CPSC NEISS · code 932

Shoe Polishes

Shoe Polishes: danger rank #794 of 838 is not ER-volume rank #764 of 838 (103 estimated ER visits a year; declining by about 32% over the last five years).

Home Workshop Tools & Equipment CPSC NEISS through 2024

Danger score versus ER volume

Danger score versus ER volume

According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Shoe Polishes ranks #794 of 838 by danger score (24/100) at ER-volume #764 of 838 (103/yr). They are not the same ranking.

#794
danger rank of 838
#764
ER-volume rank of 838
24/100
danger score
103/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 (24/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories

24 Among the lowest lower than 95% 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: 18/100

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.

A
Dimension Value National percentile Weight applied Source
Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) 3 20th 35% CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index
Annual ER injury volume 103 8th 30% CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries
5-year injury trend -32% 20th 15% CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries
Consumer incident reports 3 28th 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 1,646 estimated ER injuries land on the body

Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 932. Segments sum to 1,646 - 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 Workshop Tools & 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 Workshop Tools & Equipment danger scores

1. Gasoline47/1002. Methyl Alcohol (solvent)45/1003. Caustics43/1004. Lye42/1005. Gasoline Cans41/1006. Paints, Varnishes Or Shel…41/1007. General Purpose Household…41/1008. Shoe Polishes24/100
Higher score = higher composite danger in this group. Peer set is other scored products sharing the same CPSC group.
0/100100/10024/100
PlainSafety danger score · Shoe Polishes

Source: CPSC NEISS danger-score model As of 2024

How this 24/100 score is built

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

  • Injury volume 103 ER visits/yr Low volume
  • Severity (hospitalization rate) 2.5% Low admission rate
  • Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
  • 5-year trend-32%

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 shoe polishes are declining by about 32% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2011 (298 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2021 (5 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 788 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by derma/conjunct to the eyeball (104 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 554 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 2.5% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.

Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 3 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how shoe polishes 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)

0100200300400 200520072010201220152018202020222024 41
Estimated annual emergency-room visits for Shoe Polishes, 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
0-4 184 370 554
5-14 192 16 208
15-24 257 70 327
25-34 141 0 141
35-44 146 0 146
45-54 0 16 16
55-64 0 16 16
65-74 99 78 177
75+ 60 0 60

Most Common Injuries

Body Part Diagnosis Est. Injuries
All Parts Body Poisoning 788
Eyeball Derma/conjunct 104
Ear Foreign Body 98
Lower Trunk Contusions, Abr. 82
Upper Arm Fracture 78
Face Burns, Thermal 76
Upper Leg Burn, Chemical 75
Eyeball Contusions, Abr. 72
Eyeball Other 72
Face Burn, Chemical 60
Head Internal Injury 28
All Parts Body Other 17
Eyeball Burn, Chemical 16
Face Derma/conjunct 16
Finger Contusions, Abr. 16

Severity Breakdown

Treated/examined And Released 95.4% (1,571)
Held For Observation 3.8% (62)
Treated And Admitted/hospitalized 0.8% (13)

ER Visit Narratives

Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.

Age 212 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

12MOF PRESENTS WITH CONCERN FOR POSSIBLE ACCIDENTAL INGESTION OF SHOE CLEANER. MOM REPORTS PT WAS FOUND WALKING AROUND THE HOUSE WITH SHOE *** SHOE CLEANER AND MAY HAVE INGESTED SOME 30 MIN-1.5HR AGO. MOM DID NOT WITNESS INGESTION BUT REPORTS SMELLING IT AROUND PTS MOUTH AND ON PT'S SHIRT. MOM DENIES ANY BEHAVIOR CHANGE OR CONCERNING SYMPTOMS. DX: ACCIDENTAL INGESTION OF SUBSTANCE.

Age 211 · Female · Eyeball · Derma/conjunct · 2024

11MOF PRESENTS TO THE ED FOR EVALUATION OF BILATERAL EYE REDNESS AND IRRITATION SINCE 1240 TODAY. FATHER REPORTS PATIENT'S 3 Y.O SIBLING POURED *** SHOE CLEANING POLISH ONTO PATIENT'S HEAD CAUSING TO FALL INTO HER EYES DX: CHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS OF BOTH EYES

Age 214 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2022

14MOF PRESENT TO ED AFTER POSSIBLE ACCIDENTAL INGESTION OF HER FATHERS LEATHER SHOE POLISH/CONDITIONER. PARENTS NOTE PT WAS W/ GRANDFATHER IN THE BASEMENT,NOTED TO HAVE DARK BROWN SHOE POLISH AROUND HER MOUTH ON HER HANDS. NOT KNOWN IF TRUELY INGESTED,NOT KNOWING THE INGEDIENTS AND POSSIBLE TOXIC EXPOSUREDX: INGESTION OF FOREIGN SUBSTANCE(POSSIBLE INGESTION OF LEATHER SHOE POLISH)

Age 214 · Male · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2022

14mom got into a container of *** Boot Buffer liquid (isoparafinic hydrocarbon), c/o grunting and drowsiness. DX: accidental hydrocarbon ingestion; hypoxia; aspiration pneumonitis.

Age 219 · Male · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2022

19MOM PRESENTING AFTER INGESTION OF FLUID REFRESHED SHOE CLEANER THIS MORNING AT HOME. MOM THINKS HE MANAGED TO SWALLOW SOME, POSSIBLY 140ML. HAS BEEN ACTING NORMALLY BUT IS SCRATCHING HIS NOSE A LOT AND A LITTLE FUSSY. DX: INGESTION OF SHOE CLEANER

Age 2 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2022

2YOF presents after accidental ingestion of *** shoe cleaner this morning. Mom states that she believes it was a small amount since she did not really notice much difference in the total volume of the bottle. The bottle was left uncapped. Since the ingestion, Pt has vomited x2. DX: Ingestion of non-toxic substance, accidental or unintentional

Age 208 · Female · Eyeball · Other · 2021

8 MOF - MOM SPILLED SHOE POLISH ON PTS HEAD. GOT SOME IN EYES. DX CHEMICAL EXPOSURE TO EYE

Age 212 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2020

12MOF GRABBED A SMALL BOTTLE OF SHOE CLEANER & PUT IT IN MOUTH; SMALL AMOUNT DID END UP IN PT'S MOUTH DX: ACCIDENTAL INGESTION OF SUBSTANCE %

Age 69 · Male · All Parts Body · Other · 2020

69 YOM STOOD UP THIS EVENING TO POLISH A PAIR OF SHOES WHEN HE NOTICED LIGHTHEDEDNESS. HE SAT DOWN AND THE LIGHTHEADEDNESS RESOLVED. DX: DIZZINESS, ORTHOSTATIC HYPOTENSION.

Age 27 · Male · Eyeball · Derma/conjunct · 2019

27YOM CHEM CONJ EYE, GOT SHOE POLISH IN EYE

Age 2 · Female · Face · Derma/conjunct · 2019

A 2YOF PUT SHOE POLISH ON FACE, DEVELOPED REDNESS, HIVES, DERMATITIS

Age 12 · Male · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2018

12 YOM INJURED AFTER HUFFING SHOE REPELLENT,AT HOME. DX-CHEST TIGHTNESS,TOXIC INHALATION INJURY ACCIDENTAL

Consumer Incident Reports

Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.

6/28/2022 · Injury, Hospital Admission · HUNTER BOOT USA LLC · United States

[REDACTED] was a 14-month old male toddler who had ingested ~2 ounces of Hunter Boot Buffer Spray, the active ingredient being isoparafinic hydrocarbon, which was possibly aspirated by the child based on his reaction (lots of coughing). Aspiration of the product, in tandem with concomitant infection with rhinovirus, lead to progressive issues with breathing in the patient, which eventually culminated in ARDS. Patient admitted to intensive care, intubated and placed on a ventilator.

3/25/2025 · Incident, No Injury · S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. · Texas

Purchased: Kiwi Instant Polish (liquid black shoe polish). When new (second time the cap was off): As I pushed the top cap off to expose the application sponge, the whole top came off, dumping the contents all over the floor, chair, pants, and boots. The cap would not resecure to the shoe polish bottle. The top and bottle clips were not broken and shows no misuse. I am a Fire Fighter / Medic (hazmat tech & specialist) and a mechanical engineer when not at the fire department. This bottle is poorly designed. As a result, the product contents are not properly secured is a hazard to the public.

10/31/2015 · Injury, Emergency Department Treatment Received · AGS Footwear Group · Michigan

46 year old male and 16 year old son were waterproofing their boots in their house. I do not know what kind of ventilation was used. that same day, he had respiratory difficulty and went to an Urgent Care but was discharged home. Son developed chest pain. Next day, both cats were dead. Father had difficulty breathing and could not get out of bed. Wife was not home during the waterproofing process. Son has improved but husband has had an additional ED evaluation and seen by PMD requiring steroids for his respiratory symptoms. Cats were taken to the MSU Veterinary College where they wanted to do necropsies but family could not afford the procedure. I have been unable to obtain the specific ingredients in the aerosol but it is highly suggestive of the prior episode of Bootmate which led to a recall because of nanoingredient used for waterproofing. This is Heelix Foot and Shoe Care aerosol bout at Rocky's Outdoors: 810-742-5420. the only ingredient they could give me was the propellants: propane, isobutene and hexane. It also contains mink oil. I am unable to locate this product on the web.

Product Recalls

Search for active and past recalls related to shoe polishes on the CPSC website.

Compare beyond Home Workshop Tools & Equipment

Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization

Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Shoe Polishes: cross-group products nearest on danger score (24/100), estimated annual ER visits (103/yr), and hospitalization share (2.5%). 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, Shoe Polishes ranks #794 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #764 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does shoe polishes rank on danger score versus ER volume?

Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, shoe polishes ranks #794 by PlainSafety danger score (24/100) and #764 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (103/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.

What are the most common injuries from shoe polishes?

The most common injury is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 788 injuries over 20 years.

Are injuries from shoe polishes increasing or decreasing?

Down 32% over 5 years.

Who is most at risk for shoe polishes injuries?

The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 554 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.

What happens when someone is injured by shoe polishes?

Of all ER visits involving shoe polishes, approximately 2.5% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (97.5%) are treated and released from the emergency department.

How can I report a safety problem with shoe polishes?

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 Shoe Polishes 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.