The impact of a crash prevention program in a large law enforcement agency

Background Motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) remain a leading cause of death for US law enforcement officers. One large agency implemented a crash prevention program with standard operating policy changes, increased training, and a marketing campaign. This was a scientific evaluation of that crash preven...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:American journal of industrial medicine 2019-10, Vol.62 (10), p.847-858
Main Authors: Tiesman, Hope M., Gwilliam, Melody, Rojek, Jeff, Hendricks, Scott, Montgomery, Brian, Alpert, Geoff
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
ARIMA
Autoregressive models
Crashes
Enforcement
evaluation
Injury prevention
Law enforcement
motor vehicle crash
Motor vehicles
Police
Prevention
Prevention programs
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) remain a leading cause of death for US law enforcement officers. One large agency implemented a crash prevention program with standard operating policy changes, increased training, and a marketing campaign. This was a scientific evaluation of that crash prevention program. Methods MVC and motor vehicle injury (MVI) data for law enforcement officers were compared using an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model. Two law enforcement agencies who had not implemented a crash prevention program were controls. Results After program implementation, overall, MVC rates significantly decreased 14% from 2.2 MVCs per 100 000 miles driven to 1.9 (P = .008). MVC rates did not decrease in the control agencies. Overall, MVI rates significantly decreased 31% from 3.4 per 100 officers to 2.1 (P = .0002). MVC rates did not decrease in the control agencies. MVC rates for patrol officers significantly decreased 21% from 3.1 per 100 000 miles to 2.4. MVI rates for patrol officers significantly decreased 48% from 3.2 per 100 officers to 1.6 (P 
ISSN:0271-3586
1097-0274
DOI:10.1002/ajim.23032