Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students

Bellal Joseph, Ansab Haider, Ahmed Hassan, Narong Kulvatunyou, Sandeep Bains, Andrew Tang, Bardiya Zangbar, Terence OKeeffe, Gary Vercruysse, Lynn Gries, Peter Rhee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death and nonfatal injury among young adults. The aims of this study were to assess the magnitude of distracted driving (DD) among students and to examine the effectiveness of awareness campaign against DD. We hypothesized that DD is prevalent among students and educational efforts such as DD awareness campaign can effectively reduce it. METHODS: This study was conducted within the University of Arizona that has a student enrollment of 42,000 students.We conducted our prospective interventional study in four phases at the university campus. Phase 1 involved 1-week preintervention observation, Phase 2 involved 1-week intervention, Phase 3 involved 1-week postintervention observation, and Phase 4 involved 1-week 6-month postintervention observation. We used a combination of e-mails, pamphlets, interactive sessions, and banners as intervention tools in student union. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of DD before, after, and 6 months after intervention. RESULTS: A total of 47,764 observations (before, 14,844; after, 17,939; 6 months after, 14,981) were performed. During the study period, overall rate of DD rate among the students was 8.8 (5.4) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8[3.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 3.9[2.0] per 100 drivers). The baseline rate ofDDamong students during the phase onewas 9.0 (1.2) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8 [1.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 4.1 [1.1] per 100 drivers). Following intervention, there was a 32% significant reduction in overall DD (9.0 [1.2] vs. 6.1 [1.7], p < 0.001) in the immediate postintervention phase; however, the rate of DD returned to baseline at 6 months after intervention and trended toward increase (9.0 [1.2] vs. 11.1 [8.4], p = 0.34). CONCLUSION: DD is prevalent among university students. Following a comprehensive preventive campaign against DD, there was a 32% reduction in the rate of DD in the immediate postintervention period. However, a single episode of intervention did not have a sustainable preventive effect on the DD, and the rate increased to the baseline at 6-month follow-up. Targeting DD with a successful injury prevention campaign with repeated boosters may decrease its prevalence among the students.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)144-147
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Volume81
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Students
Wounds and Injuries
Text Messaging
Observation
Distracted Driving
Pamphlets
Postal Service
Motor Vehicles
Young Adult
Cause of Death
Prospective Studies

Keywords

  • Distracted driving
  • Educational campaign
  • Talking and driving
  • Texting and driving

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Joseph, B., Haider, A., Hassan, A., Kulvatunyou, N., Bains, S., Tang, A., ... Rhee, P. (2016). Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 81(1), 144-147. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000001022

Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students. / Joseph, Bellal; Haider, Ansab; Hassan, Ahmed; Kulvatunyou, Narong; Bains, Sandeep; Tang, Andrew; Zangbar, Bardiya; OKeeffe, Terence; Vercruysse, Gary; Gries, Lynn; Rhee, Peter.

In: Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Vol. 81, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 144-147.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Joseph, B, Haider, A, Hassan, A, Kulvatunyou, N, Bains, S, Tang, A, Zangbar, B, OKeeffe, T, Vercruysse, G, Gries, L & Rhee, P 2016, 'Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students', Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 144-147. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000001022
Joseph, Bellal ; Haider, Ansab ; Hassan, Ahmed ; Kulvatunyou, Narong ; Bains, Sandeep ; Tang, Andrew ; Zangbar, Bardiya ; OKeeffe, Terence ; Vercruysse, Gary ; Gries, Lynn ; Rhee, Peter. / Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students. In: Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. 2016 ; Vol. 81, No. 1. pp. 144-147.
@article{c4236466d3bd4d6cb18b80c5d7c7c9c3,
title = "Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students",
abstract = "Background: Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death and nonfatal injury among young adults. The aims of this study were to assess the magnitude of distracted driving (DD) among students and to examine the effectiveness of awareness campaign against DD. We hypothesized that DD is prevalent among students and educational efforts such as DD awareness campaign can effectively reduce it. METHODS: This study was conducted within the University of Arizona that has a student enrollment of 42,000 students.We conducted our prospective interventional study in four phases at the university campus. Phase 1 involved 1-week preintervention observation, Phase 2 involved 1-week intervention, Phase 3 involved 1-week postintervention observation, and Phase 4 involved 1-week 6-month postintervention observation. We used a combination of e-mails, pamphlets, interactive sessions, and banners as intervention tools in student union. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of DD before, after, and 6 months after intervention. RESULTS: A total of 47,764 observations (before, 14,844; after, 17,939; 6 months after, 14,981) were performed. During the study period, overall rate of DD rate among the students was 8.8 (5.4) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8[3.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 3.9[2.0] per 100 drivers). The baseline rate ofDDamong students during the phase onewas 9.0 (1.2) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8 [1.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 4.1 [1.1] per 100 drivers). Following intervention, there was a 32{\%} significant reduction in overall DD (9.0 [1.2] vs. 6.1 [1.7], p < 0.001) in the immediate postintervention phase; however, the rate of DD returned to baseline at 6 months after intervention and trended toward increase (9.0 [1.2] vs. 11.1 [8.4], p = 0.34). CONCLUSION: DD is prevalent among university students. Following a comprehensive preventive campaign against DD, there was a 32{\%} reduction in the rate of DD in the immediate postintervention period. However, a single episode of intervention did not have a sustainable preventive effect on the DD, and the rate increased to the baseline at 6-month follow-up. Targeting DD with a successful injury prevention campaign with repeated boosters may decrease its prevalence among the students.",
keywords = "Distracted driving, Educational campaign, Talking and driving, Texting and driving",
author = "Bellal Joseph and Ansab Haider and Ahmed Hassan and Narong Kulvatunyou and Sandeep Bains and Andrew Tang and Bardiya Zangbar and Terence OKeeffe and Gary Vercruysse and Lynn Gries and Peter Rhee",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/TA.0000000000001022",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "81",
pages = "144--147",
journal = "Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery",
issn = "2163-0755",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Injury prevention programs against distracted driving among students

AU - Joseph, Bellal

AU - Haider, Ansab

AU - Hassan, Ahmed

AU - Kulvatunyou, Narong

AU - Bains, Sandeep

AU - Tang, Andrew

AU - Zangbar, Bardiya

AU - OKeeffe, Terence

AU - Vercruysse, Gary

AU - Gries, Lynn

AU - Rhee, Peter

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Background: Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death and nonfatal injury among young adults. The aims of this study were to assess the magnitude of distracted driving (DD) among students and to examine the effectiveness of awareness campaign against DD. We hypothesized that DD is prevalent among students and educational efforts such as DD awareness campaign can effectively reduce it. METHODS: This study was conducted within the University of Arizona that has a student enrollment of 42,000 students.We conducted our prospective interventional study in four phases at the university campus. Phase 1 involved 1-week preintervention observation, Phase 2 involved 1-week intervention, Phase 3 involved 1-week postintervention observation, and Phase 4 involved 1-week 6-month postintervention observation. We used a combination of e-mails, pamphlets, interactive sessions, and banners as intervention tools in student union. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of DD before, after, and 6 months after intervention. RESULTS: A total of 47,764 observations (before, 14,844; after, 17,939; 6 months after, 14,981) were performed. During the study period, overall rate of DD rate among the students was 8.8 (5.4) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8[3.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 3.9[2.0] per 100 drivers). The baseline rate ofDDamong students during the phase onewas 9.0 (1.2) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8 [1.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 4.1 [1.1] per 100 drivers). Following intervention, there was a 32% significant reduction in overall DD (9.0 [1.2] vs. 6.1 [1.7], p < 0.001) in the immediate postintervention phase; however, the rate of DD returned to baseline at 6 months after intervention and trended toward increase (9.0 [1.2] vs. 11.1 [8.4], p = 0.34). CONCLUSION: DD is prevalent among university students. Following a comprehensive preventive campaign against DD, there was a 32% reduction in the rate of DD in the immediate postintervention period. However, a single episode of intervention did not have a sustainable preventive effect on the DD, and the rate increased to the baseline at 6-month follow-up. Targeting DD with a successful injury prevention campaign with repeated boosters may decrease its prevalence among the students.

AB - Background: Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death and nonfatal injury among young adults. The aims of this study were to assess the magnitude of distracted driving (DD) among students and to examine the effectiveness of awareness campaign against DD. We hypothesized that DD is prevalent among students and educational efforts such as DD awareness campaign can effectively reduce it. METHODS: This study was conducted within the University of Arizona that has a student enrollment of 42,000 students.We conducted our prospective interventional study in four phases at the university campus. Phase 1 involved 1-week preintervention observation, Phase 2 involved 1-week intervention, Phase 3 involved 1-week postintervention observation, and Phase 4 involved 1-week 6-month postintervention observation. We used a combination of e-mails, pamphlets, interactive sessions, and banners as intervention tools in student union. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of DD before, after, and 6 months after intervention. RESULTS: A total of 47,764 observations (before, 14,844; after, 17,939; 6 months after, 14,981) were performed. During the study period, overall rate of DD rate among the students was 8.8 (5.4) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8[3.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 3.9[2.0] per 100 drivers). The baseline rate ofDDamong students during the phase onewas 9.0 (1.2) per 100 drivers (texting, 4.8 [1.7] per 100 drivers; talking, 4.1 [1.1] per 100 drivers). Following intervention, there was a 32% significant reduction in overall DD (9.0 [1.2] vs. 6.1 [1.7], p < 0.001) in the immediate postintervention phase; however, the rate of DD returned to baseline at 6 months after intervention and trended toward increase (9.0 [1.2] vs. 11.1 [8.4], p = 0.34). CONCLUSION: DD is prevalent among university students. Following a comprehensive preventive campaign against DD, there was a 32% reduction in the rate of DD in the immediate postintervention period. However, a single episode of intervention did not have a sustainable preventive effect on the DD, and the rate increased to the baseline at 6-month follow-up. Targeting DD with a successful injury prevention campaign with repeated boosters may decrease its prevalence among the students.

KW - Distracted driving

KW - Educational campaign

KW - Talking and driving

KW - Texting and driving

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960193744&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960193744&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/TA.0000000000001022

DO - 10.1097/TA.0000000000001022

M3 - Article

C2 - 26953757

AN - SCOPUS:84960193744

VL - 81

SP - 144

EP - 147

JO - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

JF - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

SN - 2163-0755

IS - 1

ER -