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

Figure 15. Literature available for assessing research needs on interurban traffic safety(1995-2009)Original articlesN=1 960Related to highwayN=37Full text retrievedN=32Qualified for reviewN=31Burden CrashRoad CareN=5 * factors Behaviours EvaluationN=18 * N=9 * N=0InterventionsN=6 ** A research may have been counted for one or more categoriesQuality of RTC reportingOut of 18 studies on crash factors and outcome, nine used police-related sources [18, 19, 21,23, 26, 35, 37, 39, 48]. Among them, crash reports were analyzed in only four studies [19, 21,35, 37]. In three studies, data from traffic agencies was used to assess crash factors, includingtwo where detailed reports were available [28, 40, 45]. Four studies used ambulance-relatedcrash reports which included information on injured patients [30-33]. Emergency department(ED) statistics for assessing RTI burden were used in three studies [22, 40, 43]. Only onestudy used multiple crash data sources but did not assess discrepancies between them [40].Quality of documentation was assessed for ED data, only type of data that showed that seatbeltuse was reported in 27.3%, crash factors in 18.8%, alcohol use in 18.2%, and extricationmethods in 3.1% of crash cases (including highways) reporting to ED [43].Crash types were mostly defined using police or traffic agency specific definitions,international definitions such as the Microcomputer Accident Analysis Package or Externalinjury codes were available in only five studies [19, 30-33]. Further, traffic fatality in all crashburden studies was not defined according to the WHO definition requiring RTI patientfollow-up to 30 days. Similarly, in most studies, injury severity was defined as ‘mild’ mostlywhen treated at crash scene and ‘severe’ when requiring a hospital visit or admission [30-33].Only one study defined injuries by using the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) [36].We found four studies related to identification and reporting of high-risk crash sites oninterurban roads in LMICs [22, 28, 35, 39]. A Kenyan study reported that a total of 145 highrisksites with five or more crashes (N=1 261) were identified on rural road networks in oneyear, but no details were given regarding whether they were defined using Global PositioningSystem (GPS) coordinates or other length measures [39]. A Turkish study showed thatinformation on traffic crashes is mostly recorded in textual form and is not geo-referenced,which could pose problems in their identification and improvement afterwards [28]. Theauthors used GPS coordinates of sites and assessed the usability of this system from a LMICpoint of view. Similarly, the Indian study examined the usefulness of GPS coordinates toidentify specific injury events on a highway [22]. Using hospital data and onsite investigation,75