Preventing Crashes Among Novice Teenage Drivers: Research on Risk and Prevention

Transcription

1 Preventing Crashes Among Novice Teenage Drivers: Research on Risk and Prevention Dr. Bruce Simons-Morton Senior Investigator, Health Behavior Branch & Associate Director for Prevention National Institute of Child Health & Human Development National Institutes of Health

2 YOUNG DRIVER PROBLEM Driver Fatal Crash Involvement/Million Miles

3

4 THE YOUNG DRIVER PROBLEM Inexperienced Drivers of All Ages Have High Crash Rates Twisk & Stacy, 2007

5 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS Exposure - Miles - Condiitons Maturity/Age Inexperience Driving Performance Individual Variability - Errors - Attention - Riskiness Crash Risk

6 NATURALISTIC DRIVING RESEARCH DRIVING Naturalistic Teenage Driving Study A. Purpose: examine variability in teen driving performance B. Overview N = 42 teens and 54 parents, 18-months of driving Continuous data collection Instrumentation: accelerometers, cameras, GPS C. Surveys at 0, 6, 12, 18 months

7 Driving Clips 7

8 8

9 Naturalistic Teen Driving Study Crash/Near Crash Teens and Parents IRR=3.91 Simons-Morton, et al., AJPH, 2011

10 Variability in CNC Rate by Group Guo, Simons-Morton, et al., J of Pediatrics, 2013

11 Variability in CNC Rate Over Time Low-Risk Drivers (n=13) Moderate-Risk Drivers (n=16) All Drivers (n=42) CNC rate (CNC per 10KKMT) Months 1-3 Months 4-6 Months 7-9 Months Months Months 16-18

12 Kinematic Risky Driving Acceleration Event Gravitational Force Correlation w/ CNC Hard braking > g 0.76 Rapid starts > 0.35 g 0.75 Sharp turns > 0.50 g 0.60 Yaw + 6 degrees w/i 3 seconds 0.46 Composite 0.60 *Notes: 1) High monthly KRD = 10 times greater likelihood of a CNC in next month 2) KRD rate/month is 75% accurate in predicting CNC Simons-Morton, et al., American Journal of Public Health, 2011; Simons-Morton et al., American Journal of Epidemiology, 2012

13 TEEN AND ADULT KRD 8.00 Kinematic Risky Driving Rates 7.00 IRs for g-force rates/ 100 miles Turns.57** Yaw IRR = * Parent driver Teen driver with no passengers Time since licensure (3-month time periods) Simons-Morton et al., Journal of Adolescent Health, 2011

14 TEEN AND ADULT KRD With Adult Passengers 8.00 Kinematic Risky Driving Rates 7.00 IRs for g-force rates/ 100 miles Turns.57** Yaw IRR = * Parent driver Teen driver with no passengers Teen driver with adult passengers Time since licensure (3-month time periods) Simons-Morton et al., Journal of Adolescent Health, 2011

15 INATTENTION INCREASES CRASH RISK CNC Odds Ratios NTDS (Novice Drivers) 100-Car Study (Experienced Drivers) Secondary Task OR 95% CI OR 95% CI Texting /10.0 n/a n/a Dialing / /4.5 Talking - Phone / /1.1 Reaching - Phone / /6.1 Reaching - Object (not phone) / /2.3 Looking Roadside object / Eating / /2.1 Vehicle Operations / /2.7 Radio/HVAC / /0.9 Klauer, Guo, Simons-Morton et al., New England Journal of Medicine, 2014

16 TEST TRACK RESEARCH ON DISTRACTION Dialing When Approaching Intersection Figure 4: The Smart Road Intersection

17 Test Track Phone Task: Intersection Stopping Behavior (n=16 teens; 16 experience adults) Percentage Who Stopped 200' w/phone 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Teen Adult Teen Adult Olsen, Simons-Morton, Lee, 2006 Time 1 Time 2 T0 T6

18 Teen Passengers

19 Teen Passengers Increase Fatal Crash Risk Ages Ages Ages Number of passengers NPTS & NASS/GES Fatal crashes/10,000 trips Chen, Baker, 2003

20 Observing Teen Drivers Leaving High School Video camera 2 Observer Radar Video camera 1 3 HS parking lot 10 area high schools; 3000 observations Compared teen drivers with usual traffic Speed - radar gun Close following - video Simons-Morton. Lerner, Singer, AAP, 2005

21 Teen Driver Speed by Driver and Passenger Type M ale P assenger Transformed Speed Male D riv er M ale P assenger Fe m ale Driver N o P ass enger No P ass enger F emale P ass enger F emale P ass enger Mean for usual traffic 0 A ll T e e n s D rive r G e n d e r P a sse n g er G e nd e r Simons-Morton et al, AAP, 2005

22 Experimental Simulation Study on Effect of Teen Passengers on Teen Risky Driving

23 Confederate Passenger

24 TEEN PASSENGER STUDY #1 (n=58) Passenger Effects (ANOVA) Risky Intersection Behavior Outcome/ Condition Passenger Solo p Average Average Failed to stop 30% 24% <0.01 % time in red 22% 17% <0.01 *Significant passenger presence * passenger type interaction (p <0.001) Simons-Morton, Bingham, et al., Health Psychology, 2013

25 TPS#1 (n=58) Risky Intersection Behavior Probability of failed to stop zinteractions Between Passenger Presence and Passenger Type Failed to Stop** Percent Time in Red** Percent time in Red Passenger Drive Solo Drive 5 0 Passenger Drive Solo Drive **p <0.001 Risk-accepting passenger Risk-averse passenger Simons-Morton, Bingham, et al., Health Psychology, 2013

26 SUMMARY Teen Risk Factors 1. Young age & inexperience 2. Kinematic risky driving 3. Inattention due to 2 nd tasks 4. Teenage passengers

27 Crashes Increase at Licensure 27

28 Safety Approaches To The Novice Young Driver Problem SAFETY APPROACH GOALS EVIDENCE OF SAFETY BENEFIT GDL Limit exposure +++ Driver education & training Vehicle management and driving test??? Supervised practice Provide experience, improve skills, judgment, norms Improve parent management? Limit exposure +

29 Effects of GDL in Michigan Delays licensure Reduces exposure to high-risk driving Shope, Molnar, 2004

30 GDL POLICY ANALYSES Fatal Crash Rate Declines by Number of Graduate Driver Licensing Components Chen L et al. Pediatrics 2006;118:56-62

31 EVALUATIONS OF DRIVER TRAINING More skillful drivers do not necessarily crash less; regardless of skill drivers must actually drive more safely to minimize risk. (Lonero, Meyhew, 2015). Approach Objective Safety Benefits DeKalb Study, 1973 Intensive/usual DE No safety benefits Vernick et al, 1999; Mayhew & Simpson, 2002; Elvik, 2004; Peck, 2011; Lenero & Mayhew, 2015 Beanland et al., 2013; Washington et al., 2011; Mynttinen et al., 2010 Reviews (pre-open licensure training) Reviews (post-drive training) No safety benefits No safety benefits of post-drive training (2- stage) LSEDE, 2015 Oregon, Manitoba Probably no benefits Senserrick, Ivers, et al., 2009 NSW DRIVE risk orientation/resilience 44% reduced crash RR Thomas et al., 2016 Hazard skills training Possible crash reduction

32 SUPERVISED PRACTICED NATURALISTIC DRIVING STUDY Driving Errors Improve With Practice Driving Errors by Type First 10 Hours N=90 participants # 9,823 observations Last 10 hours N=78 participants # 8,523 observations N Percentage (SD) N Percentage (SD) Driving Errors - Total 1, (19.4) * (13.0) Recognition (1.2) (0.9) Decision (2.9) (2.4) Performance (19.3) (11.3) Other (1.0) (0.8) High Risk Secondary Tasks (4.6) * (7.6)

33 SUPERVISED PRACTICE NATURALISTIC DRIVING STUDY Parent Driving Instruction Topics Topic Proximal Instruction # Higher Order Instruction * Navigation 94% 4% Warning/Detect Hazard 75% 16% Vehicle Handling or Operation 85% 7% Remark on Driving Behavior 74% 17% Asks Question - Driving Task 80% 19% Rules of the Road 78% 15% # Proximal relates to the present driving task or immediate future * Higher order relates to principles of driving N=76

34 PRACTICE DRIVING AND INDEPENDENT Measures RISKY DRIVING MEASURES Correlations Kinematic Risky Driving Crash/Near Crash 3-Months Total 3-Months Total Miles Road Type Diversity

35 RESEARCH ON PARENTAL MANAGEMENT OF TEENAGE DRIVERS

36 Authoritative Parents are Demanding and Responsive

37 Parental Restrictions on Trip and Risk Conditions Never allowed Always allowed 1 1 month <3 mos 3-5 mos 6-8 mos 9-11 mos >11 mos Trip limits Risk Limits Hartos, Simons-Morton. 2001

38 CHECKPOINTS PARENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Persuasive Communications Parent Management of Teen Driving - Limits on teen driving Mediators 1 - restriction norms - expectations 1 Protection motivation theory

39 The Checkpoints Parent-Teen Driving Agreement PART I: DRIVING RULES: These are absolutes ones that apply to every trip, every time Teen driver will: Always obey all traffic laws Never speed, tailgate, or cut others off Always wear a seat belt and require all passengers to wear seat belts Never drive after taking any drugs or alcohol or ride with a driver who has taken any drugs or alcohol Always tell parent/guardian where going and with whom Always call home if going to be late Always call home if for any reason it is not safe to drive or ride PART II: DRIVING PRIVILEGES: These need to be tailored to your teen's driving progress Parent will: Be a good role model behind the wheel Point out and discuss safe and dangerous driving situations and practices limits Apply rules fairly and consistently Consider necessary exceptions to driving Provide a safe ride home (no questions asked at that time) DRIVING PRIVILEGES Nighttime Teen passengers Weather Road types Review date We agree Initials Checkpoint 1 Month 1 8 pm None Dry Local Checkpoint 2 Months pm None Moderate No high speed Checkpoint 3 Months pm 1 Most Most WE AGREE (sign) PARENT TEEN

40 Checkpoints in Driver Education % Percentage of families with a completed agreement Intervention Control 1 Zakrajsek, Simons-Morton, Shope, F&CH, Intervention greater than control (x = 42.54; p <.0001)

41 CHECKPOINTS PROGRAM Tx Group Improvements in Driving Outcomes Intervention Control m (sd) m (sd) p Overall High Risk Driving (past week) 19 items 0.50 (0.5) 0.82 (0.9).04 Sped in residential or school zone 1.51 (1.7) 2.20 (2.3).09 Drove mph over limit 0.31 (0.1) 0.80 (1.8).10 Drove 20+ mph over limit 0.02 (0.1) 0.28 (0.7).02 Tailgated 0.08 (0.3) 0.37 (1.0).07 Went through intersection on yellow 1.79 (2.2) 3.15 (3.9).04 Raced another vehicle 0.05 (0.2) 0.24 (0.7).07 Drove to show off 0.03 (0.2) 0.15 (0.4).08

42 TECHNOLOGY AND PARENT MANAGEMENT Event Recorders Provide Feedback and Enable Parent Monitoring

43 DriveCam TeenSafe Driver Feedback name name name

44 Randomized Trial: Group #1: Immediate Feedback to Teen (LO) Group #2: Lights+ Feedback to Family (DC) Simons-Morton, Bingham, Shope, et al., Journal of Adolescent Health, 2012.

45 IMPROVING NOVICE TEEN DRIVING SAFETY Summary 1. Goals: A. Delay licensure B. Limit exposure to high risk driving conditions C. Create safe driving norms and practices 2. Improve training & supervision (Driver Ed & practice driving) A. Higher order instruction B. Safe driving expectations, judgment, self-control, norms 3. Parental management A. Set strict limits on newly licensed teens B. Monitor driving performance

46 Thank you! Collaborators NICHD: Johnathon Ehsani, Kaigang Li, Fearghal O Brien, Pnina Gershon, Paul Albert Sherbrook U: Marie Claude Ouimet VTTI: Sheila Klauer, Tom Dingus, Feng Guo, Suzie Lee, UMTRI: Ray Bingham, Jean Shope, Anuj Pradhan, U of PA: Emily Falk DriveCam Inc CDM, Inc U Michigan UMass Virginia Tech