Truck drivers’ traffic accidents in the State of São Paulo: prevalence and predictors

Oliveira, Lucio Garcia de; Almeida, Carlos Vinícius Dias de; Barroso, Lucia Pereira; Gouvea, Marcela Julio Cesar; Muñoz, Daniel Romero; Leyton, Vilma

doi:10.1590/1413-812320152112.11182015

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Article • Ciênc. saúde colet. 21 (12) • Dec 2016 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320152112.11182015 copy

Truck drivers’ traffic accidents in the State of São Paulo: prevalence and predictors

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Abstract The mortality rate of traffic accidents (TA) is high in Brazil. Trucks are the second category of motor vehicles most often involved in TA. However, few studies have addressed the issue of TA among these professionals. The study aimed to estimate the prevalence of TA and their predictors in a sample of 684 truck drivers recruited in the state of São Paulo during 2012 and 2013. We requested participants to answer a research instrument on their personal and occupational data and their involvement in TA and traffic violations. A logistic regression model was developed to identify TA predictors. Almost 11% of the respondents suffered at least one TA in that timeframe. We identified the following TA predictors: having few years of experience as professional drivers (OR = 1.86; CI 95% = 1.05-3.38; p = 0.036); receiving some traffic tickets (OR = 1.91; CI 95% = 1.04-3.66; p = 0.043) and working more than 12 hours daily (OR = 1.84; CI 95% = 1.04-3.24; p = 0.034). Given those results, we suggest the development of a joint action among all the involved social stakeholders in order to negotiate truck drivers’ work organization aiming at reducing behaviors that may lead to traffic accidents.

Key words
Traffic accidents; Automobile driving; Motor vehicles; Cross-sectional studies; Epidemiology

Variables		Traffic Accident
		Total		No		Yes		OR	CI95%	p-value
		N	%	N	%	N	%	OR	CI95%	p-value
Age (years)			36.5 ± 7.80		36.7 ± 7.27		34.9 ± 8.31
	≤ 35	260	48.7	226	47.4	34	59.6	1.64	0.91-3.01	0,107
	> 35	274	51.3	251	52.6	23	40.4	1
Schooling (years)			8.6 ± 2.29		8.6 ± 2.29		8.7 ± 2.33
	≤ 9	261	48.8	237	49.6	24	42.1	1		0,286
	>9	274	51.2	241	50.4	33	57.9	1.35	0.78-2.36
Marital Status
	Single	101	18.9	89	18.6	12	21.0	1.16		0,657
	Not single	434	81.1	389	81.4	45	79.0	1	0.59-2.29
Years of professional experience			12.5 ± 8.14		12.6 ± 8.10		11.5 ± 8.52
	≤ 11	283	52.9	246	51.5	37	64.9	1.74		0,055^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
	>11	252	47.1	232	48.5	20	35.1	1	0.98-3.09
Service type
	Hired	327	61.2	287	60.2	40	70.2	1.56		0,143
	Self-employed	207	38.8	190	39.8	17	29.8	1	0.86-2.83
Work shift
	Day	422	78.9	376	78.7	46	80.7	1.13		0,721
	Night and other	113	21.1	102	21.3	11	19.3	1	0.57-2.27
Working day (hours)			12.2 ± 3.90		12.1 ± 3.94		13.0 ± 3.45
	≤ 12	354	66.2	324	67.8	30	52.6	1		0,022^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
	>12	181	33.8	154	32.2	27	47.4	1.89	1.09-3.30
Total		535		478		57

			Traffic Accident
			Total		No		Yes		OR	CI95%	p-value
			N	%	N	%	N	%	OR	CI95%	p-value
Risk behavior in traffic
	Received traffic ticket
		No	213	39.8	198	41.4	15	26.3	1		0.028^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
		Yes	322	60.2	280	58.6	42	73.7	1.98	1.07-3.67
	Drove without seat belt on
		No	207	38.7	186	38.9	21	36.8	1		0.762
		Yes	328	61.3	292	61.1	36	63.2	1.09	0.62-1.92
	Drove above allowed speed limit
		No	252	47.1	223	46.7	29	50.9	1.18	0.68-2.05	0.546
		Yes	283	52.9	255	53.3	28	49.1	1
	Quarreled and bickered in transit
		No	467	87.3	418	87.5	49	86.0	1		0.679
		Yes	68	12.7	60	12.5	8	14.0	1.14	0.52-2.52
	Drunk drove
		No	498	93.1	445	93.1	53	93.0	1		> 0.999
		Yes	37	6.9	33	6.9	4	7.0	1.02	0.35-2.98
	Any traffic violation
		No	59	11.0	59	12.3	0	0.0			0.005^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
		Yes	476	89.0	419	87.7	57	100.0
Drug use and mental health
	Use of alcohol
		No	120	22.4	108	22.6	12	21.0	1		0.792
		Yes	415	77.6	370	77.4	45	79.0	1.09	0.56-2.14
	Use of at least one illicit drug
		No	369	69.0	334	69.9	35	61.4	1		0.191
		Yes	166	31.0	144	30.1	22	38.6	1.46	0.83-2.57
	Stress (LSSI)
		No	468	87.6	422	88.5	46	80.7	1		0.092
		Yes	66	12.4	55	11.5	11	19.3	1.83	0.89-3.75
	With a psychiatric diagnosis (MINI)
		No	494	92.5	444	93.1	50	87.7	1		0.146
		Yes	40	7.5	33	6.9	7	12.3	1.88	0.79-4.47
	Sleep quality (PSQI)
		Fair	231	43.2	208	43.5	23	40.4	1		0.649
		Poor	304	56.8	270	56.5	34	59.6	1.14	0.65-1.99
	Excessive Sleepiness (ESS)
		Non existent	354	66.2	321	67.2	33	57.9	1		0.163
		Moderate/Severe	181	33.8	157	32.8	24	42.1	1.49	0.85-2.60
	Hours of sleep										0.298
		≤ 7	325	60.8	294	61.5	31	54.4	1
		>7	210	39.2	184	38.5	26	45.6	1.34	0.77-2.33
Total			535		478		57

Variables		Before adjustment			After adjustment
Variables		OR	CI 95%	p-value	OR	CI 95%	p-value
Age (years)
	≤ 35	1.64	0.91-3.01	0.107	––	––	––
	> 35	1
Years of professional experience (years)
	≤ 11	1.74	0.98-3.09	0.055	1.86	1.05-3.38	0.036^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
	> 11	1			1
Service type
	Hired	1.56	0.86-2.83	0.143	––	––	––
	Self-employed	1
Working day (hours)
	≤ 12	1		0.022	1		0.034^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
	> 12	1.89	1.09-3.30		1.84	1.04-3.24
Received traffic ticket
	No	1		0.028	1		0.043^* * statistically significant = p<0,05.
	Yes	1.98	1.07-3.67		1.91	1.04-3.66
Use of at least one illicit drug
	No	1		0.191
	Yes	1.46	0.83-2.57		––	––	––
Stress (LSSI)
	No	1		0.092
	Yes	1.53	0.89-2.59		––	––	––
Psychiatric diagnosis (MINI)
	No	1		0.146
	Yes	1.36	0.70-2.65		––	––	––
Excessive Sleepiness (ESS)
	Non existent	1		0.163
	Moderate/Severe	1.49	0.85-2.60		––	––	––
Total					535

ABRASCO - Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva Av. Brasil, 4036 - sala 700 Manguinhos, 21040-361 Rio de Janeiro RJ - Brazil, Tel.: +55 21 3882-9153 / 3882-9151 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: cienciasaudecoletiva@fiocruz.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Collaborations

LG Oliveira, CVD Almeida, LP Barroso, MJC Gouvea, DR Muñoz and V Leyton participated in the project design, analysis and interpretation of data, wording and critical evaluation of the paper, the approval of the final version of this paper and were jointly responsible for all work aspects.