Danger score versus ER volume
Danger score versus ER volume
According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Scaffolding ranks #38 of 838 by danger score (46/100) at ER-volume #285 of 838 (5,034/yr). They are not the same ranking.
- #38
- danger rank of 838
- #285
- ER-volume rank of 838
- 46/100
- danger score
- 5,034/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 (46/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories
46 Higher than most more dangerous than 94% 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: 69/100
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) | 19 | 92nd | 35% | CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index |
| Annual ER injury volume | 5,034 | 58th | 30% | CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries |
| 5-year injury trend | +18% | 80th | 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 100,667 estimated ER injuries land on the body
Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1816. Segments sum to 100,667 - 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 Building Materials & Home Structures 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.
Building Materials & Home Structures danger scores
How this 46/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for scaffolding - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume 5,034 ER visits/yr Above median volume
- Severity (hospitalization rate) 17.6% Very high admission rate
- Fatality rate 0.18% Elevated fatality rate
- 5-year trend+18%
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 scaffolding are rising by about 18% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2007 (6,483 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2015 (3,586 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is internal injury to the head, accounting for approximately 9,228 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by fracture to the upper trunk (5,130 cases). The 35-44 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 21,146 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 17.6% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.18%) result in fatality.
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 scaffolding 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 | 607 | 250 | |
| 5-14 | 2,586 | 738 | |
| 15-24 | 7,203 | 1,426 | |
| 25-34 | 14,393 | 1,525 | |
| 35-44 | 18,756 | 2,390 | |
| 45-54 | 16,361 | 1,840 | |
| 55-64 | 14,635 | 2,124 | |
| 65-74 | 10,795 | 811 | |
| 75+ | 4,049 | 152 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| Head | Internal Injury | |
| Upper Trunk | Fracture | |
| Upper Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Lower Trunk | Fracture | |
| Lower Trunk | Other | |
| Ankle | Strain, Sprain | |
| Foot | Fracture | |
| Lower Trunk | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Head | Laceration | |
| Face | Laceration | |
| Lower Trunk | Strain, Sprain | |
| Wrist | Fracture | |
| Ankle | Fracture | |
| Head | Concussion | |
| Upper Trunk | Other |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
57YOM PRESENT TO ED PT WAS ON SCAFFOLDING THAT GAVE OUT CAUSING HIM TO HIT HIS HEAD AND 6FT FALL LANDING ON HIS HEAD REPORTED 5MIN LOC.RECEIVED ***/*** BY EMS,BECAME A SCENE *** ACTIVATION.ENROUTE VS STABLE,NO AIRWAY DIFFICULTYDX:FALL;CONCUSSION W/ LOC 30MIN OR LESS
66YOM WAS PAINTING A HOUSE AND WAS ON SCAFFOLDING WHEN HE LOST HIS BALANCE AND FELL 4-5 FT. DX: FALL ON AND FROM SCAFFOLDING CAUSING ACCIDENTAL INJURY; CLOSED HEAD INJURY WITHOUT LOSS OF CONSCIOUSNESS; RIGHT-SIDED CHEST WALL PAIN; ACUTE BILATERAL LOW BACK PAIN; SPASM OF THORACIC BACK MUSCLE.
47YOM C/O WRIST PAIN. FELL 3FT BACKWARDS OFF A SCAFFOLDING AND LANDED ON HIS RIGHT WRIST. DX: WRIST SPRAIN
62YOM WALKED IN TO ED FOLLOWING A FALL FROM SCAFFOLDING APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET 3 DAYS PRIOR TO ARRIVAL, REPORTS FALLING ON BOARDS. PATIENT REPORTS FALLING ON RIGHT SIDE. PATIENT REPORTS RIGHT SIDED PAIN IN CHEST, ABDOMEN, SHOULDER, AND FACE. PATIENT REPORTS CHIPPING 3 TEETH. DX:SYNCOPE AND COLLAPSE; FACIAL PAIN; NECK PAIN.
39YOM - PATIENT PRESENT FOR FALL. PT FELL OFF SCAFFOLDING. PT HAS + LOC AND SCALP LACERATION. DX: FALL.
60YOM REPORTS AFTER FALLING FROM SCAFFOLDING GREATER THAN 20 FT. PATIENT REPORTS LEG AND BACK PAIN. DX S/P FALL, HIP FRACTURE,PELVIC FRACTURE, ANKLE INJURY, ADMIT.
53 YOM FELL OFF SCAFFOLD DX; LHIP FX, PELVIC FX
40YOM STATES THAT HE FELL OFF OF A SCAFFOLDING THIS MORNING WAS WEARING A HELMET AT THE TIME DX: CLOSED HEAD INJURY; MUSCULOSKELETAL LOW BACK PAIN
65YOM PRESENTS AFTER HE WAS ON SOME SCAFFOLDING SLIPPED AND FELL AND LANDED ON HIS RIGHT HIP, PRESENTS WITH PAIN TO HIS RIGHT HIP AND SORENESS TO HIS RIGHT SHOULDER DX: CLOSED DISPLACED FRACTURE OF RIGHT ACETABULUM
49YOM WAS AT A HOME IMPROVEMENT STORE WHEN 450 LBS OF SCAFFOLDING FELL STRUCK HIM IN THE RIGHT SHOULDER DX: PAIN RIGHT SHOULDER
38 YOM FELL APPROXIMATELY 15 FEET OFF SCAFFOLDING AND REPORTEDLY LANDED ON HIS BOTTOM. SUSPECT PATIENT ALSO HIT HIS HEAD. DX: LACERATION OF SCALP, TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY.
59YOM PRESENTS TO THE ED AFTER THE PATIENT FELL FROM A 8 FT SCAFFOLD LANDING ON RIGHT SIDE COMPLAINING OF WRIST PAIN. DX: FALL FROM SCAFFOLD, WRIST PAIN AND SWELLING, WRIST FRACTURE
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
The door latch for staging guard rail is installed wrong. The door unexpectedly opened and almost fell off. UPDATED ON 8/24/2023: [I installed the rails on the platform. The fault latch was installed at the factory. It was not at work. ]
I was working on a UST Work-A-Round scafflod when the weld holding the right front leg and caster broke. I was pitched forward and fell to the floor. I couldn't remove my body from the collapsing unit since my feet were caught and bent backwards within the unit. I went to the ER and had x-rays of my feet, ankles, knees and wrists. I had a broken big toe and later lost that nail and much tissue damage and swelling to my lower legs and feet. I also had tingling from my knees to my toes and also to my wrists. I used crutches for one week to get around since I couldn't put my weight on my lower legs or feet.
Scaffolding collapsed due to the securing pins not engaging fully, I was treated for a broken forearm at Via Christi Hospital in Wichita Kansas. Total cost of the broken arm was more than $19,000.00 to the hospital & Doctor. The scaffolding was made by Buffalo Tools Corp. & sold by Tractor Supply in Wichita Kansas.
A contractor was working on a scaffold when a newly replace 5-inch caster broke away. As a result, the contractor fell 4 feet from the ground causing bruised ribs and a broken rib to his right side. Further investigation revealed the caster was not properly weld between the stem and the top plate. The caster was improperly manufactured and could not sustain the recommended rating of 440lbs. The caster was in the lock position and no movement was conducted with the scaffold. While inspecting other casters, we noticed the newly purchased casters did not have an outside weld like other original casters. The contractor stated they purchased the castors from Amazon and the vendor is still to be determined. We recommended the vendor to conduct an inspection of all scaffolds to determine if they possess the new replacement caster. If so, they were to suspend operations of the scaffold until further notice.
One of our employees was using a Werner PS-48 4 ft Portable Scaffold. He was applying drywall mud with the wheels locked. The unit broke apart and the employee fell 3' to the floor. The diagonal bracing broke away from the center piece on the back side of the scaffold. It appears the metal in the center piece is too thin to handle the type of use it's designed for. A check of 4 other Werner PS-48's showed one unit about to fail for the same reason and two of the units with stress cracks in the same area. We believe these scaffolds have a faulty design and we have pulled them from the field.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to scaffolding on the CPSC website.
Compare beyond Building Materials & Home Structures
Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization
Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Scaffolding: cross-group products nearest on danger score (46/100), estimated annual ER visits (5,034/yr), and hospitalization share (17.6%). 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.
- Swimming Pool Equipment Sports Protective Equipment & Gear 5,075/yr
- Electric Chandeliers Or Other Attached Light Fixtures Home Furnishings & Fixtures 4,981/yr
- Electric Wire Or Wiring Systems (excl Panelboards Recept Floors, Walls & Ceilings 4,956/yr
- Metal Cookware (nonelectric) Containers, Tableware & Packaging 5,114/yr
Similar hospitalization rate
Nearest cross-group products by % of NEISS ER visits resulting in hospital admission.
Related Products in Building Materials & Home Structures
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, Scaffolding ranks #38 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #285 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does scaffolding rank on danger score versus ER volume?
Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, scaffolding ranks #38 by PlainSafety danger score (46/100) and #285 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (5,034/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.
What are the most common injuries from scaffolding?
The most common injury is internal injury to the head, accounting for approximately 9,228 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from scaffolding increasing or decreasing?
Up 18% over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for scaffolding injuries?
The 35-44 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 21,146 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by scaffolding?
Of all ER visits involving scaffolding, approximately 17.6% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (82.4%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with scaffolding?
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.