|
Community
Preventive Services -
Reducing Specific Diseases, Injuries and
Impairments-
Motor
Vehicle Occupant Injury
ACPM
Recommendations:
Strengthening
Motor Vehicle Occupant Protection Laws
The American College
of Preventive Medicine recommends that
all states pass standard (primary)
enforcement MSBUL and that this
legislation be combined with public
education campaigns to increase
compliance. The College supports the
Model Standard Safety Belt Law,
developed by the National Committee on
Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances.
Existing state regulations should be
standardized to eliminate exemptions for
some passengers and vehicles from
compliance. Use of lap-shoulder belts
should be required for both front and
rear seat passengers. Infants and
children should be correctly placed in
restraints appropriate for their age and
size and such restraints should be used
in the back seat of the vehicle, as this
is the safest position. The
incorporation of higher fines, as well
as demerit points, may increase
compliance with these laws. However, in
light of the limits on the effectiveness
of these laws, the College supports
further technological innovations in
automobiles and roads to reduce injuries
from motor vehicles, combined with
continued health promotion campaigns.
See the entire ACPM
recommendation at:
Strengthening
Motor Vehicle Occupant Protection Laws.
Rebecca Ferrini, MD, MPH. University of
California/California State University.
Am J Prev Med. September/October 1997.
Task
Force on Community Preventive Services
Recommendations:
Strategies
for Increasing Use of Child Safety
Seats, Increasing Use of Safety Belts,
and Reducing Alcohol-Impaired Driving
|
Intervention |
Recommendation |
Intervention
Description |
|
Interventions to
increase child safety seat use |
|
Child safety
seat law |
Strongly
recommended |
Requires infants
and young children traveling in
motor vehicles to be restrained in
federally approved child safety
seats appropriate for the child's
age and size. State laws vary
regarding the children to whom the
laws apply (e.g., according to
age, height, weight, seating
position, or a combination of
factors). |
|
Community-wide
information and enforcement
campaigns |
Recommended |
Use media
support and child safety seat
displays in public sites to
promote use.
Use special
enforcement strategies (e.g.,
checkpoints, dedicated law
enforcement officials, or
alternative penalties) to enforce
existing child safety seat laws. |
|
Distribution and
education programs |
Strongly
recommended |
Provide approved
child safety seats to parents
through loans, low-cost rentals,
or giveaways.
Include
educational components of varying
intensity. |
|
Incentive and
education programs |
Recommended |
Provide rewards
to children and parents for
purchasing and correctly using
child safety seats.
Include
educational components of varying
intensity. |
|
Education-only
programs |
Insufficient
Evidence* |
Provide
information and teach skills to
parents, children, or professional
groups regarding the use of child
safety seats. |
|
Interventions to
increase safety belt use |
|
Safety belt law |
Strongly
recommended |
Requires the use
of safety belts by motor-vehicle
occupants not covered by the
state's child safety seat laws.
Existing safety belt laws vary in
their requirements. Most are
age-based and cover occupants
(usually front seat occupants)
aged ³ 16 years. These laws leave
major gaps in coverage for
occupants, primarily those aged
4-16 years.
Specific
requirements (e.g., age, seating
position, fines, exceptions) vary
by state. |
|
Primary
enforcement law |
Strongly
recommended (instead of secondary
law) |
Primary
enforcement law allows a police
officer to stip a vehicle solely
for an observed belt law violation
(without having other reasons for
stopping the vehicle).
Secondary
enforcement law allows a police
officer to issue a belt law
citation only if the vehicle has
been stopped for another
violation. |
|
Enhanced
enforcement |
Strongly
recommended |
Increased,
rather than routine, enforcement
at specific locations and times to
target violations of safety belt
laws.
Media campaigns
that publicize the enforcement
activity are an important
component. |
|
Interventions to
reduce alcohol-impaired driving |
|
0.08% blood
alcohol concentration (BAC) law |
Strongly
recommended |
Lowers the BAC
at which it is ilegal to drive a
motor vehicle from 0.10g/dl to
0.08g/dl (0.08%). |
|
Minimum legal
drinking age. |
Strongly
recommended (i.e., maintaining
MLDA at 21 years) |
Specifies an age
below which the purchase or
consumption of alcoholic beverages
are not permitted. |
|
Lower BAC for
young and inexperienced drivers |
Recommended |
Establishes a
separate, lower illegal BAC
(usually £ 0.02g/dl) for drivers
targeted by the law.
Studies assessed
changes in state laws in the US
and Australia. US laws apply to
all drivers under the MLDA. In
other countries, laws apply to
either newly licensed drivers or
newly licensed drivers under a
specified age. |
|
Sobriety
checkpoints |
Strongly
recommended |
At random breath
testing (RBT) checkpoints, all
drivers stopped are given breath
tests for BAC. Such checkpoints
are not conducted in the US.
At selective
breath testing (SBT) checkpoints,
police must have reason to suspect
the driver has been drinking
before using breath tests.
Media campaigns
that publicize the enforcement
activity are an important
intervention component. |
* A determination that evidence is
insufficient should not be seen as
evidence of ineffectiveness. A
determination of insufficient evidence
assists in identifying a) areas of
uncertainty regarding effectiveness of
an intervention and b) continuing
research needs. In contrast, evidence of
ineffectiveness leads to a
recommendation that the intervention
should not be used.
See a
more detailed review of the
recommendations at The
Community Guide.
See the
summary report from the Task Force on
Community Preventive Services as
published in the CDC's Morbidity
and Mortality Weekly Report.
|
