How to Strengthen Non-Motorised Mobility of Elderly People? An Evidence-based Manual for the Set-up of Fall Prevention Programmes in Communities

In the course of life, mobility behaviour and needs change and have to be adapted. With growing age, muscle mass reduces continuously. If this natural degradation process is not countered, the risk of falls and getting injured increases. Once a person has experienced a fall, the fear of falling again is likely to evolve. As a consequence, physical activity is associated with feelings of insecurity and is therefore avoided (post-fallsyndrome). Within the age group 55 years and older, almost a quarter of occurring falls in Austria happen in traffic (KFV, 2016). Thus, motivity and health are key prerequisites for a safe, independent and injury-free mobility. In order to tackle this topic, the Austrian Road Safety Board (KFV) developed the project “Pimp your Skills”1 (Eichhorn et al., 2016), which focused on strengthening non-motorised mobility of elderly people and, particularly, on fall prevention. As a result, a manual on setting up an effective fall prevention programme for adults is now available.

State of the art on measuring driver state and technology-based risk prevention and mitigation Findings from the i-DREAMS project

Advanced vehicle automation and the incorporation of more digital technologies in the task of driving, bring about new challenges in terms of the operator/vehicle/environment framework, where human factors play a crucial role. This paper attempts to consolidate the state-of-the-art in driver state measuring, as well as the corresponding technologies for risk assessment and mitigation, as part of the i-DREAMS project. Initially, the critical indicators for driver profiling with regards to safety risk are identified and the most prominent task complexity indicators are established. This is followed by linking the aforementioned indicators with efficient technologies for real-time measuring and risk assessment and finally a brief overview of interventions modules is outlined in order to prevent and mitigate collision risk. The results of this review will provide an overall multimodal set of factors and technologies for driver monitoring and risk mitigation, essential for road safety researchers and practitioners worldwide<br

A systematic cost-benefit analysis of 29 road safety measures

Economic evaluations of road safety measures are only rarely published in the scholarly literature. We collected and (re-)analyzed evidence in order to conduct cost-benefit analyses (CBAs) for 29 road safety measures. The information on crash costs was based on data from a survey in European countries. We applied a systematic procedure including corrections for inflation and Purchasing Power Parity in order to express all the monetary information in the same units (EUR, 2015). Cost-benefit analyses were done for measures with favorable estimated effects on road safety and for which relevant information on costs could be found. Results were assessed in terms of benefit-to-cost ratios and net present value. In order to account for some uncertainties, we carried out sensitivity analyses based on varying assumptions for costs of measures and measure effectiveness. Moreover we defined some combinations used as best case and worst case scenarios. In the best estimate scenario, 25 measures turn out to be cost-effective. 4 measures (road lighting, automatic barriers installation, area wide traffic calming and mandatory eyesight tests) are not cost-effective according to this scenario. In total, 14 measures remain cost-effective throughout all scenarios, whereas 10 other measures switch from cost-effective in the best case scenario to not cost-effective in the worst case scenario. For three measures insufficient information is available to calculate all scenarios. Two measures (automatic barriers installation and area wide traffic calming) even in the best case do not become cost-effective. Inherent uncertainties tend to be present in the underlying data on costs of measures, effects and target groups. Results of CBAs are not necessarily generally valid or directly transferable to other settings.acceptedVersio

Which factors influence non-motorized mobility and mode choice? A practical application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour.

Motivity and health are key prerequisites for safe, independent and injury-free mobility and, subsequently, basic conditions for well-being and social participation in advanced years. To address the importance of active mobility with increasing age, the project “Pimp your Skills”, funded by the Austrian Road Safety Fund, was carried out (Eichhorn et al., 2016). The project aimed at identifying factors relating to mobility behaviour as well as the underlying motives behind such behaviour by means of a population survey. The theory of planned behaviour was used to explain non-motorised mobility behaviour for the target group, namely the current elderly (65+ years of age) as well as the future elderly (50+ years of age). The determining factors for walking and cycling were examined, and regression analyses carried out. The results show that meaningful relationships between behavioural beliefs, perceived skills, habits and subjective norms could be established for cycling and walking behaviour

Comparison and analysis of user and stakeholder needs across different countries

The current deliverable aims at presenting the results of the analysis of stakeholder needs, in order to have support for selecting the most relevant use cases. For the identification of user requirements of all stakeholders relevant to school transportation different methods were used: - Focus groups with representatives of one user or stakeholder group - Workshops with different stakeholders - 2 questionnaire surveys (Questionaire A: Road Experts, Questionaire B: children, parents and bus drivers) Problems and needs in the following areas were subject of discussions, interviews and questionnaires: - Behaviour of road users counteracting with school buses - Behaviour of pupils on the school bus and while entering and exiting the same - Design of bus stops - Protection of pupils on the school bus - Condition of school buses - Education of school bus drivers - Education of pupils concerning school transportation - Information flow - Route to/from school - Special needs of children with disabilities Results show that the organisation of school transport varies between countries and even within a country. Stakeholders underline the importance of consistent regulations and clear responsibilities as a basis for a safe way to school by bus

A systematic cost-benefit analysis of 29 road safety measures

Economic evaluations of road safety measures are only rarely published in the scholarly literature. We collected and (re-)analyzed evidence in order to conduct cost-benefit analyses (CBAs) for 29 road safety measures. The information on crash costs was based on data from a survey in European countries. We applied a systematic procedure including corrections for inflation and Purchasing Power Parity in order to express all the monetary information in the same units (EUR, 2015). Cost-benefit analyses were done for measures with favorable estimated effects on road safety and for which relevant information on costs could be found. Results were assessed in terms of benefit-to-cost ratios and net present value. In order to account for some uncertainties, we carried out sensitivity analyses based on varying assumptions for costs of measures and measure effectiveness. Moreover we defined some combinations used as best case and worst case scenarios. In the best estimate scenario, 25 measures turn out to be cost-effective. 4 measures (road lighting, automatic barriers installation, area wide traffic calming and mandatory eyesight tests) are not cost-effective according to this scenario. In total, 14 measures remain cost-effective throughout all scenarios, whereas 10 other measures switch from cost-effective in the best case scenario to not cost-effective in the worst case scenario. For three measures insufficient information is available to calculate all scenarios. Two measures (automatic barriers installation and area wide traffic calming) even in the best case do not become cost-effective. Inherent uncertainties tend to be present in the underlying data on costs of measures, effects and target groups. Results of CBAs are not necessarily generally valid or directly transferable to other settings.status: publishe

The European Road Safety Decision Support System on Risks and Measures

The European Road Safety Decision Support System (roadsafety-dss.eu) is an innovative system providing the available evidence on a broad range of road risks and possible countermeasures. This paper describes the scientific basis of the DSS. The structure underlying the DSS consists of (1) a taxonomy identifying risk factors and measures and linking them to each other, (2) a repository of studies, and (3) synopses summarizing the effects estimated in the literature for each risk factor and measure, and (4) an economic efficiency evaluation instrument (E3-calculator). The DSS is implemented in a modern web-based tool with a highly ergonomic interface, allowing users to get a quick overview or go deeper into the results of single studies according to their own needs

D2.1 State of the art on monitoring driver state and task demand

The work presented in this deliverable addresses the monitoring of the task demand and complexity based on contextual factors of the driver environment and the monitoring of the driver (car, truck, bus and train) in real-time; both with the aim of eventually determining whether an individual operates within or without a safe zone. In recent years, considerable research has been conducted in relation to these topics and the development of associated technologies is progressing fast – especially in view of the autonomous driving boom – which has resulted in an enormous variety of approaches, data collection methods, monitoring and warning equipment etc. This variety and ever-changing technology maturity, however, also reflects the circumstance that there is not a standard approach but quite the contrary, a multitude of tools, measurement methods, indicators, algorithms etc. with specific advantages and drawbacks, delivering their full potential in specific contexts. Therefore, capturing the state of the art of monitoring techniques and subsequently assessing the applicability for i-DREAMS’ endeavour is indispensable.</div

Identification and Safety Effects of Road User Related Measures, SAfetyCube Deliverable 4.2

Safety CaUsation, Benefits and Efficiency (SafetyCube) is a European Commission supported Horizon 2020 project with the objective of developing an innovative road safety Decision Support System (DSS). The DSS will enable policy-makers and stakeholders to select and implement the most appropriate strategies, measures, and cost-effective approaches to reduce casualties of all road user types and all severities. This document is the second deliverable (4.2) of work package 4, which is dedicated to identifying and assessing road safety measures related to road users in terms of their effectiveness. The focus of deliverable 4.2 is on the identification and assessment of countermeasures and describes the corresponding operational procedure and outcomes. Measures which intend to increase road safety of all kind of road user groups have been considered. The following steps have been carried out: " Identification of human related road safety measures- creation of a taxonomy " Consultation of relevant stakeholders and outcomes of previous related projects for identification of most important human related measures " Systematic literature search and selection of relevant studies on identified key measures " Coding of evaluation studies " Analysis of key measures on basis of coded studies " Synopses of key measures. The core output of this task are synopses on road safety measures, which will also be available through the DSS. Within the synopses, each countermeasure (or group of measures) was analysed systematically on basis of scientific studies and is further assigned to one of four levels of effectiveness (marked with a colour code). Essential information of around 240 included studies was coded and will also be available in the database of the DSS. Furthermore, the synopses contain theoretical background on the measures and are prepared in different sections with different levels of detail for an academic as well as a non-academic audience. These sections can be read independently. It is important to note that quantifying the relationship between road user related countermeasures and road safety is a difficult task. Corresponding evaluation studies are not always assessing the impact of a countermeasure on the accident occurrence or severity but rather on alternative factors which, however, are proven or considered as relevant for road safety. The descriptive and qualitative context provided in the measures synopses is therefore important to be considered. The analysed countermeasures were assessed as 'Green' (effective), 'Light green' (probably effective), 'Grey' (unclear results) or 'Red' (ineffective or counterproductive)