For several years now, and for various reasons (economic crisis, climate crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, etc.), personal mobility in France has undergone significant changes: a decline followed by stabilization in private car use in favor of public transit, the rise of carpooling, a resurgence of walking and cycling in cities, and more recently, the emergence of personal mobility devices (motorized and electric scooters, unicycles, Segways, etc.). These devices are experiencing rapid growth due to their ease of use and the alternative they offer to certain modes of transportation. The introduction of self-service electric scooters in major cities has significantly contributed to this trend by increasing their appeal. The development of these new forms of mobility poses a public health challenge, with a sharp rise in the number of casualties seen in emergency departments. This observation is linked to the conditions under which these new devices are used: on the one hand, the characteristics of the devices themselves (maneuverability, instability, lack of visibility), and on the other hand, the sharing of public space (sidewalks, roads, bike lanes, etc.) among different modes of transportation. In this context, the primary objective of this study is to describe the characteristics of all victims involved in accidents with personal mobility devices (PMDs) and those involved in bicycle accidents, as well as the circumstances under which these accidents occurred. The second objective is to compare, within a homogeneous population in terms of travel practices (homogeneity of topography, regulations, traffic, etc.) and age (no mandatory helmet use, exclusion of children), the severity of injuries among users of motorized PTMs (mPTMs) with that of cyclists involved in accidents. This analysis is based on data collected by the Rhône Registry. Since 1995, it has recorded all injured victims (treated in emergency departments or hospitalized) in hospitals following a traffic accident occurring in the department and involving at least one moving vehicle, whether motorized or not. The definition of a victim is based on having at least one injury as defined by the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The severity indicator used for each victim is the Maximum AIS Score (MAIS) and corresponds to the highest AIS score recorded for an injured person. Victims with a MAIS of 1 are considered to have minor injuries, those with a MAIS of 2 are considered to have moderate injuries, and victims with a MAIS of 3 or higher are considered to have severe injuries. This study highlights a sharp increase in the number of EDP victims (motorized or non-motorized). In the Rhône Registry, their number increased fivefold between 2018 and 2019. The characteristics of the victims are consistent with those found in the literature. EDP victims are relatively young (average age of 24.3 years). Men outnumber women by a factor of 1.6. Among e-bike victims, 3% are MAIS3+ and 10% are hospitalized. When comparing the severity of injuries among e-bike riders to that of cyclists, while accounting for all confounding factors in a multivariate logistic regression model, it is noteworthy that e-bike victims, “all else being equal,” 1.8 times (CI 1.1–2.7) more likely to be seriously injured than cyclists. The risk of serious injury is 2.2 (CI 1.7–2.9) times higher when the accident occurs in the Lyon suburbs (outside Lyon) than in Lyon, 1.8 (1.3–2.4) times higher for men than for women, 1.9 (1.2–2.8) times higher for residents outside the Rhône department than for residents of that department, and it is 1.9 (1.4–2.4) times higher when the accident involves a collision with a motor vehicle compared to a fall alone.EDP accidents, particularly EDPm accidents, represent a major road safety issue. Targeted preventive measures must be taken to reduce their frequency and severity. These measures can be considered at several levels: the user’s environment (bike lanes, road surface improvements, etc.), the vehicle (larger taillights, turn signals, etc.), and user behavior (helmet use, compliance with traffic rules, alcohol, etc.). The regulations governing these vehicles in the Highway Code need to be revised to improve protection for these users. The findings presented in this report should be updated to account for changes in accident rates in recent years and the impact of new safety rules (the 2019 decree and the June and July 2020 orders).