| N˚ | Brief description of the intervention implemented | Brief summary of the results obtained |
| 1 | * What: Creation of the Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC) as an institution in charge of road safety * How: Prevention and reduction of MVA risks; education of road users * When: From 1988 | * Significant decrease in the average annual number of MVAs and people injured after an MVA following the creation of the FRSC * Non-significant decrease in the average annual number of post-stroke fatalities after the introduction of the FRSC |
| 2 | * What: Through the creation of a road safety institution: Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC) * How: Implementation of intervention policies to reduce MVAs * When: From 1988 * 34.5% reduction in MVAs | * 67.4% reduction in MVA cases per capita * 71.77% increase serious MVA not fatal MVA * 14.55% reduction in fatal MVA cases per capita * 26.54% reduction in severe MVA cases * 63.45% reduction in severe MVA cases per capita |
| 3 | * What: Enforcement of helmet law * How: Mandatory helmet use by motorcyclists * When: From 1 June 1976 in Anambra State | * Non-significant increase in the proportion of motorcyclists who died as a result of an MVA after the intervention, * but high proportion (over 90%) of subjects wearing helmets |
| 4 | * What: Implementation of national road traffic regulations with seatbelt use as the main feature * When: Effective implementation from 2005 | * Non-significant reduction in accident cases. * Increase in the number of injuries, fatalities, total number of victims, and death index |
| 5 | * What: Fuel saving measures * How: Speed restrictions * When: November 1973 | * Significant decrease in the incidence and severity of head injuries |
| 6 | * What: Implementation of the law on maximum speed limits on roads * How and when: Speed limits reduced from 120 km/h to 80 km/h for rural traffic and from 60 km/h to 50 km/h for urban traffic in November 1973, then limit for urban traffic increased from 50 to 60 km/h in January 1974 | * Significant decrease of the total number of patients admitted for head injuries after MVA * Decrease in total number of deaths and total length of stay in hospital for patients admitted for head injuries after MVA |
| 7 | * What: Adoption of a law to reinforce road safety and tackle alcohol consumption * How and When: October 2008: Adoption of a 30% tax on alcoholic products and use of the funds collected to tackle alcohol abuse November 2010: Increase of the tax on alcoholic products to 40% April 2009: Enforcement of ROAD SAFETY regulations with sanctions and fines for several traffic offences, including driving without a licence, speeding, driving under the influence of alcohol and disobeying road signs | * Significant decrease in the overall MVA rate in June 2009 and June 2010 * Significant decrease in the rate of fatal MVAs and the rate of fatal single-vehicle night-time MVAs in early 2010 |
| 8 | * What: Ban on “commercial” motorcyclists in the state capital * When: From July 2009 | * “Significant” decrease in reported MVAs after the intervention * Decrease in MVAs resulting from motorbike crashes * Decrease in serious injuries and fatalities after intervention |
| 9 | * What: Banning motorbikes as a mode of public transport * When: From 2010 and effective application 1 year later | * Significant decrease in the frequency of head injuries, open femur fractures, closed tibia fractures, and penetrating abdominal injuries, but a significant increase in spinal fractures * Significant decrease in the hospital prevalence of MVA * Significant decrease in the severity of head injuries (Revised trauma score) |
| 10 | * What: assessment of the impact of helmet legislation in improving helmet use in Kenya * How: 16 rounds of helmet observations among motorcycle drivers and passengers at six randomly selected locations and eight rounds of KAP surveys administered to motorcyclists were conducted in Thika and Naivasha. Analysis of trauma registry data in four public hospitals in Kenya (Thika Level 5 Hospital, Naivasha District Hospital, Kenyatta National Hospital, and Machakos Level 5 Hospital) between January 2014 and February 2015 * When: between August 2010 and December 2014 | * Minor improvements in Naivasha and no effect in Thika have been observed in helmet use among motorcycle drivers and passengers after the passage of a traffic amendment bill. * KAP survey showed that respondents recognized the life-saving effect of wearing a helmet, but many did not always wear a helmet * Analysis of trauma registry data showed that helmet wearing was associated with a significant reduction in head injuries among motorcyclists (adjusted odds ratio: 0.472, 95% CI: 0.327 - 0.684) |
| 11 | * What: Evaluate the impact of ASE on speeding patterns (and crash rates) on the R61 and adjacent road segments in South Africa and compare the results with control routes. * How: Time differentiation and spatial differentiation analysis at various distances from the enforcement route and control routes Behaveioural changes analysis Crash outcomes (fatalities, serious and minor injuries) analysis by comparing two years of pre- and post-installation effects of the ASE system. * When: June 2009 to June 2011 before enforcement, and December 2011 to December 2013 during enforcement | * Reduction in mean speed on the enforcement route and adjacent control route for passenger vehicles after the introduction of ASE * Little influence of ASE on improving speed compliance for minibus taxis * Reduction of fatalities (79.5%), serious injuries (58.5%) and minor injuries (50%) * Reduction of passenger vehicle crash rates on the enforcement route and its immediate vicinity * Lack of understanding of how the system operates by minibus taxis driver
|
| 12 | * What: Computerised traffic sign knowledge enhancement programme * How: The programme provides 41 questions (5 levels of advancement) with 4 answer options (in English). One can only continue if the correct option is chosen. Students acquire knowledge by working through the programme themselves (autodidactic) | * Significant change in learners’ knowledge of road signs after the intervention * Variable effect depending on the category of road signs |
| 13 | * What: Rescue techniques, basic evacuation procedures and specific first aid skills * How: Didactic lectures, practical demonstrations and skill-building exercises | * No significant increase in first aid knowledge score over the 3 periods in the intervention group * Significant increase in first aid competence score over the 3 periods in the intervention group * 75% of drivers in the intervention group who witnessed an MVA used their acquired skills |
| 14 | * What: Basic rescue and evacuation techniques, fracture/haemorrhage management, general first aid knowledge, securing the scene of an MVA, victim assessment, rapid victim assessment, important information to obtain from the victim * How: Didactic lectures, practical demonstrations and skill-building exercises, formation of groups of 10 - 20 drivers to facilitate participation and skill acquisition, use of the “Basic Trauma Life Support (BTLS) manual” for 2 days | * Significant improvement in first aid knowledge and skill score over the 3 periods in the intervention group * Significantly higher post-intervention first aid knowledge and skill score in the intervention group |
| 15 | * What: Communication on road safety practices (explanation of the association between road behaviours and the occurrence of MVAs) * How: Lecture and interactive sessions (Q & A, local language) | * Increased proportion of drivers reporting resting after hours of driving (significant), observing speed limits (significant) and having a valid driver’s licence (non-significant) in the intervention group * Decrease in the proportion of drivers reporting fatigue (significant), substance use (non-significant), and carrying more than one person (non-significant) in the intervention group * Non-significant decrease in the prevalence of MVAs in the intervention group |
| 16 | * What: Teaching of traffic signs * How: Lecture, interactive sessions, visual aids on the identification of traffic signs and the importance of obeying them | * Significant increase in the proportion of drivers with a good traffic sign knowledge score in the intervention group * Significant increase in the proportion of drivers reporting compliance with traffic signs in the intervention group |
| 17 | * What: Health and safety education on the following topics: the burden of MVAs and the need to prevent/control them, the importance of vision tests and driving tests as prerequisites for obtaining a driver’s licence, road signs and maximum speed limits * How: 4 one-hour sessions over 2 months using pictures, posters, road signs and speed limits, leaflets | * Significant increase in the proportion of drivers with correct knowledge of driving licence requirements, adequate knowledge of road signs and adequate knowledge of maximum speed limits in the intervention group * Decrease in the proportion of drivers reporting compliance with speed limits in the intervention group |
| 18 | * What: Raising awareness among minibus passengers * How: Placing stickers in front of the passenger seats of minibuses used for long-distance public transport, with messages encouraging passengers to react if drivers do not respect the rules of the road and even to report them if they do not listen to the advice. This is accompanied by a lottery to reward drivers who do not remove the stickers | * Decrease in the number of incidents leading to insurance claims |
| 19 | * What: Raising awareness among minibus passengers * How: Setting up several experimental groups with specific messages for each group with or without lottery, pictures or other additional text | * Reduction in claims ranging from one quarter to one third * 140 fewer MVAs per year than expected and 55 lives saved * Cost-effectiveness of the intervention between $13 and $60 per DALY and between $10 and $45 per DALY for the most “impactful” stickers * Average maximum speeds and average speeds 1 - 2 km/h lower in the intervention vehicles * Messages promoting collective action are particularly effective, and evocative images are an important motivator. * No effect of the radio campaign was found |
| 20 | * What: Uber * Where and when: Johannesburg/Gauteng Province from 11 September 2013, Cape Town/Western Cape from 11/10/2013 and Durban/KwaZulu-Natal from 12/02/2014 | * Number of weekly MVA deaths in a province with Uber were lower after the introduction of Uber than in comparison provinces without Uber * Absolute effects were very small (<2 deaths per year), could be due to seasonal variation |
| 21 | * What: Free distribution of reflective vests + brief road safety education * How: Distribution + communication about the beneficial effects of visibility measures (wearing reflective jackets, using daytime running lights and wearing white helmets) on reducing the risk of MVAs; places where this equipment could be purchased | * Significant increase in the use of reflective jackets among motorbike taxi drivers * No significant difference in use of white helmet and daytime running lights among motorbike taxi drivers |
| 22 | * What: Ban on mobile phone use while driving, driving without seatbelts and not using motorbike helmets; introduction of stiffer penalties including suspension of a driving licence for speeding, driving under the influence and dangerous loads from September 2007 * How: regular random roadside checks for helmet/seatbelt use and phone use while driving; however, no radar or breathalyser to check for speeding and drink driving | * Significant reduction in the number of non-injury MVAs and fatalities (per 10,000 vehicles) by 19% and 12.4% respectively in the first year of implementation of the intervention * Non-significant reduction in injuries (per 10,000 vehicles) in the first year of implementation of the intervention |
| 23 | * What: Reduce MVAs caused by speeding, increase passenger safety, increase driver responsibility and accountability, eliminate illegal drivers, facilitate vehicle identification and limit their exploitation for other purposes, etc. * How: Installation of seatbelts and speed governors (80 km/h), indication of route details, painted yellow stripes for easy identification, security control of drivers (compulsory wearing of badges, uniforms while on duty), permanent employment of drivers, compulsory renewal of drivers’ competence tests every 2 years, posting of each driver’s photo, enforcement measures and the provision of hotlines for the public to report offenders to the police | * No significant change in levels of injury severity (including deaths) or patient length of stay before and after |
| 24 | * What: Advocacy for strengthening road safety legislation among the participants How: Multi-country study including Kenya In Kenya: Increased penalties for driving under the influence of alcohol, up to and including licence suspension in 2012, law for mandatory use of certified helmets and reflective clothing and carrying of a maximum of one passenger in 2013, increased penalties for speeding in 2013 | * In total, 109,000 lives saved including 1637 in Brazil, 61,622 in China, 3318 in Kenya, 3221 in Mexico, 1061 lives in Turkey and 38,645 in Vietnam * In total, 109,000 lives were saved, 84% due to alcohol laws, 13% due to increased protection for motorcyclists, 2% due to increased fines and penalty points, and 1% due to seatbelt interventions |
| 25 | * What: Education, provision of motorbike taxi equipment * How: Multi-stage road safety training, two helmets (for driver and passenger) and vehicle maintenance, provision of hairnets to encourage helmet use by passengers | * Helmet use (reported or directly observed) significantly higher among SafeBoda drivers than among regular drivers * Self-reported prevalence of protective behaviours (possession of a driver’s licence, reflective jacket, not using a phone while driving, not driving in the wrong direction, not carrying more than one passenger) significantly higher among SafeBoda drivers * Observed prevalence of risky behavior (phone use while driving, carrying more than one passenger) higher among SafeBoda drivers, but not significant * Based on roadside observation, SafeBoda drivers were significantly less likely to carry more than one passenger * Prevalence of MVAs significantly lower among SafeBoda drivers |
| 26 | * What: Slow down traffic, separate children (pedestrians) from vehicles + road safety education * How: Identification of public primary schools with high incidence of MVAs + infrastructure improvements (speed bumps, bollards, pavements, signage, new school gates) + traffic safety education (how to cross, how to be seen, choosing the best place to cross, how to walk alone on the road, choosing the best place to play, characteristics of MVAs) | * Significant decrease in prevalence of MVAs occurring on the way to school in the intervention group * Non-significant decrease in the frequency of pedestrian vs. motorbike collisions (most frequent type of collision) in the intervention group * Significant decrease in the frequency of pedestrian vs. private car collisions in the intervention group * Significant decrease in the frequency of minor injuries in the intervention group * Significant decrease in the frequency of MVAs occurring in the morning in the intervention group (however, no reduction in certain types of accidents, such as those involving motorcycles and pedestrians, or in injuries such as fractures) |
| 27 | * What: Contribution to making school trips in minibuses safer for children through interventions among = drivers and on the vehicle * How: Among the drivers (driver training for safer driving, eye tests) and on the vehicle (vehicle inspections and upgrades, implementation of a telematics tracking system) | * Overall, intervention group drivers recorded less speeding, hard braking (on bends) and hard acceleration than control group drivers * Intervention group drivers drove more at night than control group drivers * Significant difference in the speed on the approach to a bend * No reduction in hard braking |
| 28 | * What: Reduce speeding and excessive transit volumes on roads not designed for this purpose * How: Introduction of area-wide speed bumps to prevent traffic migration to other side roads, tarring of roads and construction of pavements + speed restrictions, road signs, road safety education in the primary school curriculum, employment of “lollipop men” in some schools to assist at pedestrian crossing points * When: Introduction of intervention from 2001 | * Decrease in the number of collisions between pedestrians and motor vehicles (total, fatal, serious, slight, no injury) in both areas * Decrease in the number of collisions between motor vehicles in one of the two zones, but an increase was recorded in the second zone |
| 29 | * What: Make it easier for children/pupils to cross the road * How: Construction of a pedestrian overpass on a two-lane expressway near a military primary school + education on its use (on good pedestrian manners according to Schifferes) | * Increase in the number of pupils using the overpass after road safety education |