Evaluating the citywide Edinburgh 20mph speed limit intervention effects on traffic speed and volume: A pre-post observational evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Traffic speed is important to public health as it is a major contributory factor to collision risk and casualty severity. 20mph (32km/h) speed limit interventions are an increasingly common approach to address this transport and health challenge, but a more developed evidence base is needed to understand their effects. This study describes the changes in traffic speed and traffic volume in the City of Edinburgh, pre- and 12 months post-implementation of phased city-wide 20mph speed limits from 2016-2018. METHODS: The City of Edinburgh Council collected speed and volume data across one full week (24 hours a day) pre- and post-20mph speed limits for 66 streets. The pre- and post-speed limit intervention data were compared using measures of central tendency, dispersion, and basic t-tests. The changes were assessed at different aggregations and evaluated for statistical significance (alpha = 0.05). A mixed effects model was used to model speed reduction, in the presence of key variables such as baseline traffic speed and time of day. RESULTS: City-wide, a statistically significant reduction in mean speed of 1.34mph (95% CI 0.95 to 1.72) was observed at 12 months post-implementation, representing a 5.7% reduction. Reductions in speed were observed throughout the day and across the week, and larger reductions in speed were observed on roads with higher initial speeds. Mean 7-day volume of traffic was found to be lower by 86 vehicles (95% CI: -112 to 286) representing a reduction of 2.4% across the city of Edinburgh (p = 0.39) but with the direction of effect uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the city-wide 20mph speed limit intervention was associated with meaningful reductions in traffic speeds but not volume. The reduction observed in road traffic speed may act as a mechanism to lessen the frequency and severity of collisions and casualties, increase road safety, and improve liveability.

Use of natural experimental studies to evaluate 20mph speed limits in two major UK cities.

INTRODUCTION: Reductions in traffic speed can potentially offer multiple health and public health benefits. In 2016, implementation of 20mph (30kph) speed limit interventions began in Edinburgh (city-wide) and Belfast (city centre). The aims of this paper are to describe 1) the broad theoretical approach and design of two natural experimental studies to evaluate the 20mph speed limits in Edinburgh and Belfast and 2) how these studies allowed us to test and explore theoretical mechanisms of 20mph speed limit interventions. METHODS: The evaluation consisted of several work packages, each with different research foci, including the political decision-making processes that led to the schemes, their implementation processes, outcomes (including traffic speed, perceptions of safety, and casualties) and cost effectiveness. We used a combination of routinely and locally collected quantitative data and primary quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: The evaluation identified many contextual factors influencing the likelihood of 20mph speed limits reaching the political agenda. There were substantial differences between the two sites in several aspects related to implementation. Reductions in speed resulted in significant reductions in collisions and casualties, particularly in Edinburgh, which had higher average speed at baseline. The monetary value of collisions and casualties prevented are likely to exceed the costs of the intervention and thus the overall balance of costs and benefits is likely to be favourable. CONCLUSIONS: Innovative study designs, including natural experiments, are important for assessing the impact of 'real world' public health interventions. Using multiple methods, this project enabled a deeper understanding of not only the effects of the intervention but the factors that explain how and why the intervention and the effects did or did not occur. Importantly it has shown that 20mph speed limits can lead to reductions in speed, collisions and casualties, and are therefore an effective public health intervention.

A qualitative exploration of the mechanisms, pathways and public health outcomes of a city centre 20mph speed limit intervention: The case of Belfast, United Kingdom.

Twenty miles per hour (mph) speed limits can impact the health of the public (e.g., road safety, active travel). However, a better understanding of how individuals experience 20mph limits is required, to ensure interventions are cognisant of perceptions and potential un/intended outcomes. Focus groups (n = 9, 60 participants) to explore the Belfast 20mph intervention highlighted divergent perspectives and experiences including: 12 mechanisms (e.g., limited awareness), 15 pathways (e.g., reduced driving speed→improved liveability) and 10 public health outcomes (e.g., increased cyclist safety). Future interventions should consider un/intended outcomes and implement strategies to enhance effectiveness and mitigate harms (e.g., through training, enforcement).

An observational study of spectators' step counts and reasons for attending a professional golf tournament in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Spectators at several hundred golf tournaments on six continents worldwide may gain health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) during their time at the event. This study aims to investigate spectators' reasons for attending and assess spectator physical activity (PA) (measured by step count). METHODS: Spectators at the Paul Lawrie Matchplay event in Scotland (August 2016) were invited to take part in this study. They were asked to complete a brief questionnaire with items to assess (1) demographics, (2) reasons for attendance and (3) baseline PA. In addition, participants were requested to wear a pedometer from time of entry to the venue until exit. RESULTS: A total of 339 spectators were recruited to the study and out of which 329 (97.2%) returned step-count data. Spectators took a mean of 11 589 steps (SD 4531). 'Fresh air' (rated median 9 out of 10) then 'watching star players', 'exercise/physical activity', 'time with friends and family' and 'atmosphere' (all median 8 out of 10) were rated the most important reasons for attending. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to assess spectator physical activity while watching golf (measured by step count). Obtaining exercise/PA is rated as an important reason for attending a tournament by many golf spectators. Spectating at a golf tournament can provide HEPA. 82.9% of spectators achieved the recommended daily step count while spectating. Further research directly assessing whether spectating may constitute a 'teachable moment', for increasing physical activity beyond the tournament itself, is merited.

The impact of mobile phone use on where we look and how we walk when negotiating floor based obstacles.

Pedestrians regularly engage with their mobile phone whilst walking. The current study investigated how mobile phone use affects where people look (visual search behaviour) and how they negotiate a floor based hazard placed along the walking path. Whilst wearing a mobile eye tracker and motion analysis sensors, participants walked up to and negotiated a surface height change whilst writing a text, reading a text, talking on the phone, or without a phone. Differences in gait and visual search behaviour were found when using a mobile phone compared to when not using a phone. Using a phone resulted in looking less frequently and for less time at the surface height change, which led to adaptations in gait by negotiating it in a manner consistent with adopting an increasingly cautious stepping strategy. When using a mobile phone, writing a text whilst walking resulted in the greatest adaptions in gait and visual search behaviour compared to reading a text and talking on a mobile phone. Findings indicate that mobile phone users were able to adapt their visual search behaviour and gait to incorporate mobile phone use in a safe manner when negotiating floor based obstacles.

The effect of trial frames on adaptive gait.

PURPOSE: Research investigating how vision affects adaptive gait typically tests participants whilst wearing their own spectacles or whilst wearing trial case lenses mounted in a trial frame. Trial frames are temporary frames allowing different lenses to be inserted, permitting different visual conditions to be simulated. Trial frames occlude part of the wearer's peripheral visual field. The current study investigated how use of trial frames affects adaptive gait. METHODS: Fifteen participants (age 25 ± 5 years) with normal uncorrected vision negotiated a single floor based obstacle habitually (not wearing a trial frame) or wearing trial frames which occluded part of the lower visual field (half-eye) or circumferential peripheral visual field (full aperture). No lenses were used in the trial frames. Analysis assessed visual field occlusion and the kinematics of obstacle crossing. RESULTS: Visual field was reduced wearing either trial frame. Compared to the habitual condition, participants wearing either type of trial frame lifted their foot significantly higher over the obstacle and increased the time taken to step over the obstacle; a result of uncertainty regarding the precise location (height) of the obstacle due to the occlusion of visual information from the inferior visual field. There were no differences in obstacle crossing between trial frame conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Wearing either full or half eye trial frames can in itself influence adaptive gait. Whilst consideration needs to be given to the visual correction that participants wear during gait research, the method of mounting these lenses also requires consideration.

Visual search strategies of soccer players executing a power vs. placement penalty kick.

INTRODUCTION: When taking a soccer penalty kick, there are two distinct kicking techniques that can be adopted; a 'power' penalty or a 'placement' penalty. The current study investigated how the type of penalty kick being taken affected the kicker's visual search strategy and where the ball hit the goal (end ball location). METHOD: Wearing a portable eye tracker, 12 university footballers executed 2 power and placement penalty kicks, indoors, both with and without the presence of a goalkeeper. Video cameras were used to determine initial ball velocity and end ball location. RESULTS: When taking the power penalty, the football was kicked significantly harder and more centrally in the goal compared to the placement penalty. During the power penalty, players fixated on the football for longer and more often at the goalkeeper (and by implication the middle of the goal), whereas in the placement penalty, fixated longer at the goal, specifically the edges. Findings remained consistent irrespective of goalkeeper presence. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Findings indicate differences in visual search strategy and end ball location as a function of type of penalty kick. When taking the placement penalty, players fixated and kicked the football to the edges of the goal in an attempt to direct the ball to an area that the goalkeeper would have difficulty reaching and saving. Fixating significantly longer on the football when taking the power compared to placement penalty indicates a greater importance of obtaining visual information from the football. This can be attributed to ensuring accurate foot-to-ball contact and subsequent generation of ball velocity. Aligning gaze and kicking the football centrally in the goal when executing the power compared to placement penalty may have been a strategy to reduce the risk of kicking wide of the goal altogether.