Applying the health action process approach to bicycle helmet use and evaluating a social marketing campaign.

BACKGROUND: Bicycle injuries are of concern in Canada. Since helmet use was mandated in 1996 in the province of British Columbia, Canada, use has increased and head injuries have decreased. Despite the law, many cyclists do not wear a helmet. Health action process approach (HAPA) model explains intention and behaviour with self-efficacy, risk perception, outcome expectancies and planning constructs. The present study examines the impact of a social marketing campaign on HAPA constructs in the context of bicycle helmet use. METHOD: A questionnaire was administered to identify factors determining helmet use. Intention to obey the law, and perceived risk of being caught if not obeying the law were included as additional constructs. Path analysis was used to extract the strongest influences on intention and behaviour. The social marketing campaign was evaluated through t-test comparisons after propensity score matching and generalised linear modelling (GLM) were applied to adjust for the same covariates. RESULTS: 400 cyclists aged 25-54 years completed the questionnaire. Self-efficacy and Intention were most predictive of intention to wear a helmet, which, moderated by planning, strongly predicted behaviour. Perceived risk and outcome expectancies had no significant impact on intention. GLM showed that exposure to the campaign was significantly associated with higher values in self-efficacy, intention and bicycle helmet use. CONCLUSION: Self-efficacy and planning are important points of action for promoting helmet use. Social marketing campaigns that remind people of appropriate preventive action have an impact on behaviour.

Youth injury prevention in Canada: use of the Delphi method to develop recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The Health Behaviour in School-aged Children Survey is one of very few cross-national health surveys that includes information on injury occurrence and prevention within adolescent populations. A collaboration to develop a Canadian youth injury report using these data resulted in, Injury among Young Canadians: A national study of contextual determinants. The objective of this study was to develop specific evidence-based, policy-oriented recommendations arising from the national report, using a modified-Delphi process with a panel of expert stakeholders. METHOD: Eight injury prevention experts and a 3-person youth advisory team associated with a Canadian injury prevention organization (Parachute Canada) reviewed, edited and commented on report recommendations through a three-stage iterative modified-Delphi process. RESULTS: From an initial list of 27 draft recommendations, the modified-Delphi process resulted in a final list of 19 specific recommendations, worded to resonate with the group(s) responsible to lead or take the recommended action. Two recommendations were rated as "extremely important" or "very important" by 100 % of the expert panel, two were deleted, a further two recommendations were deleted but the content included as text in the report, and four were merged with other existing recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The modified-Delphi process was an appropriate method to achieve agreement on 19 specific evidence-based, policy-oriented recommendations to complement the national youth injury report. In providing their input, it is noted that the injury stakeholders each acted as individual experts, unattached to any organizational position or policy. These recommendations will require multidisciplinary collaborations in order to support the proposed policy development, additional research, programming and clear decision-making for youth injury prevention.

An evaluation of evidence-based paediatric injury prevention policies across Canada.

BACKGROUND: Policies to reduce injury among Canadians can be controversial and there is variability in the enactment of injury prevention laws across the country. In general, laws are most effective when they are based on good research evidence, supported by widespread public awareness and education, and maintained by consistent enforcement strategies. The purpose of this study was to document and compare key informants' perceptions of the quality, awareness, and enforcement of three evidence-based paediatric injury prevention policies (bicycle helmet legislation, child booster seat legislation, graduated driver licensing) among Canadian provinces and territories. METHODS: We identified best practices related to each policy, then developed an online survey to ascertain the extent to which each jurisdiction's policy aligned with best practices, whether experts believed that the public was aware of the policy and whether it was enforced. The survey was distributed using a snowball sampling strategy to key informants across Canada. RESULTS: Thirty-eight key informants responded to the bicycle helmet survey, with 73 and 35 key informants for the booster seat and graduated driver licensing surveys, respectively. Respondent's perceptions of the policies varied substantially. Key informants indicated that residents are not always aware of legislation, and legislation is not consistently enforced. These results suggest that child health policy is not always guided by evidence. CONCLUSIONS: There was variation between evidence and the policies related to paediatric injury prevention among Canadian provinces and territories. Experts generally rate their policies more highly when they align with evidence and best practice. There is room for improvement and harmonization of injury prevention policies.

Developing injury indicators for Canadian children and youth: a modified-Delphi approach.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a set of national injury indicators for Canadian children and youth which will eventually be used to reflect and monitor identified prevention priorities. METHODS: The Canadian Injury Indicators Development Team brought together injury researchers, policy makers, and practitioners to develop injury indicators in the following areas: overall health services implications; motor vehicle occupant; sports, recreation, and leisure; violence; and trauma care, quality, and outcomes. A modified-Delphi process was used to establish a set of indicators that met evidence-based criteria, were useful, and that would prompt action. Each indicator was rated by 132 respondent injury experts and stakeholders on its usefulness and ability to prompt action to reduce injury among Canadian children and youth. RESULTS: From an initial list of 51 indicators, a refined set of 34 indicators was established. Indicators were grouped into three categories related to: policies; risk and protective factors; and outcomes. Indicators related to motor vehicle injury were rated as most useful and most able to prompt action. Injury mortality rate and injury hospitalisation rate were also rated highly for both usefulness and ability to prompt action. Policy, violence, sport and recreation, and trauma indicators were all rated higher for usefulness, but somewhat lower for ability to prompt action. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that a broad-based modified-Delphi process is an important first step in developing useful and relevant indicators for injury prevention activity focused on Canadian children and youth.