The effect of group-adapted motivational interviewing on traffic convictions and driving behaviors of court-adjudicated youth

Assessing the effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions on driving behavior: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This review aimed to quantitatively summarize the evidence concerning the effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions on driving behavior. A final pool of 138 studies, totaling approximately 97,000 participants, was included in the analyses and covered all types of driving behavior targeted by the interventions. Using a random effects model, significant results were found for almost all driving outcomes, both post-intervention and long-term. The strongest effect was for reducing distracted driving at post-intervention (d = 1.87 [1.12, 2.60], Z = 4.94, p < 0.001). The only non-significant effects were for reducing errors in the long term (d = 0.50 [-0.87, 1.86], Z = 0.71, p = 0.48) and driving under the influence at post-intervention (d = 0.35 [0.00, 0.71], Z = 1.96, p = 0.05). Concerning which type of intervention was more effective, feedback, training and motivational ones appear to work best. Educational interventions show only weak effects, while awareness interventions seem mostly ineffective. Overall, our results show that most interventions can reduce different types of driving behaviors, but there are specific aspects to be considered based on the targeted behavior.

ProjectDRIVE: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial to improve driving practices of high-risk teen drivers with a traffic violation

BACKGROUND

Teen drivers with a traffic violation are at increased risk for crashes and crash-related injuries; however, most parent-focused interventions target teen drivers with supervised learner's permits. Very few interventions are implemented at the probationary driver's license stage or target high-risk teen drivers, such as those with traffic violations. This paper describes the protocol of ProjectDRIVE, A Randomized Controlled Trial to Improve Driving Practices of High-Risk Teen Drivers with a Traffic Violation, which targets improving parent-teen communication about safe driving practices to reduce unsafe driving behaviors and traffic violation recidivism of teen drivers cited for traffic violation.

METHODS

Teen drivers (ages 16 or 17) cited for a moving violation and the parent/legal guardian most involved with the teen's driving are recruited from juvenile traffic courts following their required court hearing. After completing informed consent/assent, enrolled dyads are randomized into one of three groups using stratified block randomization: control, device feedback only, or device feedback plus parent communication training. Participating dyads are followed for 6 months with 3 months of active intervention. Using in-vehicle device and smartphone application technology, the study provides real-time and cumulative driving feedback to intervention teens and collects continually recorded, objectively measured driving outcome data throughout the teen's study participation. Primary outcomes include rates of risky driving events and unsafe driving behaviors per 1000 miles driven. Secondary outcomes include traffic violation recidivism up to 12 months following study completion and frequency and quality of parent-teen communication about safe driving practices.

DISCUSSION

Through partnership with the local juvenile traffic courts, this study integrates recruitment and randomization into existing court practices. Successfully completing this study will significantly impact juvenile traffic court's practices and policies by informing judges' decisions regarding the driving safety programs they refer to teens to prevent motor vehicle crashes and crash-related injuries and deaths. Trial registration The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04317664) on March 19, 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04317664 and updated on April 27, 2021. This protocol was developed per the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) Checklist.

CBT program to reduce recidivism risk for road crashes among adolescents and young adults: Results of a randomized controlled study and prospects

Road crashes are the first cause of mortality for young adults aged 18-25 years and the human factor contributes to 90-95% of events. The present study was carried out to determine the efficacity of the ECARR2 recurrence prevention program among adolescents and young adults at high risk of having a new traffic crash in the following months. A total of 288 participants having had a traffic crash that required going to the emergency room, at high risk of accident recurrence (ECARR≥5) were randomly allocated to either the intervention group (n = 144) or the control group (n = 144).

Results

revealed that the risk of recurrence was highest during the first 6 months (66% of recurrences). In per-protocol analysis population, at 6 months after inclusion, the accident recurrence rate was 14.2% ± 3.3% in the intervention group, and 23.5% ± 4.0% in the control group. The intervention had an effect per se, independently of the other predictors (p = 0.020). This effect was mediated by the three interaction variables: BDI, Impulsive Behavior Scale lack of perseverance, and Orientation to Happiness engagement. It was therefore through these dimensions that the intervention had an effect. In conclusion, the ECARR score predicts the risk of recurrence, risk which is the highest during the first 6 months. Finally, results confirm the predictive validity of the ECARR scale. The ECARR score had an effect on the risk of recurrence regardless of group (p = 0.045) and was predictive of recurrence (p = 0.045).A brief psychological intervention such as ECARR2 program, offered to young people ar hight risk of having a new crash, just after the crash, seems to halve the risk of recurrence at 6 months. Future research should improve the brief psychological intervention and its access via a mobile application or few hours in high school or in a driving school given.

Interventions to Prevent Drugged Driving: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Literature suggests that cannabis legalization may increase fatal motor vehicle collisions. However, evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to prevent drugged driving is limited.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, SafetyLit, Criminal Justice Database, Transport Research International Documentation, bibliographies, and relevant gray literature were searched systematically through May 2020. Randomized and nonrandomized studies of preventive interventions measuring drugged driving outcomes were included. Evidence certainty was judged per Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines to designate quality ratings from very low to high.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The search identified 11 RCTs and 17 nonrandomized studies conducted predominantly among youth (aged 15-25 years; n=33,711 of 37,117 active research participants). In the public, cannabis packaging with health warnings increases the knowledge about drugged driving effects (high certainty); roadside drug testing can reduce drugged driving among cannabis users (moderate certainty); media campaigns may increase deterrent attitudes and knowledge (low certainty); and state sanctions, including traffic offense criminalization, license withdrawal, and per se drugged driving laws, may have little or no effect on drug-related fatalities or injuries (very low-low certainty). For youth or previous offenders, motivational interviewing can prevent drugged driving and driver education programs can increase knowledge (moderate certainty), whereas drug abuse prevention, substance abuse treatment, and driver rehabilitation may prevent drugged driving (very low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there is evidence to support the interventions that may improve drugged driving knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. However, the impact of such interventions on measures of drugged driving-related morbidity and mortality is uncertain. Further research is urgently required to address these gaps in knowledge.

Nationwide risk factors for hospital readmission for subsequent injury after motor vehicle crashes

OBJECTIVE

Some drivers involved in motor vehicle crashes across the United States may be identified as at risk of subsequent injury by a similar mechanism. The purpose of this study was to perform a national review of the risk factors for hospitalization for a new injury due to a subsequent motor vehicle crash. It was hypothesized that presenting to a different hospital after subsequent injury would result in worse patient outcomes when compared to presentation at the same hospital.

METHODS

The Nationwide Readmissions Database for 2010-2014 was queried for all inpatient hospitalizations with injury related to motor vehicle traffic. The primary patient outcome of interest was subsequent motor vehicle crash-related injury within 1 year. The secondary patient outcomes were different hospital subsequent injury presentation, higher Injury Severity Score (ISS), longer length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital death after subsequent injury. The analysis of secondary patient outcomes was performed only on patients who were reinjured. Univariable analysis was performed for each outcome using all variables during the index admission. Multivariable logistic regression was performed using all significant (P < .05) variables on univariate analysis. Results were weighted for national estimates.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1,008,991 patients were admitted for motor vehicle-related injury; 12,474 patients (1.2%) suffered a subsequent injury within 1 year. From the reinjured patients, 32.9% presented to a different hospital, 48.9% had a higher ISS, and 22.1% had a longer LOS. The in-hospital mortality rate after subsequent injury was 1.1%. Presentation to a different hospital for subsequent injury was associated with a longer LOS (odds ratio [OR] = 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.45; P < .01) and a higher ISS (OR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27-1.49; P < .01). Motorcyclists were more likely to suffer subsequent injury (OR = 1.39; 95% CI, 1.32-1.46; P < .01) and motorcycle passengers were more likely to present to a different hospital with a subsequent injury (OR = 2.49; 95% CI, 1.73-3.59; P < .01). Alcohol abuse was associated with subsequent injury (OR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.18; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly a third of patients suffering subsequent motor vehicle crash-related injury after an initial motor vehicle crash in the United States present to a different hospital. These patients are more likely to suffer more severe injuries and longer hospitalizations due to their subsequent injury. Future efforts to prevent these injuries must consider the impact of this fragmentation of care and the implications for quality and cost improvements.