Changes in risky driving behavior from age 21 to 26 years

Aim: The aim of this study was to determine whether the prevalence of risky driving behavior changed between ages 21 and 26 years, among a cohort of young people. Method: This study was part of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study, which is a longitudinal study of a birth cohort. This study involved examining changes in the prevalence of risky driving behavior among young adults at ages 21 and 26 years. At both ages, 936 members of the cohort were administered face-to-face interviews, using a structured questionnaire that included items on a range of risky driving and thrill-seeking activities. Results: The results showed that risky driving was predominantly a male activity, but by 26 years of age, many had “matured out” of this behavior. At the same time, the desire for thrill-seeking increased among the males. Among the females, there were few significant changes between ages 21 and 26 years, but at both ages, the prevalence of risky driving and thrill-seeking was relatively low. Impact on industry: These results show that the main target population for road safety interventions aimed at reducing risky driving behavior should be young, male drivers.     

Characteristics of drivers not using seat belts in a high belt use state

A study was undertaken in North Carolina to determine the characteristics of the minority of drivers who were not using seat belts following an extensive publicity/enforcement campaign, which had increased statewide use to 80%. Vehicles and drivers whose seat belt use was observed at sites across North Carolina were matched against Division of Motor Vehicles registration and driver history files for vehicle owners. The study file consisted of those observed drivers who matched the owners with respect to sex, race, and approximate age. The results of this investigation indicate that nonuse of seat belts was associated with males; younger age (<35); older vehicles (pre-1985); vehicles other than cars, especially pickups; and poor driving records. Telephone survey information indicated that nonusers were less likely to have health care coverage, more likely to acknowledge having consumed large amounts of alcohol in the past year, and more likely to have an arrest record. When asked about enforcement of the belt use law, many nonusers said that they would not respond to higher fines but they would respond to driver license points. To change the belt use behavior of this hard-core nonuser population, it well may be necessary as was done in Canada to combine publicity/enforcement campaigns with driver license points as a penalty for nonuse.     

Drink driving and risky behavior among university students in southwestern Nigeria—Implications for policy development

Background: Drink driving contributes significantly to road traffic injuries. Little is known about the relationship between drink driving and other high-risk behaviors in non-Western countries. The study aimed to assess the relationship between drink driving and other risky behaviors including making phone calls, sending text messages, nonuse of protective gear, and driving against traffic.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey of risky behavior among undergraduates was conducted. A stratified random sampling method was used to identify young undergraduates who had driven a motorized vehicle in the past year. The Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) and other tools developed by researchers were used to identify the risky behaviors.

Results: Of 431 respondents, 10.7% had engaged in drink driving in the past 12 months. The most common risky behavior was making phone calls (63.7%), followed by nonuse of helmets (54.7%), driving against traffic (49.2%), nonuse of seat belts (46.8%), and sending text messages (26.1%). Alcohol use was significantly associated with making phone calls (U = 1.148; P < .0001), sending text messages (U = 1.598; P = .021), nonuse of helmets (U = 1.147; P < .0001), driving against traffic (U = 1.234; P < .0001), and nonuse of seat belts (U = 3.233; P = .001). Drink driving was associated with all risky behaviors except nonuse of seat belts (U = 1.842; P = .065).

Conclusion: Alcohol use and drink driving were associated with multiple risky driving behaviors. This provides useful insight for policy development and presents additional challenges for traffic injury prevention.     

Adolescent, and their parents, attitudes towards graduated driver licensing and subsequent risky driving and crashes in young adulthood

Problem

Although Graduated Driver Licensing Systems (GDLS) have helped reduce young driver crash rates, they remain significantly over-represented in crash statistics. To be effective GDLS rely heavily on support for the legislation by those directly involved; parents to enforce the restrictions and adolescents to comply. There is some evidence that practices regarding GDLS restrictions influence adolescent driving outcomes in the early stage of licensure. However there has been no examination undertaken on the influence of parent and adolescent attitudes toward GDLS on adolescents’ driving behavior and crash experiences as they move into their young adult years. The aim of this research was to examine these relationships.

Method

This investigation was based on a longitudinal study of a birth cohort, and uses data collected when the cohort members were aged 15, 18, and 21 years. At age 15 both adolescent and their parent attitudes toward GDLS were measured. At age 18 adolescent GDLS attitudes were measured again. The association between these measures and self-reported risky driving behavior and crash involvement at age 21 were examined.

Results

Negative attitudes toward the learner supervisor restriction for males, and negative attitudes toward a GDLS for females were strongly associated with risky driving and crash involvement as young adults.

Impact on industry

Targeting interventions to improve adolescents and parents understanding of the reasons for graduated licensing and the specific restrictions may improve attitudes and views and thereby contribute to a reduction in risky driving behaviors and crash risk among young adults.     

Effects of in-vehicle monitoring on the driving behavior of teenagers

Objectives

The objective was to determine if teenage driving behavior improves when a monitoring and feedback device is installed in the teen's vehicle.

Methods

Vehicles of 85 teenage drivers were fit with a device that detected all instances of sudden braking/acceleration, speeding, and nonuse of seat belts. Drivers were assigned randomly to one of four research groups, differing in whether or not an alert sounded in the vehicle and whether or not parents were given access to websites containing notification records. Time trends in event rates per mile traveled were compared using Poisson regression.

Results

Seat belt use improved when violations were reported to the parent websites, and improved even more when in-vehicle alerts were activated. Consistent reductions in speeding were achieved only when teenagers received alerts about their speeding behavior, believed their speeding behavior would not be reported to parents if corrected, and when parents were being notified of such behavior by report cards.

Conclusions

Electronic monitoring of teenage drivers can reduce the incidence of risky behavior, especially seat belt nonuse. More complicated behavior is more difficult to change, however.

Impact on Industry

Parent participation is key to successful behavioral modification, but it is yet to be determined how best to encourage such participation.     

“Buckle Up NOW!” An Enforcement Program to Achieve High Belt Use

In the mid-1980s, the first formal seat-belt enforcement program in the United States was conducted in Elmira, NY. Front seat-belt use increased from 49% to 80%, and the Elmira program became a model for other such programs. In the spring of 1999, the New York State Police launched a statewide seat-belt enforcement campaign, and the Elmira program was revived as part of this effort. This 3-week program was coordinated by the Chemung County Sheriff's Office, and carried out in cooperation with local police departments as well as the state police. The earlier Elmira program emphasized the health and safety benefits of seat belts and warning periods prior to tickets being issued. The 1999 program featured a strong no-excuses, no-warning enforcement message, 32 belt-use checkpoints, and publicity about the enforcement through a variety of mechanisms, including feedback signs that informed motorists of current belt use rates. Front seat-belt use increased from 69% to 90%. Public opinion surveys indicated the program was well known to Elmira residents, and had the support of 79% of those polled. The 1999 Elmira program demonstrates that high-intensity enforcement programs can increase seat-belt use to very high levels with strong community support.     

Self-Reported Seat Belt Use in Four Countries: A Telephone Survey

A telephone survey was conducted in four countries in November 1998 to compare drivers in the United States with those in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom regarding their attitudes toward seat belts and belt use laws. More than 90 percent of the 2251 respondents said they thought seat belts are effective, but self-reported belt use was significantly lower in the United States than in the other countries. Respondents in Australia and the United Kingdom had similar views about what they thought were important reasons for using seat belts and had the highest self-reported use. Reasons given for using belts by Canadian and US respondents were quite similar to one another, yet US respondents had significantly lower self-reported use rates, a difference thought to be due to vigorous enforcement of the law in Canada. US drivers were less likely than Australian and UK drivers to say they used belts out of habit, to avoid a ticket, or because it is required by law and more likely to say they used belts for situational reasons. US drivers were least likely to be in favor of belt use laws. Canadian drivers reported the most experience being checked by police for belt use and were most likely to think that nonusers would be caught. US drivers in primary enforcement jurisdictions were more likely than those in secondary jurisdictions to think that drivers not using belts would be caught and more likely to say they always used belts. Results of this survey indicate that seat belt use in the United States could be increased by adoption of primary enforcement laws and highly visible enforcement programs of the type used in Canada, and that seat belt use could be increased in all countries by increasing the penalties for nonuse.     

Longitudinal examination of underage drinking and subsequent drinking and risky driving

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol use, alcohol misuse, and risky driving from adolescence into young adulthood were compared by drinking onset age. METHODS: Surveys were administered in Grades 5/6, 6/7, 7/8, 10, 12, and at approximately age 23. Participants were placed into Drinking Onset groups based on self-reported alcohol use frequency on the adolescent surveys. Driving records were examined in three age periods: under 21, 21-25, and 26+. RESULTS: The earliest drinking initiators reported higher alcohol use and misuse on each survey, and were more likely to have risky driving offenses before age 21 and to have alcohol driving offenses in all three age periods. DISCUSSION: The earliest drinking initiators engaged in risky drinking behavior and risky driving behavior that was consistently higher than those with later drinking initiation, beginning in adolescence and persisting well into young adulthood.     

Factors affecting use and nonuse of child safety car seats in Gorgan,Iran

Objective: Motor vehicle accidents, which are among the main causes of child mortality in Iran and the Middle East, impose staggering costs for the community. Ignoring use of safety devices for children in most motor vehicle crashes will lead to death or serious injury. Because few studies have been performed on effective and predictive factors regarding use of child safety seats, the purpose of this study was to examine the factors affecting the use and nonuse of child safety seats, along with the factors that can facilitate how a child safety seat is used.

Method: This study was conducted in the urban area of Gorgan using a questionnaire. Through random selection, 204 parents with at least one child, aged 8?years or younger, reported their knowledge about the benefits of using a child safety seat.

Results: The results showed that 80% of parents never use a child safety seat, and 13% always use a child safety seat. More than 93% thought that it was necessary to make usage of the child safety seat obligatory. In addition, 80% of parents believed that a child safety seat prevents children from injury in crashes. In addition, 38% of parents were not aware of child safety devices and child safety, less than 20% said that they did not use a child safety seat because their spouse did not support its use, and 28% of them thought that a child safety seat does not affect the safety of the child. In general, 91% of parents reported that if child safety seat use were mandated, the frequency of use would increase. A law on the use of child safety seats is a very important variable in their use, which can enhance the chance of using a child safety seat by 6.5 times.

Conclusion: Special instructions should be developed to create incentive strategies for using a child safety seat. Mandating the use of a child safety seat, equipping cars with a child safety seat, encouraging children to use it, and providing continuous education and training are important factors for increasing the use of child safety seats.     

Belief about seat belt use and seat belt wearing behavior among front and rear seat passengers in the United States

Introduction: Unrestrained drivers and passengers represent almost half of all passenger vehicle occupant deaths in the United States. The current study assessed the relationship between the belief about importance of seat belt use and the behavior of always wearing a seat belt. Method: Data from 2012 ConsumerStyles were analyzed separately for front and rear passenger seating positions. Multivariable regression models were constructed to identify the association between seat belt belief and behavior (i.e., always wears seat belt) among adults. Models controlled for type of state seat belt law (primary, secondary, or none). Results: Seat belt use was higher in front passenger seats (86.1%) than in rear passenger seats (61.6%). Similarly, belief that seat belt use was very important was higher in reference to the front passenger seat (84.2%) versus the rear passenger seat (70.5%). For the front passenger seat, belief was significantly associated with seat belt use in states with both primary enforcement laws (adjPR 1.64) and secondary enforcement laws (adjPR 2.77). For the rear passenger seat, belief was also significantly associated with seat belt use, and two 2-way interactions were observed (belief by sex, belief by region). Conclusions: Despite overall high rates of seat belt use in the United States, certain groups are less likely to buckle up than others. The study findings suggest that efforts to increase seat belt use among high-risk populations, such as those who live in states with secondary or no seat belt laws and those who ride in rear seats (which include people who utilize taxis or ride-hailing vehicles) could benefit from interventions designed to strengthen beliefs related to the benefits of seat belt use. Practical applications: Future research that uses a theoretical framework to better understand the relationship between beliefs and behavior may inform interventions to improve seat belt use.     

Other high-risk factors for young drivers--how graduated licensing does,doesn't,or could address them

PROBLEM: Young drivers, particularly those who are newly licensed, have a very high crash risk. This paper examines the risk factors underlying their high crash rates and assesses the extent to which existing graduated licensing programs address these risks and whether improvements to these programs should be considered. METHOD: Review and synthesis of the literature. RESULTS: The elevated risk among young drivers of being in an injury crash is the result of a number of factors found alone or in combination, such as risky driving, alcohol use, seat belt nonuse, driver distraction, fatigue, and vehicle choice. Nighttime and passenger restrictions, adopted widely in the United States, work by keeping drivers out of hazardous situations rather than by addressing risk factors directly. However, the risk factors remain in play in driving situations not specifically restricted by law. Although other graduated licensing components adopted around the world-more stringent exit tests (i.e., you need to pass a test to move to the next stage), hazard perception tests, and restrictions on speed, vehicle power, and roadway access-make sense based on the identified risk factors, they are not yet supported by research. Should research findings warrant it, consideration should be given to providing guidance to parents about how to keep their beginning drivers safe, including information on vehicle choice. IMPACT ON RESEARCH, PRACTICE, AND POLICY: Researchers should continue to monitor and to evaluate innovative approaches to reduce the crash risk of young drivers. The effectiveness of new approaches should be established before adoption on a wider scale takes place.     

Underutilization of occupant restraint systems in motor vehicle injury crashes: A quantitative analysis from Qatar

Introduction: Restraint systems (seat belts and airbags) are important tools that improve vehicle occupant safety during motor vehicle crashes (MVCs). We aimed to identify the pattern and impact of the utilization of passenger restraint systems on the outcomes of MVC victims in Qatar.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted for all admitted patients who sustained MVC-related injuries between March 2011 and March 2014 inclusive.

Results: Out of 2,730 road traffic injury cases, 1,830 (67%) sustained MVC-related injuries, of whom 88% were young males, 70% were expatriates, and 53% were drivers. The use of seat belts and airbags was documented in 26 and 2.5% of cases, respectively. Unrestrained passengers had greater injury severity scores, longer hospital stays, and higher rates of pneumonia and mortality compared to restrained passengers (P = .001 for all). There were 311 (17%) ejected cases. Seat belt use was significantly lower and the mortality rate was 3-fold higher in the ejected group compared to the nonejected group (P = .001). The overall mortality was 8.3%. On multivariate regression analysis, predictors of not using a seat belt were being a front seat passenger, driver, or Qatari national and young age. Unrestrained males had a 3-fold increase in mortality in comparison to unrestrained females. The risk of severe injury (relative risk [RR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49–2.26, P = .001) and death (RR = 4.13, 95% CI, 2.31–7.38, P = .001) was significantly greater among unrestrained passengers.

Conclusion: The nonuse of seat belts is associated with worse outcomes during MVCs in Qatar. Our study highlights the lower rate of seat belt compliance in young car occupants that results in more severe injuries, longer hospital stays, and higher mortality rates. Therefore, we recommend more effective seat belt awareness and education campaigns, the enforcement of current seat belt laws, their extension to all vehicle occupants, and the adoption of proven interventions that will assure sustained behavioral changes toward improvements in seat belt use in Qatar.     

Self-reported factors that influence rear seat belt use among adults

Introduction: While seat belt use among front seat occupants has significantly increased overtime a substantial usage gap still exists between front and back seat occupants. This study aims to identify factors that predict rear seat belt use among adult back seat passengers. Methods: We examined data from the 2016 Motor Vehicle Occupant Safety Survey, conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, to determine the influence of front seat belt use, support of and belief of rear seat belt use laws, peer perception of seat belt use, nighttime belt use, and demographic factors on self-reported rear seat belt use. Rao-Scott chi-squared tests were used to determine significant associations between self-reported rear belt use and each predictor. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios and determine the influence of significant predictors on rear seat belt use. Sampling weights were applied to produce nationally representative estimates; all statistical significance tests accounted for the complex survey design. Results: Among adults who reported riding in the back seat, 63% reported always using a rear seat belt. Front seat belt use, support and belief of state seat belt laws, nighttime seat belt use, age, and education were significantly associated with rear seat belt use. Multivariate regression results showed that adults who supported rear seat belt laws, reported front seat belt use and believed their state has a rear seat belt law were significantly more likely to report full-time use in the back seat. Conclusions: Seat belt laws and front seat belt use had the strongest association with reporting full-time use in the back seat. Practical Applications: Increasing familiarity with existing laws directed towards rear seat belt use as well as increasing awareness about the benefits of seat belts in all seating positions may help improve rear seat belt use.     

Restraint use in the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Objectives: This study set out to examine seat belt and child restraint use in the Dammam Municipality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, based on the premise that an increase in seat belt use would significantly reduce personal injury in traffic crashes. It was expected that local data would help identify intervention strategies necessary to improve seat belt use in the region.

Methods: The research involved 2 methodologies. First, 1,389 face-to-face interviews were conducted with male and female adults in regional shopping plazas regarding their own and their children's restraint use in their vehicles and reasons for these attitudes and beliefs. Second, 2 on-road observation studies of adult and child restraint use were conducted by trained observers. Occupants of approximately 5,000 passenger vehicles were observed while stopped at representative signalized traffic intersections.

Results: The findings showed front seat belt use rates of between 43 and 47% for drivers and 26 to 30% for front seat passengers; rear seat belt use rates were lower. While there seemed to be some knowledge about the purpose and reasons for restraining both adults and children in suitable restraints, this failed to be confirmed in the on-road observations.

Conclusions: Reasons for these rates and findings are discussed fully, and recommendations for improving seat belt use in the Dammam Municipality are included.     

Passenger use of and attitudes toward rear seat belts

Objectives: This study sought to identify attitudes toward belt use in the rear seat and to gain insight into the experiences of rear-seat passengers. Method: A telephone survey conducted between June and August 2016 targeted adult passengers who had recently ridden in the rear and who did not always wear their seat belt when doing so. Respondents were questioned regarding their reasons for not buckling up and possible conditions under which they would be more likely to buckle up during rear-seat travel. Results: Of 1163 recent rear-seat passengers, 72% reported always using their seat belt in the rear. Full-time belt use was lower among passengers who primarily travel in the rear of hired vehicles compared with personal vehicles. The most common explanation for not buckling up was that the back seat is safer than the front. Four out of five agreed they do not buckle up because of type of trip; two-thirds forget or do not see the need; and two-thirds agreed with reasons related to design, comfort, or usability issues. Nearly 40% agreed that they sometimes do not buckle up in the rear because there is no law requiring it. Conclusion: Many reasons for not using belts in the rear are similar to reasons in the front, such as forgetfulness, inconvenience, or discomfort. One difference is that many rear-seat passengers perceive using the belt is unnecessary because the back seat is safer than the front. More than half of part-time belt users and nonusers reported interventions such as rear seat belt reminders, stronger belt-use laws, and more comfortable belts would make them more likely to use their seat belt in the rear seat. Practical applications: This study identifies barriers to rear seat belt use that point to the need for a multi-faceted approach to increase belt use.     

Individual difference factors in risky driving among older adults

INTRODUCTION: Motor-vehicle crashes kill roughly 4,500 American adults over the age of 75 annually. Among younger adults, one behavioral factor consistently linked to risky driving is personality, but this predictor has been overshadowed by research on cognitive, perceptual, and motor processes among older drivers. METHOD: In this study, a sample of 101 licensed drivers, all age 75 and over, were recruited to complete self-report measures on personality, temperament, and driving history. Participants also completed a virtual environment (VE) course designed to assess risk-taking driving behavior. State records of motor-vehicle crashes were collected. RESULTS: Results suggest both a sensation-seeking personality and an undercontrolled temperament are related to risky driving among older adults. Sensation-seeking was particularly related to history of violations and tickets, while temperamental control was more broadly related to a number of risky driving measures. Methodological and crash prevention issues are discussed.     

Attitudes toward a primary seat belt law among adults in a rural state with a secondary seat belt law

Problem

Enforced primary seatbelt laws can reduce morbidity and mortality associated with motor-vehicle crashes. Constituent support is an important factor associated with legislator voting behavior toward injury prevention laws. Little is known about attitudes toward a primary seat belt law among adults in rural states without a primary seat belt law.

Methods

Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey, a telephone survey of a representative sample of adults in Montana, were used to assess attitudes toward a primary seat belt law.

Results

Sixty-one percent of respondents supported a primary seat belt law. Using multiple logistic regression analyses, women (AOR 1.87; 95% CI 1.49-2.36), persons aged 65 years and older (1.45; 1.06-1.96), American Indians (2.71; 1.55-4.75), those with health insurance (1.51; 1.07-2.14), and those who reported always wearing their seat belt (4.05; 3.14-5.21) were more likely to support a primary seat belt law than respondents without these characteristics.

Conclusions

The majority of adults in a rural state support a primary seat belt law.     

Use of child safety seats and booster seats in the United States: A comparison of parent/caregiver-reported and observed use estimates

Background: Motor-vehicles crashes are a leading cause of death among children. Age- and size-appropriate restraint use can prevent crash injuries and deaths among children. Strategies to increase child restraint use should be informed by reliable estimates of restraint use practices. Objective: Compare parent/caregiver-reported and observed child restraint use estimates from the FallStyles and Estilos surveys with the National Survey of the Use of Booster Seats (NSUBS). Methods: Estimates of child restraint use from two online, cross-sectional surveys—FallStyles, a survey of U.S. adults, and Estilos, a survey of U.S. Hispanic adults—were compared with observed data collected in NSUBS. Parents/caregivers of children aged ≤ 12 years were asked about the child’s restraint use behaviors in FallStyles and Estilos, while restraint use was observed in NSUBS. Age-appropriate restraint use was defined as rear-facing child safety seat (CSS) use for children aged 0–4 years, forward-facing CSS use for children aged 2–7 years, booster seat use for children aged 5–12 years, and seat belt use for children aged 9–12 years. Age-appropriate restraint users are described by demographic characteristics and seat row, with weighted prevalence and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. Results: Overall, child restraint use as reported by parents/caregivers was 90.8% (CI: 87.5–94.1) (FallStyles) and 89.4% (CI: 85.5–93.4) for observed use (NSUBS). Among Hispanic children, reported restraint use was 82.6% (CI: 73.9–91.3) (Estilos) and 84.4% (CI: 79.0–88.6) for observed use (NSUBS, Hispanic children only). For age-appropriate restraint use, estimates ranged from 74.3% (CI: 69.7–79.0) (FallStyles) to 59.7% (CI: 55.0–64.4) (NSUBS), and for Hispanic children, from 71.5% (CI: 62.1–81.0) (Estilos) to 57.2% (CI: 51.2–63.2) (NSUBS, Hispanic children only). Conclusion and Practical Application: Overall estimates of parent/caregiver-reported and observed child restraint use were similar. However, for age-appropriate restraint use, reported use was higher than observed use for most age groups.     

Parental awareness and perception for correct use of child restraint systems and airbags in Brazil

Objective: The objective of this study was to obtain information about the current knowledge and habits of parents who transport children in cars in Brazil.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted using specifically designed self-report questionnaires to parents of children attending a private pediatric office in a town in southwest Brazil. Data were collected regarding children's age, gender, height, and weight and possession of an automobile child restraint system (CRS), its type, frequency and adequacy of use, and reasons for not possessing or not using the devices. Parents were asked whether their cars were equipped with airbags and about the use of the restraints in seats with airbags.

Results: We interviewed parents of 293 children transported in cars who met the criteria for use of a CRS. Children were younger than 1 year in 15.3% of the cases, between 1 and 4 years in 38.6%, and older than 4 in 46.1%. Cars were equipped with CRS in 78.5% of the cases, but in only 58% of the cases was the device proper for child's age and adequately installed in the seat. Among owners of the devices, 84.3% reported that they always used it. Reasons for infrequency were forgetting the device at home or in another car (6.4%), the child disliking the device (3.2%), or the false impression that the child was grown enough not to use it (3.2%)l 87.1% did not justify why they did not always use the CRS. Considering type of CRS, correct installation of the seat, and frequency of use, only 44.4% of children under 1 year, 69.9% of those 1 to 4 years, and 52.6% over age 4 were protected. Only 28.6% of the parents knew that children should never be positioned in a seat with active airbags.

Conclusion: Considering appropriateness for age, correctness of installation (in the back seat in the correct orientation), and frequency of use, only 50.85% (149/293) of the children were reported as always protected with a CRS. Children between 1 and 4 years were more likely to always use a CRS in this Brazilian survey. We were also able to identify an important gap in the knowledge about airbags among parents. Further efforts are needed to correct those distortions.     

Marijuana trajectories and associations with driving risk behaviors in Canadian youth

Objective: Research on risky driving practices involving marijuana use among youth and young adults often relies on cross-sectional data, which fail to account for longitudinal changes in substance use patterns. A better understanding of the longitudinal patterns of marijuana use and its effect on risky driving practices during young adulthood is needed in order to better inform prevention efforts. The current study examined whether different longitudinal patterns of marijuana use across the transition from adolescence to young adulthood are associated with impaired driving risks in young adulthood.

Methods: Data were from the longitudinal Victoria Healthy Youth Survey, which interviewed youth biennially on 6 occasions across 10 years (2003 to 2013).

Results: Youth who reported consistently high levels of marijuana use from adolescence to young adulthood (chronic users) and youth who reported increasing levels of use across this period (increasers) were more likely to engage in risky impaired driving behaviors compared to the other 3 user groups (occasional users, decreasers, and abstainers). Frequency of marijuana use was also predictive of impaired driving risks in young adulthood after controlling for individual characteristics (age, sex, socioeconomic status, age of onset of marijuana use), frequency of other substance use (heavy episodic drinking and illicit drug use), and simultaneous use of marijuana and other substances (alcohol and illicit drugs). By young adulthood, youth who use marijuana more than once a week are more likely to simultaneously use alcohol and engage in heavy episodic drinking. They are also more likely take driving risks.

Conclusions: Harm reduction strategies and legislative approaches targeting impaired driving risks associated with marijuana use should include approaches to target these high-risk groups and to reduce simultaneous use of alcohol.