Smartphone addiction has become a crucial social issue. Past studies have indicated that phone use such as talking or texting while walking constitutes a dual task that may cause pedestrians inattentional blindness and impair their awareness of surroundings. This study investigated the influence of various smartphone tasks (calling, music listening, texting, playing games, and web surfing) on the smartphone overuse and inattentional blindness of pedestrians in Taipei, Taiwan. Pedestrian smartphone overuse was observed and recorded via WiFi cameras to determine whether pedestrians were using their smartphones when crossing a street with a signal. After crossing the street, pedestrians were interviewed to obtain additional information regarding demographics, smartphone tasks, data plan, and screen size. Pedestrians were classified into the case (distracted) and control (undistracted) groups. By determining whether pedestrians saw something unusual—a clown walking the opposite direction—and heard the national anthem played by the clown, inattentional blindness and deafness were examined. Pedestrians’ situational awareness was assessed by ascertaining whether they remembered how many seconds remained before the crossing signal upon arriving at the curb. In total, 2556 pedestrians crossed the street and underwent the interview. Smartphone overuse and inattentional deafness were the commonest among music listeners. Playing Pokémon Go gaming was the task most associated with inattentional blindness. Logistic regression models revealed that contributing factors to smartphone overuse and inattentional blindness were a large smartphone screen (≥5 in), unlimited mobile Internet data, and being a student. The interactions of gaming with being a student and with unlimited data were significantly associated with smartphone overuse, inattentional blindness and deafness, and situational awareness. Listening to music was the smartphone task most associated with pedestrian smartphone overuse and inattentional deafness. Pokémon Go was the most associated task with inattentional blindness and reduced situational awareness.

Background: Motorcycle full-coverage helmet use may reduce fatalities and head injuries. Methods: This retrospective cohort study extracted injury data from eight level-I trauma centres in Taiwan and performed a questionnaire survey to investigate injuries sustained by motorcyclists for the period between January 2015 and June 2017. Results: As many as 725 patients participated in the questionnaire survey and reported their helmet types or phone use during crashes. The results of multivariate logistic models demonstrated that nonstandard helmet (half or open-face helmet) use was associated with an increased risk of head injuries and more severe injuries (injury severity score ≥ 8). Drunk riding and phone use appeared to be two important risk factors for head injuries and increased injury severity. Anaemia was also found to be a determinant of head injuries.” Conclusions: Compared to full-coverage helmets, nonstandard provide less protection against head injuries and increased injury severity among motorcyclists.

Bicyclists and motorcyclists contribute substantially to the morbidity and mortality rates of road crash casualties. The objective of the study was to investigate the crash characteristics of bicyclist and motorcyclist casualties presented to hospitals in Taiwan resulting from crashes. By using linked data from The National Traffic Crash Dataset and the National Health Insurance Database between 2003 and 2012, logistic regression models were used to examine the determinants of hospitalisation among motorcyclist and bicyclist casualties. The examined variables include demographic characteristics, road and weather conditions, and vehicle characteristics. A total of 1,998,606 two-wheelers were enrolled in the study, of whom 216,600 were hospitalised: 203,623 were motorcyclists and 12,964 were bicyclists. Bicyclists were more likely to be hospitalised than motorcyclists were (14.0% vs. 10.7%). The pooled logistic regression model shows that bicyclists had higher odds of hospitalisation than motorcyclists (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.11, 95% confident interval [CI] = 1.08–1.14). In the motorcyclist and bicyclist models, helmet non-use appears to be a determinant of hospitalisation for motorcyclists (AOR = 1.14, CI = 1.12–1.16), although insignificant for cyclists (AOR = 1.03, CI = 0.94–1.12). Other important determinants of hospitalisation for motorcyclists and cyclists include female riders, elderly riders, rural roadways, unlicensed riding (for motorcyclists only), curved roadways, defective roadways, alcohol consumption (only for motorcyclists), and single-vehicle crashes (for motorcyclists only). The result that bicyclists had an increased probability of being hospitalised than motorcyclists is particularly noteworthy, because there have recently been much more users of bikesharing systems in metropolitan cities where cycle helmets are not provided. We further found that helmet non-use was also a risk factor for motorcyclists, but insignificant for cyclists, possibly due to lower helmet utilization rates among bicyclists. Our findings regarding the increased hospitalisation percentage emphasize the importance of helmet use.

Background: Most studies have focused on injuries sustained by intoxicated drivers themselves, but few have examined the effect of drunk driving on injury outcomes among VRUs (vulnerable road users) in developing countries. This study aims to evaluate the effect of drunk driving on fatal injuries among VRUs (pedestrians, cyclists, or motorcyclists). Methods: The data were extracted from the National Taiwan Traffic Crash Dataset from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2019. Crashes involving one motorized vehicle and one VRU were considered. This study examines the effect of drunk driving by estimating multivariate logistic regression models of fatal injuries among VRUs after controlling for other variables. Results: Among 1,416,168 casualties, the fatality rate of VRUs involved in drunk driving was higher than that of general road users (2.1% vs. 0.6%). Drunk driving was a significant risk factor for fatal injuries among VRUs. Other risk factors for fatal injuries among VRUs included VRU age ≥ 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 5.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.53–6.07), a nighttime accident (AOR: 4.52, 95% CI: 4.22–4.84), and being hit by a heavy-duty vehicle (AOR: 2.83, 95% CI: 2.26–3.55). Subgroup analyses revealed a linear relationship between driver blood alcohol concentration (BAC) and the risk of fatal injury among motorcyclists. Motorcyclists exhibited the highest fatality rate when they had a BAC ≤ 0.03% (AOR: 3.54, 95% CI: 3.08–4.08). Conclusion: Drunk driving was associated with a higher risk of fatality for all VRUs. The risk of fatal injury among motorcyclists was linearly related to the BAC of the drunk drivers. Injuries were more severe for intoxicated motorcyclists, even those with BAC ≤ 0.03%, which is within the legal limit.