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 5.4 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Safety Science Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106754
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":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","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":"2024/12/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
系统思考方法在多大程度上被应用于理解涉及救护车的机动车辆碰撞?对危险因素和特征的系统回顾
机动车碰撞在发达国家护理人员的工作场所死亡人数中所占比例最大。在寻求理解和管理复杂的道路安全问题时,系统思维是一种流行的方法;然而,它还没有被应用到救护车事故中。我们进行了系统的文献综述,以检查涉及救护车的机动车辆碰撞的相关因素,以及系统思维在这一领域的应用程度。使用事故映射技术(AcciMap)对碰撞因素进行分类(基于从政府到道路环境的六个层次),然后根据它们是否是碰撞/伤害碰撞风险因素或特征进行综合。在纳入的24项研究中,大多数只报告了与驾驶员及其周围环境相关的因素(n = 23)。最常见的因素是十字路口的位置、紧急使用救护车(灯和警报器运行)和不使用约束(所有这些都与撞车或伤害撞车的风险增加有关)。三分之二的研究存在偏倚风险。考虑到与道路使用者、车辆和道路环境相关的较低层次因素的重要性,得出的结论是,系统思维方法将有助于理解救护车碰撞,特别是对于较高层次的系统因素。建议进行进一步的研究:1)检查驾驶员及其直接环境之外的因素及其相互作用的潜在贡献;2)基于较少的研究以及在检查驾驶员、车辆和环境因素方面缺乏严谨的方法,验证当前的研究结果。建议开发符合系统思维原则的事故数据收集和报告系统,作为支持识别和系统分析整个社会技术系统的促成因素的第一步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
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.
期刊最新文献
Electric motorcycle crash severity: a random parameters logit model considering interaction effects and counterfactual policy evaluation Enablers of Quantitative Risk Assessments in Major Hazard Facilities versus those in Fire Safety Engineering Driving safety excellence: A multifaceted analysis of leading indicators across industries Safety, identity, and inequity at the last mile: a qualitative study of app-based bicycle delivery riders in Spain Psychometric validation of the Turkish Short form of the disaster resilience scale for individuals
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1