Jennifer L Bell1, Matthew A Taylor2, Guang-Xiang Chen3, Rachel D Kirk4, Erin R Leatherman5. 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Division of Safety Research, United States. Electronic address: JBell@cdc.gov. 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Effects Laboratory Division, United States. 3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Division of Safety Research, United States. 4. JAB Innovative Solutions, LLC, United States. 5. West Virginia University, Department of Statistics, United States.
Abstract
PROBLEM: Roadway incidents are the leading cause of work-related death in the United States. METHODS: The objective of this research was to evaluate whether two types of feedback from a commercially available in-vehicle monitoring system (IVMS) would reduce the incidence of risky driving behaviors in drivers from two companies. IVMS were installed in 315 vehicles representing the industries of local truck transportation and oil and gas support operations, and data were collected over an approximate two-year period in intervention and control groups. In one period, intervention group drivers were given feedback from in-cab warning lights from an IVMS that indicated occurrence of harsh vehicle maneuvers. In another period, intervention group drivers viewed video recordings of their risky driving behaviors with supervisors, and were coached by supervisors on safe driving practices. RESULTS: Risky driving behaviors declined significantly more during the period with coaching plus instant feedback with lights in comparison to the period with lights-only feedback (ORadj=0.61 95% CI 0.43-0.86; Holm-adjusted p=0.035) and the control group (ORadj=0.52 95% CI 0.33-0.82; Holm-adjusted p=0.032). Lights-only feedback was not found to be significantly different than the control group's decline from baseline (ORadj=0.86 95% CI 0.51-1.43; Holm-adjusted p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The largest decline in the rate of risky driving behaviors occurred when feedback included both supervisory coaching and lights. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Supervisory coaching is an effective form of feedback to improve driving habits in the workplace. The potential advantages and limitations of this IVMS-based intervention program are discussed. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
PROBLEM: Roadway incidents are the leading cause of work-related death in the United States. METHODS: The objective of this research was to evaluate whether two types of feedback from a commercially available in-vehicle monitoring system (IVMS) would reduce the incidence of risky driving behaviors in drivers from two companies. IVMS were installed in 315 vehicles representing the industries of local truck transportation and oil and gas support operations, and data were collected over an approximate two-year period in intervention and control groups. In one period, intervention group drivers were given feedback from in-cab warning lights from an IVMS that indicated occurrence of harsh vehicle maneuvers. In another period, intervention group drivers viewed video recordings of their risky driving behaviors with supervisors, and were coached by supervisors on safe driving practices. RESULTS: Risky driving behaviors declined significantly more during the period with coaching plus instant feedback with lights in comparison to the period with lights-only feedback (ORadj=0.61 95% CI 0.43-0.86; Holm-adjusted p=0.035) and the control group (ORadj=0.52 95% CI 0.33-0.82; Holm-adjusted p=0.032). Lights-only feedback was not found to be significantly different than the control group's decline from baseline (ORadj=0.86 95% CI 0.51-1.43; Holm-adjusted p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The largest decline in the rate of risky driving behaviors occurred when feedback included both supervisory coaching and lights. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Supervisory coaching is an effective form of feedback to improve driving habits in the workplace. The potential advantages and limitations of this IVMS-based intervention program are discussed. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Entities:
Keywords:
Driving; In-vehicle monitoring system; Injury; Motor vehicle; Occupational safety
Authors: Anthony D Harris; Douglas D Bradham; Mona Baumgarten; Ilene H Zuckerman; Jeffrey C Fink; Eli N Perencevich Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2004-05-12 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: W Karl Sieber; Cynthia F Robinson; Jan Birdsey; Guang X Chen; Edward M Hitchcock; Jennifer E Lincoln; Akinori Nakata; Marie H Sweeney Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2014-01-04 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Guang X Chen; James W Collins; W Karl Sieber; Stephanie G Pratt; Rosa L Rodríguez-Acosta; Jennifer E Lincoln; Jan Birdsey; Edward M Hitchcock; Cynthia F Robinson Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Steven J Wurzelbacher; Alysha R Meyers; Michael P Lampl; P Timothy Bushnell; Stephen J Bertke; David C Robins; Chih-Yu Tseng; Steven J Naber Journal: J Safety Res Date: 2021-09-17
Authors: Brian R Ott; George D Papandonatos; Erin M Burke; Donna Erdman; David B Carr; Jennifer D Davis Journal: Alzheimers Dement (N Y) Date: 2021-03-03
Authors: Yong Han Ahn; Sangeun Lee; Su Ryeon Kim; Jeeyeon Lim; So Jin Park; Sooyoung Kwon; Heejung Kim Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-11-05 Impact factor: 3.295