To what extent has a systems thinking approach been applied to understand motor vehicle crashes involving ambulances? A systematic review of risk factors and characteristics

IF 4.7 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
Christine Mulvihill , Carlyn Muir , Stuart Newstead , Robert Jaske , Paul Salmon
{"title":"To what extent has a systems thinking approach been applied to understand motor vehicle crashes involving ambulances? A systematic review of risk factors and characteristics","authors":"Christine Mulvihill ,&nbsp;Carlyn Muir ,&nbsp;Stuart Newstead ,&nbsp;Robert Jaske ,&nbsp;Paul Salmon","doi":"10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Motor vehicle crashes account for the largest proportion of workplace fatalities among paramedics in developed countries. Systems thinking is one approach that is popular when seeking to understand and manage complex road safety issues; however, it has not been applied to ambulance crashes. A systematic literature review was conducted to examine factors associated with motor vehicle crashes involving ambulances, and the extent to which systems thinking has been applied in this area. Crash factors were categorised using the Accident Mapping technique (AcciMap) (based on six hierarchical levels ranging from government to the road environment) and then synthesised according to whether they were crash/injury crash risk factors or characteristics. Of the 24 included studies, most only reported factors associated with the driver and their immediate environment (n = 23). The most commonly identified factors were intersection location, emergency use of the ambulance (lights and sirens operational) and non-use of restraints (all associated with increased risk of crash or injury crash). Two-thirds of studies were at risk of bias. Given the prominence of lower-level factors associated with road users, vehicles, and the road environment, it is concluded that systems thinking approaches would be beneficial to understand ambulance crashes, particularly for higher level system factors. Further research is recommended to i) examine the potential contribution of factors and their interactions that go beyond the driver and their immediate environment and ii) validate the current findings based on the low number of studies and their lack of methodological rigour in examining driver, vehicle and environmental factors. The development of a crash data collection and reporting system in line with system thinking principles is recommended as a first step to support the identification and systemic analysis of contributory factors across the entire sociotechnical system.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21375,"journal":{"name":"Safety Science","volume":"184 ","pages":"Article 106754"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753524003448","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Motor vehicle crashes account for the largest proportion of workplace fatalities among paramedics in developed countries. Systems thinking is one approach that is popular when seeking to understand and manage complex road safety issues; however, it has not been applied to ambulance crashes. A systematic literature review was conducted to examine factors associated with motor vehicle crashes involving ambulances, and the extent to which systems thinking has been applied in this area. Crash factors were categorised using the Accident Mapping technique (AcciMap) (based on six hierarchical levels ranging from government to the road environment) and then synthesised according to whether they were crash/injury crash risk factors or characteristics. Of the 24 included studies, most only reported factors associated with the driver and their immediate environment (n = 23). The most commonly identified factors were intersection location, emergency use of the ambulance (lights and sirens operational) and non-use of restraints (all associated with increased risk of crash or injury crash). Two-thirds of studies were at risk of bias. Given the prominence of lower-level factors associated with road users, vehicles, and the road environment, it is concluded that systems thinking approaches would be beneficial to understand ambulance crashes, particularly for higher level system factors. Further research is recommended to i) examine the potential contribution of factors and their interactions that go beyond the driver and their immediate environment and ii) validate the current findings based on the low number of studies and their lack of methodological rigour in examining driver, vehicle and environmental factors. The development of a crash data collection and reporting system in line with system thinking principles is recommended as a first step to support the identification and systemic analysis of contributory factors across the entire sociotechnical system.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Safety Science
Safety Science 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
335
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: Safety Science is multidisciplinary. Its contributors and its audience range from social scientists to engineers. The journal covers the physics and engineering of safety; its social, policy and organizational aspects; the assessment, management and communication of risks; the effectiveness of control and management techniques for safety; standardization, legislation, inspection, insurance, costing aspects, human behavior and safety and the like. Papers addressing the interfaces between technology, people and organizations are especially welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信