thèse doctorat de l'université bordeaux 2 - ISPED-Enseignement à ...

SitesOut of 131 crash sites identified in Pakistan, 16 were involved in three or morecrashes. Similarly, out of 474 crash sites identified in Cameroon, 18 were involved in three ormore crashes. We randomly selected 10 high-risk sites. In Pakistan, most high-risk sites werewith straight road profile (87%), whereas this proportion was 20% in Cameroon (Table 1).Road surface conditions were irregular on most high-risk sites in Pakistan (75% vs. 65%) andCameroon (90% vs. 40%) than low-risk sites. Half of high-risk sites in Pakistan (62%) andCameroon (50%) were with flat road profile. A vertical road sign was visible at 38% of highrisksites in Pakistan and at 40% in Cameroon. Fewer high-risk sites were located in built-uparea in Pakistan (31%) than in Cameroon (50%). Similarly, one third of high-risk sites were atintersection in Pakistan (31%) and Cameroon (40%). In Pakistan, 19% of the high-risk siteswere situated at a U-turn and on 13%, maintenance works was ongoing.ParticipantsOut of 100 participants, 44 were interviewed at the AKU. Most participants wereaged between 26-45 years and one fifth had received no education (Table 2). While all driverslived in Karachi, 46 of them had a residence in other regions of Pakistan as well. Seventy fourdrivers reported either not wearing a seat-belt at all or wearing it occasionally, and 92 of themreported using a cell phone while driving. No significant association was found for any of thedriver-related factor or interview location with recent crash history.Hazard perception of high- and low-risk sitesIn twelve site pairs, five from Pakistan and seven from Cameroon, site hazardperception level was significantly higher and reported speeds were significantly lower forhigh-risk than for low-risk sites (Table 3). Correlations of pair-wise reported speeds weremoderate to high (0.51≥ICC≤0.95). The highest negative speed differences (> 25 km/h) wereobserved for pair 4 (toll plaza at high-risk site), 16 (built-up area with markets and traffic athigh-risk site), and 24 (a curve, with rain, oil tanker, and parked vehicle on high-risk site).Most high-risk sites where site hazard perception was not different or lower than low-risksites were straight (N=10) and plain (N=8).Factors associated with hazard perceptionCompared to middle-aged drivers, significantly high hazard perception was reportedby drivers aged 18-25 years and those aged 26-35 years (Table 4). Similarly, compared toheavy trucks, those driving cars or mini-trucks reported significantly lower hazard perception.Vehicle driven remained significantly associated with hazard perception in models 2 and 3.The association of age with hazard perception was not significant in model 3 (P > 0.05).Hazard perception of Cameroonian sites was higher than Pakistani sites. Similarlyhazard perception at sites with irregular surface conditions, at intersections, and with ongoingmaintenance works was significantly higher than those without them. Hazard perception ofsites with straight and flat road profile was significantly lower than those with curve and sloperoad profile. Hazard perception of high-risk sites in built-up areas and having road width≤ 8 m was significantly lower than low-risk sites with same features. Hazard perception ofhigh-risk sites with visible hazard sign or a U-turn was significantly higher than low-risk siteswith same features. Hazard perception of sites videos with maneuvering or oppositely movingvehicles was higher than site videos without them. Hazard perception of site videos withheavy vehicle or motorcycles was significantly lower than site videos without them. Hazard128