISTING AND DEVELOPED LOWER ABDOMINAL PAIN DX: ABDOMINAL PAIN; ACUTE APPENDICITIS
90YOM WAS TRYING TO TRIM TREES WHEN HE FELL OFF OF A 4 FOOT LADDER LANDING ONTO LEFT HIP DX: FRACTURED LEFT FEMUR
45YOM WAS TRIMMING HIS TREE WHEN HE TWISTED HIS LEFT SHOULDER DX:STRAINED SHOULDER
76YOM WAS PRUNING A TREE WHEN HE FELL OFF OF A LADDER LANDING ONTO HEAD DX:FRACTURED NECK, CLOSED HEAD INJURY
47 YOM WAS LANDSCAPING THIS MORNING AND CUT HIS FOURTH AND FIFTH DIGIT WITH A HEDGE TRIMMER BY ACCIDENT. DX: FINGER LACERATION.
64YOM, CUTTING TREE LIMB THAT FELL ON HIS HEAD LACERATION ABOVE RIGHT EYEBROW, ABRASION BRIDGE OF NOST DX: LACERATION ABOVE RIGHT EYEBROW, ABRASION BRIDGE OF NOSE
66 YOM CUT LEFT INDEX FINGER WHILE TRIMMING THE BUSHES TODAY, DOES NOT TAKE BLOOD THINNERS, DX: FINGER LACERATION, PARTIAL AMPUTATION OF FINGER
71 YOF WAS GETTING A TREE TRIMMED AT HOME. SHE WENT OUT TO TAKE A PICTURE OF THIS AND FELT SOMETHING GO IN HER EYE WHEN SHE LOOKED UP. DX CORNEAL ABRASION
75YOM C/O LACERATIONS TO MULITPLE FINGERS AND ABRASION TO CHEST S/P PT STATES HE ACCIDENTALLY CUT HIS FINGERS WHEN A BRANCH FELL ON HIM WHILE TRIMMING A TREE. DX: LACERATIONS TO FINGERS AND ABRASION TO CHEST.
56YOM WAS TRIMMING A PALM TREE IN HIS BACKYARD WHEN HE STRUCK HIMSELF IN THE RIGHT EYE DX: CORNEAL ABRASION
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
The consumer stated that his friend was using his new gas trimmer for approximately 2 hours. The consumer stated that when his friend finished his faced was burnt and that he did not burnt his eyes because he had glasses on. The consumer stated that he noticed that the reason why his face was burnt was because the exhaust system was located in a way where the heat was released towards the operator. The consumer stated that his friend used a burn ointment to treat the burns on his face. The consumer stated that his friend did not have to go to the emergency room. The consumer stated that he contacted the manufacturer and filed a complaint. The consumer believes this product should be investigated due to the burn hazard that it poses to the consumers.
I own a little-used Husqvarna 125L grass trimmer, which was purchased from Lowes in 2007 and while attempting to start it recently and ended up with gas splashed all over my hands. The cause immediately became evident when inspecting the special molded fuel pickup lines which were completely rotted and had leaked gas while attempting the starts up. I contacted Husqvarna after noting a similar CPSC recall on anther trimmer model and was told that the 125L is not part of the recall program. I was instructed to to repair the unit out of warranty and have it inspected by a dealer. This unit has been used less than a dozen or so times since it's purchase and should not have failed in such a dangerous way. It's clear that the materials being used are substandard (it's made in China) and result in a risk of skin contamination and other hazards. Pressure needs to be applied to Husqvarna to improve the safety and quality of these products. It was also one of the more expensive units on the market and one would most certainly expect better quality.
Garden shears are sharpened on the outside of the blades and I have been cut numerous times just normally using them.
Toro Gas Trimmer, model: 51950 gas grommet or gasket leaks. Trimmer purchased in 2010 The gas tank grommet (or gasket) that holds and seals the gas line tube as it passes through to the gas tank has deteriorated starting in 2013. On first use this season (2014), the grommet is now crumbling; thus allowing gas to freely seep from the gas tank. The leaking gas could be ignited by the hot engine. This is a dangerous flammable situation.
Simply unpackaging a Fiskars 2 Piece Pruning Set from CostCo, Costco Product Number 1902210 resulted in a lacerated thumb. Multi-purpose tools knife edge blade is unshielded within outer packaging. Opening it up from the backside does not allow you to see the edge of the tool. My thumb, while separating the clear packaging from the cardboard backing, was sliced open. This is not a serious injury, yet it could be worse for someone else.
consumer states that There is a cover that goes over the spooler in which snaps into place . Per the instructions you are to tap the weed wacker on the ground to the feed the line out further. If it is taped a little hard the cap will fly off in the opposite direction and the spool would fall off. When the spool fell off it has hit him in the leg on a few occassions. He returned it to the retailer and was offered a newer model. Upon using the new model he noticed the same hazard occurred. He returned the second one to Sears in TN on 4/13/11. Sears exchanged it for a newly designed model. The head or spool cover is redesigned. It took many telephone calls and four store viists to get this done. His concern with the older model is that you can be seriously injured with the cap if it continues to fly off.
The product is a Kobalt 40V Hedge Trimmer from Lowes. Product was stored under the house. Had not been in use for several months and was being stored during winter period. Due to smell permeating into the home it was discovered that the trimmer/battery had caught fire. Fire was extinguished with no damage to house or individuals however given the nature of the incident it could have been much worse if people had not been in the house and reacted immediately to the smell.
On January 17, 2016 Purchased a Ryobi PRUNER ATTACHMENT - MODEL RY15520 from Home Depot store #[REDACTED]. On January 24, 2016, I used the attachment with a [REDACTED] 4 cycle engine, designed to allow various attachment tools. According to the HomeDepot web site: "This pole saw attachment can be used with Ryobi, [REDACTED] and other universal brand fit power heads and trimmers." The attachment comes with a strap hanger that the manual says to attach to the power head end of the shaft. It also comes with a shoulder strap which is then connected to the strap hanger with a snap clip. The shoulder strap is made from nylon webbing and sewn together connected with some steel rings and nylon-plastic adjustment sliders. The manual implies to make sure to use this shoulder strap as a safety measure. From the manual: "When operating this unit, you must wear a shoulder strap to support the unit. If your unit does not have a strap hanger installed on the power head shaft, use the following instructions to install the hanger. ? Pull strap hanger apart and place over power head end of shaft; position near the upper knob. ? Install bolt and lock nut. Tighten nut securely. NOTE: Check for tightness before each use to avoid serious injury or product damage. ? Place shoulder strap over your left shoulder and attach shoulder strap clip to strap hanger. Adjust by sliding the front clip up or down. NOTE: When properly adjusted, the power head should be supported by the shoulder strap about hip level." The first time I used this tool, I used it for about 45 minutes and then the shoulder strap fell apart and stopped supporting the weight of the power head and attachment. The combined weight of the power head and the attachment stressed and deflected a metal ring that holds two parts of the strap together. The nylon part of the strap was then able slip out of the ring where a gap in the ring had opened up. I did not get hurt, but feel I coul
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to pruning or trimming equipment, not specified on the CPSC website.
Frequently Asked Questions
How dangerous are pruning or trimming equipment, not specified?
Based on 20 years of CPSC data, pruning or trimming equipment, not specified have a danger score of 41/100 (moderate risk). An estimated 21,939 ER-treated injuries occur annually in the U.S. related to this product category.
What are the most common injuries from pruning or trimming equipment, not specified?
The most common injury is laceration to the finger, accounting for approximately 162,011 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from pruning or trimming equipment, not specified increasing or decreasing?
Down 23% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for pruning or trimming equipment, not specified injuries?
The 55-64 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 84,834 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by pruning or trimming equipment, not specified?
Of all ER visits involving pruning or trimming equipment, not specified, approximately 7.4% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (92.6%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with pruning or trimming equipment, 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.
Related Products in Lawn & Garden Equipment
Safety Guides
What this means for you
Treat the 41/100 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 55-64 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.