Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 88, Issue 1, pp 62–66 | Cite as

Evaluation of a Four-year Bicycle Helmet Promotion Campaign in Quebec Aimed at Children Ages 8 to 12: Impact on Attitudes, Norms and Behaviours

  • Céline Farley
  • Joanne Otis
  • Marie Benoît
Article
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluated a four-year bicycle helmet promotion campaign.

Methods: Children’s attitudes, social norms, intentions to wear a bicycle helmet as well as helmet ownership were measured. Evaluation was based on a pre-experimental static group comparison design repeated at two (1991) and four years (1993) after implantation, with a non-randomized control group. 3,424 students completed a self-administered questionnaire (experimental: 2,097, control: 1,327).

Results: The program had a significant impact on helmet ownership (1989: 4%; 1991: 26%; 1993: 56%). The program was the principal predictor of high intention to use a bicycle helmet. Time was the principal predictor of ownership with exposure to the program being the next predictor.

Conclusion: This study showed that time is an important factor in bicycle helmet acquisition, and that a long-term community-based program can accelerate the process of adopting this behaviour.

Résumé

Objectif: L’objectif poursuivi par cette étude est d’évaluer un programme de promotion du casque de vélo d’une durée de quatre ans.

Méthodes: Les enquêtes visaient à mesurer les changements dans les attitudes des enfants à l’égard du casque, les normes sociales perçues qui y sont associées, leur intention de le porter ainsi que les changements dans la possession du casque. L’évaluation reposait sur un devis de type pré-expérimental “static-group comparison” répété dans le temps soit deux ans (1991) et quatre ans (1993) après l’implantation avec groupe témoin non aléatoire. 3 424 étudiants ont complété un questionnaire auto-administré (expérimental 2 097, témoin: 1 327).

Résultats: Le programme a été efficace pour accroître le taux de possession du casque de vélo (1989: 4 %, 1991: 26 %, 1993: 56 %). Le programme a été le principal pré-dicteur de l’intention forte d’utiliser un casque de vélo. Le temps a été le principal prédicteur de la possession d’un casque, suivi de l’exposition au programme.

Conclusion: Selon cette étude, le temps est une variable importante dans l’acquisition d’un casque de vélo et les programmes communautaires à long terme accélèrent le processus d’adoption de ce comportement.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Weiss BD. Childhood bicycle injuries: What can we do? Am J Dis Child 1987;77:135–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fife D, David J, Tate L, et al. Fatal injuries to bicyclists: The experience of Dade County, Florida. J Trauma 1983;23:745–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kraus JF, Fife D, Conroy C. Incidence, severity, and outcomes of brain injuries involving bicycles. Am J Public Health 1987;77:76–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gallagher S, Finison K, Guyer B, Goodenough S. The incidence of injuries among 87,000 Massachusetts children and adolescents: Results of the 1980–1981 statewide childhood injury prevention program surveillance system. Am J Public Health 1984;74:340–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choinière R, Robkaille Y, Dorval D, Sauvageau Y. Profil des traumatismes au Québec: disparités régionales et tendances de la mortalité (1976 à 1990) et des hospitalisations (1981 à 1991). Québec: Direction générale de la santé publique, Ministère de la Santé et des services sociaux, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown B, Farley C. The pertinence of promoting the use of bicycle helmets for 8 to 12 year old children. Chron Dis Can 1989;10:92–96.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thompson SR, Rivara FP, Thompson DS. A case-control study of the effectiveness of bicycle safety helmets. N Engl J Med 1989;320:1361–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorsch MM, Woodward AJ, Somers RL. Do bicycle safety helmets reduce severity of head injury in real crashes? Accident Analysis Prev 1987;19:183–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith P. Increasing bicycle helmet use in Michigan: A school-based intervention pilot program. Michigan bicycle helmet advisory committee, Michigan, U.S.A.: Center for Health Promotion, Michigan Department of Public Health, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bergman A, Rivara FP, Richard DD, Rogers LW. The Seattle children’s bicycle helmet campaign. Am J Dis Child 1990;144:727–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bell R, Drakenberg V. Promoting helmet use in the schools: The Swedish experience. Presented at the Child Accident Prevention Conference, September 21–22, 1989, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wood T, Milne P. Head injuries to pedal cyclists and the promotion of helmet use in Victoria, Australia. Accident Analysis Prev 1988;20:177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morris BA, Trimble NE. Promotion of bicycle helmet use among schoolchildren: A randomized clinical trial. Can J Public Health 1991;82:92–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Griffiths L, Venebles H. Bicycle Safety Campaign, Community Traffic Safety Campaign. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 1988.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Parkin P, Spence L, Hu X, et al. Evaluation of promotional strategy to increase bicycle helmet use by children. Pediatrics 1993;91:772–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    DiGuiseppi CG, Rivara FP, Koepsell TD, Polissar L. Bicycle helmet use by children. Evaluation of a community-wide helmet campaign. JAMA 1989;262:2256–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schneider M, Ituarte P, Stokols D. Evaluation of a community bicycle helmet promoting campaign: What works and why. Am J Health Promotion 1993;7:281–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cushman R, Dow J, MacMillan N, Waclawick H. Helmet promotion in the emergency room following a bicycle injury: A randomized trial. Pediatrics 1991;88:43–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cushman R, James W, Waclawick H. Physicians promoting bicycle helmets for children: A randomized trial. Am J Public Health 1991;81:1044–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Côté TR, Sacks JJ, Lambert-Huber DA, et al. Bicycle helmet use among Maryland children: Effect of legislation and education. Pediatrics 1992;89:1216–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Danneberg AL, Gielen AC, Beilenson PL, et al. Bicycle helmet laws and educational campaigns: An evaluation of strategies to increase children’s helmet use. Am J Public Health 1993;83:667–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heiman L. Bicycle helmet usage surveys of primary and secondary school children, adults, commuter and recreational cyclists, 1983–1987. Victoria, Australia: Road Traffic Authority, 1987 Report 0-7306-0255-9.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stevenson T, Lennie J. Empowering school students in developing strategies to increase bicycle helmet wearing. Health Ed Res 1992;7:555–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Otis J, Lesage D, Godin G, et al. Predicting and reinforcing children’s intentions to wear protective helmets while bicycling. Public Health Rep 1989;107:283–89.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Green LW, Kreuter M. Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Environmental Approach. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co., 1991.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd edition. New York, NY: Free Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Farley C, Quesnel G. Evaluation et résultats de quatre années de promotion «Mon “vélo-casque” c’est sauté!». Direction de la santé publique de la Régie régionale de la santé et des services sociaux de la Montérégie, 1994.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Campbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1966;12.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Levy PS, Lemeshow S. Sampling for Health Professionals. Belmont, CA: Lifetime Learning Publication, 1980.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Benoît M. Développement d’instruments de mesure pour évaluer le programme de promotion du casque pour cycliste de la Montérégie, Montréal: Université de Montréal, 1991, thèse de maîtrise.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cameron MH, Heiman L, Neiger D. Evaluation of the bicycle helmet wearing law in Victoria during 1st–12 months. Manash, Australia: Manash University Accident Research Centre, 1992.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Farley C, Haddad S, Brown B. The effects of a 4-year program promoting bicycle helmet use among children in Québec. Am J Public Health 1996;86(1):46–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Céline Farley
    • 1
  • Joanne Otis
    • 2
  • Marie Benoît
    • 3
  1. 1.Régie régionale de la santé et des services sociaux de la MontérégieSaint-HubertCanada
  2. 2.Université du Québec à MontréalMontréalCanada
  3. 3.Collège Haute-YamaskaGranbyCanada

Personalised recommendations