Study finds quarter of hockey helmets tested unsafe

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 30/03/2015 (3814 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Despite the inflated price on the sales sticker, that hockey helmet you’re buying for your son or daughter may not be as concussion-proof as you think.

A new study put out by researchers at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Monday showed that more than a quarter of 32 different models of hockey helmets are unsafe, with the majority of the helmets sampled woefully underperforming in terms of concussion prevention. The study, published in Springer’s April 2015 issue of Annals of Biomedical Engineering, found just one helmet, the Warrior Krown 360, earned a three-star rating through the STAR helmet evaluation system. Six earned two stars, 16 received a one-star rating, while nine helmets failed to earn any stars — a rating that researchers file under the “not recommended” category.

“Our focus is to improve the safety of the sport, and we have spent a great deal of time developing the methods and relaying these to the manufacturers so that they can optimize their designs,” Stefan Duma, head of Virginia Tech’s Department of Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics and co-director of the research said in the report.

“Our hope is to see new helmets come into the market with improved performance.”

Researchers tested each of the helmets, from trusted hockey equipment manufacturers such as Bauer, CCM, Warrior, Reebok and Easton, though a variety of impact tests. All told, more than 2,000 impact tests were completed on the helmets inside the laboratory and on the ice.

The Free Press attempted to reach out to officials at the Pan-Am Clinic’s concussion program for comment on the study. A Winnipeg Regional Health Authority spokeswoman denied the request, citing the coming provincial byelection in The Pas as the reason.

At Winnipeg’s Gateway Recreation Centre, the study and the list of star ratings earned by 32 helmets were hot topics of discussion among parents watching their sons’ spring hockey team practice.

“I saw that study online this morning and I emailed a copy of it to everyone on our team,” said Troy Titterson, whose son Finley, 7, is a member of the 2007 Mustangs spring hockey team. “I am actually in the market to buy my son a helmet and you look online at the reviews. I was really interested when I heard this because it was actually a scientific rating and not just that it feels good on the kid’s head or that it’s light or whatever.”

Titterson said he looked up Finley’s helmet — the Reebok 3K — and discovered it has a zero rating.

“I’ll be buying him a new helmet next week,” Troy said. “One of the things I said to the other parents is price definitely doesn’t tell you what the quality is.”

Troy noted that another parent told him the Warrior Krown 360 model that tops the list with a three-star rating at $79.98 is a 2012 model.

Bauer took a big hit in the study, seeing only two of its 12 helmets earning two stars in testing (seven earned one star, three helmets earned zero star ratings). On top of that, researchers gave the hockey equipment giant’s most expensive helmet, the RE-AKT 100 (retail price $269.99), only one star, a dismal rating when compared to its least expensive helmet, the Bauer 2100 ($34.99), which earned two stars.

“I’d like to see Canadian ratings on them because we have different testing in Canada,” said Janet Robertson. She and her husband Phil Farrington commuted from Riverton with their son Skylar, 8. “But this will definitely affect how we buy helmets in the future.”

Phil said he checked the ratings for the helmets of all three of their hockey-playing sons and his own.

“Skylar’s is a two, it’s a Bauer 2100 series, we got it last year. But our 13-year-old son has a Reebok 5K and it’s got a zero rating,” Phil said. “I’m pretty sure our 21-year-old’s is a CCM that has a zero rating. And my helmet has a zero rating.”

Bauer found itself in hot water regarding its helmets last year, after an investigation by the Competition Bureau found the manufacturer slanted its advertising that “created the impression that the product would offer hockey players protection from concussions caused by rotational impacts.”

As a result of the investigation, the company altered its advertising wording and imagery, and agreed to donate $500,000 worth of hockey equipment to charity last November.

The Virginia Tech hockey helmet study is similar to the one researchers did on the safety of football helmets four years ago. Since that study was released, and the subsequent public pressure to improve the product realized, football helmet manufacturers have made major strides in helmet safety.

According to researchers, only one football helmet received a five-star rating four years ago. Of the 26 helmets looked at in recent testing, 12 different helmets earned a five-star status.