The advocacy for pedestrian safety study: cluster randomised trial evaluating a political advocacy approach to reduce pedestrian injuries in deprived communities.

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas.<h4>Design</h4>Cluster randomised controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ronan A Lyons, Denise Kendrick, Elizabeth M L Towner, Carol Coupland, Mike Hayes, Nicola Christie, Judith Sleney, Sarah Jones, Richard Kimberlee, Sarah E Rodgers, Samantha Turner, Mariana Brussoni, Yana Vinogradova, Tinnu Sarvotham, Steven Macey
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060158&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether advocacy targeted at local politicians leads to action to reduce the risk of pedestrian injury in deprived areas.<h4>Design</h4>Cluster randomised controlled trial.<h4>Setting</h4>239 electoral wards in 57 local authorities in England and Wales.<h4>Participants</h4>617 elected local politicians.<h4>Interventions</h4>Intervention group politicians were provided with tailored information packs, including maps of casualty sites, numbers injured and a synopsis of effective interventions.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>25-30 months post intervention, primary outcomes included: electoral ward level: percentage of road traffic calmed; proportion with new interventions; school level: percentage with 20 mph zones, Safe Routes to School, pedestrian training or road safety education; politician level: percentage lobbying for safety measures. Secondary outcomes included politicians' interest and involvement in injury prevention, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.<h4>Results</h4>PRIMARY OUTCOMES DID NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFER: % difference in traffic calming (0.07, 95%CI: -0.07 to 0.20); proportion of schools with 20 mph zones (RR 1.47, 95%CI: 0.93 to 2.32), Safe Routes to School (RR 1.34, 95%CI: 0.83 to 2.17), pedestrian training (RR 1.23, 95%CI: 0.95 to 1.61) or other safety education (RR 1.16, 95%CI: 0.97 to 1.39). Intervention group politicians reported greater interest in child injury prevention (RR 1.09, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.16), belief in potential to help prevent injuries (RR 1.36, 95%CI 1.16 to 1.61), particularly pedestrian safety (RR 1.55, 95%CI 1.19 to 2.03). 63% of intervention politicians reported supporting new pedestrian safety schemes. The majority found the advocacy information surprising, interesting, effectively presented, and could identify suitable local interventions.<h4>Conclusions</h4>This study demonstrates the feasibility of an innovative approach to translational public health by targeting local politicians in a randomised controlled trial. The intervention package was positively viewed and raised interest but changes in interventions were not statistically significance. Longer term supported advocacy may be needed.<h4>Trial registration</h4>Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN91381117.
ISSN:1932-6203