Road crash fatality rates in France: a comparison of road user types, taking account of travel practices.

BACKGROUND Travel practices are changing: bicycle and motorized two-wheeler (MTW) use are rising in some of France's large cities. These are cheaper modes of transport and therefore attractive at a time of economic crisis, but they also allow their users to avoid traffic congestion. At the same time, active transport modes such as walking and cycling are encouraged because they are beneficial to health and reduce pollution. It is therefore important to find out more about the road crash risks of the different modes of transport. To do this, we need to take account of the number of individuals who use each, and, even better, their travel levels. METHOD We estimated the exposure-based fatality rates for road traffic crashes in France, on the basis of the ratio between the number of fatalities and exposure to road accident risk. Fatality data were obtained from the French national police database of road traffic casualties in the period 2007-2008. Exposure data was estimated from the latest national household travel survey (ENTD) which was conducted from April 2007 to April 2008. Three quantities of travel were computed for each mode of transport: (1) the number of trips, (2) the distance traveled and (3) the time spent traveling. Annual fatality rates were assessed by road user type, age and sex. RESULTS The overall annual fatality rates were 6.3 per 100 million trips, 5.8 per billion kilometers traveled and 0.20 per million hours spent traveling. The fatality rates differed according to road user type, age and sex. The risk of being killed was 20 to 32 times higher for motorized two-wheeler users than for car occupants. For cyclists, the risk of being killed, both on the basis of time spent traveling and the number of trips was about 1.5 times higher than for car occupants. Risk for pedestrians compared to car occupants was similar according to time spent traveling, lower according to the number of trips and higher according to the distance traveled. People from the 17-20 and 21-29 age groups and those aged 70 and over had the highest rates. Males had higher rates than females, by a factor of between 2 and 3. CONCLUSION When exposure is taken into account, the risks for motorized two-wheeler users are extremely high compared to other types of road user. This disparity can be explained by the combination of speed and a lack of protection (except for helmets). The differential is so great that prevention measures could probably not eliminate it. The question that arises is as follows: with regard to public health, should not the use of MTW, or at least of motorcycles, be deterred? The difference between the fatality risk of cyclists and of car occupants is much smaller (1.5 times higher); besides, there is much room for improvements in cyclist safety, for instance by increasing the use of helmets and conspicuity equipment. Traffic calming could also benefit cyclists, pedestrians and perhaps moped users.

[1]  L. Paulozzi,et al.  United States pedestrian fatality rates by vehicle type , 2005, Injury Prevention.

[2]  Pierre Kopp The unpredicted rise of motorcycles: A cost benefit analysis , 2011 .

[3]  Fan Zhang,et al.  How to make more cycling good for road safety? , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  Sally Cairns,et al.  How exposure information can enhance our understanding of child traffic “death leagues” , 2007, Injury Prevention.

[5]  J. Pucher,et al.  Walking and Cycling for Healthy Cities , 2010 .

[6]  A. Schäfer REGULARITIES IN TRAVEL DEMAND: AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE , 2000 .

[7]  Penny Gordon-Larsen,et al.  Active commuting and cardiovascular disease risk: the CARDIA study. , 2009, Archives of internal medicine.

[8]  I Roberts,et al.  Interventions for increasing pedestrian and cyclist visibility for the prevention of death and injuries. , 2006, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[9]  Max Bushell,et al.  Pedestrian crash trends and potential countermeasures from around the world. , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[10]  Rune Elvik,et al.  The Handbook of Road Safety Measures , 2009 .

[11]  Emmanuelle Amoros,et al.  Under-reporting of road crash casualties in France. , 2006, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[12]  Rune Elvik,et al.  Incomplete Accident Reporting: Meta-Analysis of Studies Made in 13 Countries , 1999 .

[13]  Jean-Baptiste Richard,et al.  Evolution of bicycle helmet use and its determinants in France: 2000-2010. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[14]  Margaret M. Peden,et al.  World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention , 2004 .

[15]  Anne T McCartt,et al.  A review of evidence-based traffic engineering measures designed to reduce pedestrian-motor vehicle crashes. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[16]  Nicholas Bellamy,et al.  A comparison of injuries to moped/scooter and motorcycle riders in Queensland, Australia. , 2013, Injury.

[17]  M. Harris,et al.  The impact of transportation infrastructure on bicycling injuries and crashes: a review of the literature , 2009, Environmental health : a global access science source.

[18]  Manuela Bina,et al.  Risky driving and lifestyles in adolescence. , 2006, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[19]  K. Pérez,et al.  Measures of exposure to road traffic injury risk , 2013, Injury Prevention.

[20]  Mau-Roung Lin,et al.  A review of risk factors and patterns of motorcycle injuries. , 2009, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[21]  Warren A Harrison,et al.  Exposure survey of motorcyclists in New South Wales. , 2005, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[22]  John Pucher,et al.  Making Walking and Cycling Safer: Lessons from Europe , 2000 .

[23]  Ross A Blackman,et al.  Comparison of moped, scooter and motorcycle crash risk and crash severity. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[24]  Pascal Pochet,et al.  Contextual deprivation, daily travel and road traffic injuries among the young in the Rhône Département (France). , 2011, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[25]  Gösta Samuelson,et al.  Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health , 2004 .

[26]  Luc Int Panis,et al.  A prospective cohort study on minor accidents involving commuter cyclists in Belgium. , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[27]  Emmanuelle Amoros,et al.  Injury incidence rates of cyclists compared to pedestrians, car occupants and powered two-wheeler riders, using a medical registry and mobility data, Rhône County, France. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[28]  J. Langley,et al.  Conspicuity and bicycle crashes: preliminary findings of the Taupo Bicycle Study , 2008, Injury Prevention.

[29]  Ralph Buehler,et al.  Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from The Netherlands, Denmark and Germany , 2008 .

[30]  J.-L.M. Martin,et al.  Différences entre les hommes et les femmes face au risque routier , 2004 .

[31]  Rune Elvik,et al.  The non-linearity of risk and the promotion of environmentally sustainable transport. , 2009, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[32]  S. Tin Tin,et al.  Injuries to pedal cyclists on New Zealand roads, 1988-2007 , 2010, BMC public health.

[33]  Ann M Dellinger,et al.  Motor vehicle crash injury rates by mode of travel, United States: using exposure-based methods to quantify differences. , 2007, American journal of epidemiology.

[34]  A. Constant,et al.  Protecting Vulnerable Road Users from Injury , 2010, PLoS medicine.

[35]  L. Dijkstra,et al.  Promoting safe walking and cycling to improve public health: lessons from The Netherlands and Germany. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[36]  Malcolm Wardlaw,et al.  Exposure-Based, ‘Like-for-Like’ Assessment of Road Safety by Travel Mode Using Routine Health Data , 2012, PloS one.

[37]  Rune Elvik,et al.  Elementary Units of Exposure , 2009 .

[38]  D. Thompson,et al.  Walking, cycling, and obesity rates in Europe, North America, and Australia. , 2008, Journal of physical activity & health.