Factors associated with civilian drivers involved in crashes with emergency vehicles

• Published in: Accident analysis and prevention 2013-06, Vol.55, p.116-123
• Main Authors: Drucker, Christopher, Gerberich, Susan G., Manser, Michael P., Alexander, Bruce H., Church, Timothy R., Ryan, Andrew D., Becic, Ensar
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Accidents, Traffic - statistics & numerical data; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Ambulances - statistics & numerical data; Automobile Driving - statistics & numerical data; Biological and medical sciences; Civilian driver; Darkness; Emergency vehicle; Environment; Female; Humans; Lighting - statistics & numerical data; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Miscellaneous; Motor vehicle crash; Prevention and actions; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Risk Factors; United States; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0001-4575; 1879-2057
• DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.035

► We examined fatal and nonfatal crashes involving civilian and emergency vehicles. ► Civilian drivers may have difficulties in visually detecting emergency vehicles. ► Identify factors related to civilian drivers’ failure to notice emergency vehicles. Motor vehicle crashes involving civilian and emergency vehicles (EVs) have been a known problem that contributes to fatal and nonfatal injuries; however, characteristics associated with civilian drivers have not been examined adequately. This study used data from The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the National Automotive Sampling System General Estimates System to identify driver, roadway, environmental, and crash factors, and consequences for civilian drivers involved in fatal and nonfatal crashes with in-use and in-transport EVs. In general, drivers involved in emergency–civilian crashes (ECCs) were more often driving: straight through intersections (vs. same direction) of four-points or more (vs. not at intersection); where traffic signals were present (vs. no traffic control device); and at night (vs. midday). For nonfatal ECCs, drivers were more often driving: distracted (vs. not distracted); with vision obstructed by external objects (vs. no obstruction); on dark but lighted roads (vs. daylight); and in opposite directions (vs. same directions) of the EVs. Consequences included increased risk of injury (vs. no injury) and receiving traffic violations (vs. no violation). Fatal ECCs were associated with driving on urban roads (vs. rural), although these types of crashes were less likely to occur on dark roads (vs. daylight). The findings of this study suggest drivers may have difficulties in visually detecting EVs in different environments.