CPSC NEISS · code 1554

Safety Pins

Safety Pins: danger rank #622 of 838 is not ER-volume rank #536 of 838 (907 estimated ER visits a year; declining by about 44% over the last five years).

Nursery & Baby Products CPSC NEISS through 2024

Danger score versus ER volume

Danger score versus ER volume

According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Safety Pins ranks #622 of 838 by danger score (31/100) at ER-volume #536 of 838 (907/yr). They are not the same ranking.

#622
danger rank of 838
#536
ER-volume rank of 838
31/100
danger score
907/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: 40/100

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.

C
Dimension Value National percentile Weight applied Source
Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) 9 72nd 35% CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index
Annual ER injury volume 907 32nd 30% CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries
5-year injury trend -44% 11th 15% CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries
Consumer incident reports 1 18th 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 18,156 estimated ER injuries land on the body

Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1554. Segments sum to 18,156 - 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 Nursery & Baby Products 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.

Nursery & Baby Products danger scores

1. Bassinets Or Cradles47/1002. Baby Bathtub Seats Or Rin…41/1003. Baby Baths Or Bathinettes41/1004. Cribs, Nonportable Or Not…40/1005. High Chairs39/1006. Portable Baby Swings (for…38/1007. Portable Cribs38/1008. Safety Pins31/100
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 · Safety Pins

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 safety pins - no opinion, no editorializing:

  • Injury volume 907 ER visits/yr Below median volume
  • Severity (hospitalization rate) 9.1% High admission rate
  • Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
  • 5-year trend-44%

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 safety pins are declining by about 44% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2015 (1,591 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2022 (435 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is ingestion to the internal, accounting for approximately 3,907 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by puncture to the foot (1,446 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 3,390 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 9.1% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.

Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 1 consumer incident report filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how safety pins 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)

05001K2K2K 20052008201120142017202020232024 804
Estimated annual emergency-room visits for Safety Pins, 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 1,638 1,752 3,390
5-14 852 2,088 2,940
15-24 1,140 1,661 2,801
25-34 1,100 1,560 2,660
35-44 1,137 969 2,106
45-54 847 1,069 1,916
55-64 432 839 1,271
65-74 345 299 644
75+ 211 210 421

Most Common Injuries

Body Part Diagnosis Est. Injuries
Internal Ingestion 3,907
Foot Puncture 1,446
Finger Other 1,182
Finger Puncture 1,155
Eyeball Contusions, Abr. 632
Lower Trunk Other 586
Foot Foreign Body 505
Hand Puncture 483
Face Other 407
Mouth Other 397
Hand Other 341
Mouth Puncture 337
Internal Aspiration 332
Ear Other 324
Mouth Foreign Body 294

Severity Breakdown

Treated/examined And Released 87.5% (15,885)
Treated And Admitted/hospitalized 6.8% (1,239)
Left Without Being Seen 2.7% (486)
Treated And Transferred 2.3% (416)
Held For Observation 0.7% (130)

ER Visit Narratives

Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.

Age 12 · Female · Internal · Ingestion · 2024

12YOF SWALLOWED A SAFETY PIN AT HOME DX: SWALLOWED FOREIGN BODY

Age 45 · Female · Internal · Ingestion · 2024

45 YOF WITH POSSIBLE FOREIGN BODY SWALLOWED, STATES THAT SHE MAY HAVE SWALLOWED AN OPEN SAFETY PIN WHEN SHE ATE A SANDWICH YESTERDAY. DX FOREIGN BODY INTESTINE

Age 32 · Male · Face · Other · 2024

32YOM PRESENTS WITH FACIAL SWELLING AFTER TRYING TO DRAIN AN ABSCESS WITH A SAFETY PIN TWO DAYS AGO. DX: FACIAL CELLULITIS.

Age 73 · Female · Eyeball · Other · 2024

73YOF STATES THAT SHE ACCIDENTALLY POKED HERSELF IN THE LEFT EYE WITH A SAFETY PIN NOW HAS PAIN DX: EYE PAIN

Age 61 · Female · Finger · Foreign Body · 2024

61 YOF CLEANING HER RECLINER AND A SAFETY PIN WENT THROUGH R MIDDLE FINGER DX; FOREIGN BODY

Age 45 · Female · Finger · Other · 2024

45 YOF NOTED AN ABSCESS OVER THE FIFTH DIGIT AND USED A SAFETY PIN TO POP IT YESTERDAY. SINCE THEN, THE WOUND HAS GOTTEN BIGGER. DX: CELLULITIS OF LITTLE FINGER, CELLULITIS AND ABSCESS OF FINGER

Age 17 · Female · Foot · Foreign Body · 2024

17YOF PT C/O SAFETY PIN STUCK IN LEFT FOOT; USED THEM TO COVER HER JEANS DX: FOREIGN BODY IN FOOT

Age 78 · Female · Hand · Puncture · 2024

78 YOF ACCIDENTALLY STUCK HER RIGHT HAND WITH A SAFETY PIN, SWELLING IMPROVED, BRUISING NOTED, DOES NOT TAKE BLOOD THINNERS, DX: PUNCTURE WOUND HAND

Age 63 · Female · Eyeball · Puncture · 2024

63YOF WAS USING A SAFETY PIN TO SEPARATE HER EYELASHES WHEN IT WENT INTO LEFT EYE DX: PUNCTURE WOUND TO EYE

Age 60 · Female · Eyeball · Contusions, Abr. · 2024

60 YOF. IRRITATION TO THE LT EYE AFTER USING A SAFETY PIN TO SEPARATE SOME EYELASHES THAT WERE CAKED TOGETHER. DX: CORNEAL ABRASION

Age 24 · Female · Eyeball · Contusions, Abr. · 2024

24YOF, WAS PUTTING ON MASCARA WHEN ONE OF HER EYELASHES GOT STUCK, ATTEMPTED TO FIX IT USING A SAFETY PIN AND ACCIDENTALLY STRUCK HER EYEBALL, DX: ABRASION OF LEFT CORNEA

Age 5 · Male · Internal · Ingestion · 2024

5YOM PRESENTS WITH FOREIGN BODY INGESTION ~30-40MIN PTA. FATHER AT BEDSIDE STATES PT TOLD THEM HE HAD SWALLOWED A CLOSED SAFETY PIN SO BROUGHT HIM TO ED TO GET CHECKED OUT. XR SHOWING SAFETY PIN IN STOMACH, DX: FOREIGN BODY INGESTION

Consumer Incident Reports

Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.

11/24/2023 · No Incident, No Injury · ALO, LLC · California

My dog was severely injured by safety pins used by Alo Yoga clothing store. The safety pins are flimsy and defective. Alo Yoga uses the safety pins to attach all their price tags to clothing. My dog ingested three safety pins that were on the ground of the store. Two of the safety pins opened up inside of him and he had emergency surgery and was hospitalized for 4 days. I learned this after I went back to the store to check and all the clothing has safety pins. I asked the salesgirl about it and she said, “We have a problem with the safety pins falling off.” I said what if a mother put her child on the floor and the child was hurt?” She said they are not allowed to clean during the day when customers are in the store, and if they see a safety pin to pick them up. These safety pins are dangerous and Alo Yoga knows it. These safety pins should be recalled.

Product Recalls

Search for active and past recalls related to safety pins on the CPSC website.

Compare beyond Nursery & Baby Products

Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization

Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Safety Pins: cross-group products nearest on danger score (31/100), estimated annual ER visits (907/yr), and hospitalization share (9.1%). 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, Safety Pins ranks #622 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #536 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does safety pins rank on danger score versus ER volume?

Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, safety pins ranks #622 by PlainSafety danger score (31/100) and #536 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (907/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.

What are the most common injuries from safety pins?

The most common injury is ingestion to the internal, accounting for approximately 3,907 injuries over 20 years.

Are injuries from safety pins increasing or decreasing?

Down 44% over 5 years.

Who is most at risk for safety pins injuries?

The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 3,390 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.

What happens when someone is injured by safety pins?

Of all ER visits involving safety pins, approximately 9.1% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (90.9%) are treated and released from the emergency department.

How can I report a safety problem with safety pins?

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 Safety Pins 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.