Post-trip safety interventions: State-of-the-art, challenges, and practical implications.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, risky driving behaviour is a major contributor to road crashes and as a result, wide array of tools have been developed in order to record and improve driving behaviour. Within that group of tools, interventions have been indicated to significantly enhance driving behaviour and road safety. This study critically reviews monitoring technologies that provide post-trip interventions, such as retrospective visual feedback, gamification, rewards or penalties, in order to inform an appropriate driver mentoring strategy delivered after each trip. METHOD: The work presented here is part of the European Commission H2020 i-DREAMS project. The reviewed platform characteristics were obtained through commercially available solutions as well as a comprehensive literature search in popular scientific databases, such as Scopus and Google Scholar. Focus was given on state-of-the-art-technologies for post-trip interventions utilized in four different transport modes (i.e. car, truck, bus and rail) associated with risk prevention and mitigation. RESULTS: The synthesized results revealed that smartphone applications and web-based platforms are the most accepted, frequently and easiest to use tools in cars, buses and trucks across all papers considered, while limited evidence of post-trip interventions in -rail was found. The majority of smartphone applications detected mobile phone use and harsh events and provided individual performance scores, while in-vehicle systems provided delayed visual reports through a web-based platform. CONCLUSIONS: Gamification and appropriate rewards appeared to be effective solutions, as it was found that they keep drivers motivated in improving their driving skills, but it was clear that these cannot be performed in isolation and a combination with other strategies (i.e. driver coaching and support) might be beneficial. Nevertheless, as there is no holistic and cross-modal post-trip intervention solution developed in real-world environments, challenges associated with post-trip feedback provision and suggestions on practical implementation are also provided.

Bus driver fatigue: A qualitative study of drivers in London.

The research represents one of the first major qualitative studies to subjectively investigate fatigue amongst city bus drivers. Funded by TfL (grant no. 94050), the study considers the perspectives of both the bus drivers themselves and their managers. It explores opinion specifically in relation to how fatigue influences or is influenced by bus driving, and how this is managed. Data was collected from focus groups with bus drivers (n = 65 drivers) and one-to-one interviews with bus driver managers (n = 11). Fatigue was seen to be a problem, with all drivers having experienced for themselves the feeling of sleepiness whilst driving the bus, or knowing about it in others. The managers agreed that fatigue amongst drivers is evident, seeing it particularly as a contributor to serious incidents. Fatigue and sleepiness are not discussed between drivers as a general rule and they do not feel comfortable reporting instances of fatigue for fear of being disciplined. Managers would encourage drivers to report these issues and therefore hoped to create a more open culture. Factors identified as contributors to fatigue included: working overtime, having insufficient sleep, spending time with family, other non-work commitments, shift schedules, and work pressure.

A qualitative study exploring how city bus drivers manage sleepiness and fatigue.

Sleepiness is an important consideration for workplace safety, especially in relation to shift work. There is limited understanding of how practical applications of countermeasures are used to manage sleepiness in a professional setting. One under-researched group is city bus drivers. This qualitative study investigated the use of individual sleepiness countermeasures within a sample of city bus drivers. Nine semi-structured focus groups were convened to explore the broader experience and management of sleepiness (n = 62, largest proportion aged 45-54 y, mean bus driving experience 13.3 y). The conversations of the focus groups were audio-recorded (total: 682 min) and transcribed anonymously verbatim. Discussions specifically relating to personal countermeasure use were isolated from the original transcripts, creating nine new transcripts for a targeted analysis on the topic of individual countermeasure use. Thematic analysis identified two main themes: (1) strategies used to counteract sleepiness and (2) barriers to individual countermeasure use, each with several subthemes. A variety of countermeasures were used, including strategies with limited potential for counteracting sleepiness, such as opening a window, drinking water, talking, stretching, and consuming forms of sugar. Workplace restrictions, such as access to facilities, limitations of food/drink consumption, and tight schedules, were the strongest influences on countermeasure choice. It is important that bus drivers have access to, and are aware of the effectiveness of, countermeasures to manage sleepiness during shift work. It is vital that the actions of drivers and shift workers are better understood in the planning of organizational countermeasures.