Question Where can I find cycling helmets that can accomodate a cochlear implant?

[Myron]

I will be looking after and supervising inclusive cycling sessions (close to Manchester, England) and require helmets that can accommodate people who have a cochlear implant and I can not modify existing helmets to accommodate an implant as that would compromise the structural integrity of a helmet and also void any insurance policies that will cover the sessions.

Does anyone know of any brands which can accommodate cochlear implants or can someone signpost me to other organisations within the UK who can help me with this?

I'm aware that for over £200 I can have a helmet 3D printed, but what I'm after is something more generic that can be used by most people who attend sessions.

So here is my mission impossible. Can anyone please help me with this problem?

[Jdsk]

Welcome.

I don't think that it's been discussed here.

How about contacting the Manchester NHS team:
https://mft.nhs.uk/mri/services/cochlea ... programme/

Jonathan

[mjr]

Find a better insurer that doesn't force hard hats on the safe activity of cycling. Maybe Cycling UK's one?

[pjclinch]

Schemes that require helmets for learning environments (e.g., British Cycling's Go Ride) tend to have cultural and medical exemptions to those requirements, so it may be worth looking in to whether you actually need them.

Pete.

[Jdsk]

Wearing a helmet with an implant isn't only about protecting the head, it's also about protecting the implant.

I strongly recommend getting professional advice.

Jonathan

[axel_knutt]

I very much doubt what you're looking for will exist. The market for implant wearing, helmet wearing cyclists will be too small to make a non-customised, mass produced helmet an economical prospect. Are you sure that the requirements are sufficiently repeatable to make a non-customised helmet a practical option? Eg: are the implants always in precisely the same position? Could a helmet with a recess to accommodate the implant actually risk harm? Any movement of the helmet might tend to shear the device off the scalp.

I think the suggestions that you seek insurers that will agree to an exemption are more realistic.

[mjr]

Wearing a helmet with an implant isn't only about protecting the head, it's also about protecting the implant.

I strongly recommend getting professional advice.

Amen. I suspect there may be protective soft headgear for other activities already which would be sufficient and probably better than a kludged cycling hard shell.

[Jdsk]

Wearing a helmet with an implant isn't only about protecting the head, it's also about protecting the implant.

I strongly recommend getting professional advice.

Amen. I suspect there may be protective soft headgear for other activities already which would be sufficient and probably better than a kludged cycling hard shell.

The advice is already out there. I haven't seen what you describe in any of it.

Jonathan

[thirdcrank]

Schemes that require helmets for learning environments (e.g., British Cycling's Go Ride) tend to have cultural and medical exemptions to those requirements, so it may be worth looking in to whether you actually need them.

Pete.

I'll jump to the conclusion that anybody talking about "Manchester, England" hails from America, the United States of.

I'm no expert but I suspect this situation is governed by disability rights legislation of which they are unaware.

[Myron]

It's why I have asked the question here as the title of the entire forum is "Cycling UK Forum". I am trying to research this issue as I will be having clients who have cochlear implants and as mentioned it is as much to do with protecting the implant as is the client's head.

I've asked in this forum because I've hit the proverbial road block. Yes, I know there is a Manchester in the USA, but this is why I stated England.

The risk assessment for the sessions states that helmets will be compulsory unless there is some reason where the client can't wear a helmet, like someone who may have a form of autism which would cause distress of a helmet was to be worn or someone may have a very large cyst on the head that would prevent a helmet from being worn safely.

There are many people now who have been given a cochlear implant and I believe to be included and also to be safe, unless there is some special reason, should wear a helmet to protect their head and their implant in case of falling off the bike.

We live now in a world where an accident or incident happens and then solicitors and lawyers become involved who will nit-pick at everything and try find the tiniest loophole to win a case from which they also get their cut from a successful compensation claim. At the same time the organisation I work for had a duty of care and part of that duty is if someone is capable of wearing a helmet, they wear one when using the organisation's equipment and/or under the organisation's staff supervision.

[Jdsk]

Does anyone know of any brands which can accommodate cochlear implants or can someone signpost me to other organisations within the UK who can help me with this?

How about contacting the Manchester NHS team:
https://mft.nhs.uk/mri/services/cochlea ... programme/

I can suggest some others if they are unable or unwilling to help.

Jonathan

[pjclinch]

The risk assessment for the sessions states that helmets will be compulsory unless there is some reason where the client can't wear a helmet, like someone who may have a form of autism which would cause distress of a helmet was to be worn or someone may have a very large cyst on the head that would prevent a helmet from being worn safely.

Or, might I suggest, have a cochlear implant which isn't really compatible with the helmet?

There are many people now who have been given a cochlear implant and I believe to be included and also to be safe, unless there is some special reason, should wear a helmet to protect their head and their implant in case of falling off the bike.

If you have a risk assessment that says a helmet is necessary to protect heads on inclusive cycling sessions then it's going beyond the clear evidence of proven efficacy. Just because someone has put it in an RA doesn't make it right. For example, RAs for Bikeability 1 in school playgrounds quite typically say that helmets are necessary in case of falls and collisions, but the Association of Bikeability Schemes made a point of having their Facebook page show a playground session with a mix of wearers and non wearers (see https://www.facebook.com/The-Associatio ... 4574421799), and the same kids engaged in free play in the same playground with less supervision and less structure and a far higher accident rate operate with the understanding that if someone falls and hits their head they go to the office for some TLC, a sticker and form letter home, not an admonishment for not wearing a crash helmet. Given that cycling isn't clearly more productive of head injury than trips and falls, do these potential clients wear helmets for e.g. running? If they don't then why do they particularly need them for cycling? And if they do wear special protection for running, can they use that for cycling?

We live now in a world where an accident or incident happens and then solicitors and lawyers become involved who will nit-pick at everything and try find the tiniest loophole to win a case from which they also get their cut from a successful compensation claim. At the same time the organisation I work for had a duty of care and part of that duty is if someone is capable of wearing a helmet, they wear one when using the organisation's equipment and/or under the organisation's staff supervision.

Yes, you have a duty of care but that doesn't extend to making up reasons to use a safety intervention that's not the clear safety win it's widely assumed to be.

For those participants (or their carers) that want such protection it is excellent that you're going out of your way to find it, but it is an unnecessary imposition on those that are happy to do without if you're forcing them in to them. Your duty of care is not just protecting clients, but enabling them too, and an unnecessary helmet requirement is a barrier to enablement and, crucially given your starting point, a barrier to inclusivity. Inclusivity means everyone who wants to have a go, not everyone that wants to have a go when conforming with your dress code.

Being frightened of litigation isn't a good reason to take away someone's decision about what they wear to ride a bike. That so many people do isn't a good reason to follow suit, it's an excuse to put barriers between potential riders and riding.

Pete.

[Jdsk]

Amen. I suspect there may be protective soft headgear for other activities already which would be sufficient and probably better than a kludged cycling hard shell.

The advice is already out there. I haven't seen what you describe in any of it.

You've seen the advice and yet you're not willing to tell the questioner what it is, only tell them to ask other people who have also seen it?

I'm recommending that the OP gets advice on a very complex piece of medical technology from experts who understand it, are familiar with it, and look after the users.

Jonathan

[pjclinch]

A good first step is ask the people that actually have them. They probably have a good grasp of the advice on their care, and they have quite direct channels to the professionals who can go in to further detail. Why ask us when you can ask someone who lives with the thing day to day?

I only know one person with one of these so it's anecdotal, but he doesn't feel the need to wear a helmet when he's out on his handcycle.

One thing I do know about professional advice is that within cycle training/ride leading circles there is no formal advice or information on helmet efficacy. Ride leaders/instructors are very much left to their own devices, and much of what is said is well meant passing on of "received wisdom". Similarly, people doing RAs for cycle rides have no formal information on the ins and outs of "the helmet debate" and they typically just assume they're necessary because that's the background culture of "best practice".

So again, I salute the OP for looking in to options that might help their clients, but I would advise against forcing such a solution on to people who actually understand the devices and their issues very well through living with them day to day. If they want them it's good to have them, if they don't want them they become a barrier to inclusivity.

Pete.

[RickH]

Some organisations that may be able to help

Wheels for All (https://wheelsforall.org.uk/) - they do inclusive cycling with a number of centres around the Manchester area.

RNID (https://rnid.org.uk/) - The national hearing loss charity.

National Deaf Children's Society (https://www.ndcs.org.uk/) - as the name suggests, they work with children & young people but may be able to help even if you are dealing with adults.

I know a couple of the audiologists in Salford - I'll drop them a line & see if they've come across anything, especially as cochlear implants are becoming so common in severely/profoundly deaf children these days.