Skip to content

Road Safety Inquiry

April 2019

Written evidence submitted by Dr Duncan Guest, the Transport Research in Psychology (TRiP) Research group and Nottingham Civic Exchange.

1. Executive Summary

1.1. This submission builds on research developed by Dr Duncan Guest from the Department of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University (NTU) whose research on road safety in mobility scooter users is supported by the Road Safety Trust and forms part of a wider road safety theme of work conducted by the TRiP group at NTU.

1.2. Mobility scooter numbers In the UK have increased from an estimated 90,000 in 2005 to 300,000-350,000 in 2014 with this number estimated to continue increasing at a rate of 5-10% per year.

1.3. The reporting of accidents involving motorised mobility scooters (MMS) is problematic, we do not have a clear and accurate picture of the statistics. However, in 2014 there were 209 reported mobility scooter related collisions within England and Wales, including nine fatal road accidents.

1.4. There is little existing research on improving safety of mobility scooter use, with the small number of studies focusing on vehicle handling. There are serious issues with the design, methodology and analysis of much of this research.

1.5. Various charities, local government, retailers and manufacturers run courses to help improve scooter safety. However, these are not widely available, differ in their scope, and are not evidence based.  There is a need for an evidence base around improving safety for MMS.

1.6. Recently (March 2019) Dr Duncan Guest began the first systematic large scale research exploring what MMS users find hazardous and developing a training tool to help improve MMS safety. This tool, See and Scoot, is an online training tool available free of charge. This is the first evidence based training tool aimed at preparing MMS users to navigate safely various hazardous situations they may face.

1.7. We call for a national framework to bring together charities, local government, manufacturers and retailers across the industry to connect the various strands of road safety activity in relation to MMS, and to use this network to generate and publicise evidence-based interventions and facilitate knowledge exchange.

1.8. The public appear to have quite a negative and uninformed view of MMS and their users. This may negatively impact road safety, because the public are unable to predict what MMS users will do and why. Work is required to explore effective public awareness around this issue to improve road safety (Dr Guest and his colleagues will be exploring public perception and understanding of mobility scooters in the near future).

1.9. Some of the legislation around MMS is not fit for purpose, given the growing number of MMS users and may make MMS use more dangerous (for example, Class Three scooters, which are allowed on roads, are not able to use cycle lanes).

1.10. Within the industry and from the public there is sometimes a call for a test for MMS users. At present there is no evidence base from which to develop a test. A test may also prove a large administrative burden and have negative economic consequences by decreasing the independent living of many scooter users, and thus increasing dependency and reducing ability to work and lead active lives. We recommend that policy focuses on exploring and validating easily accessible training tools such as See and Scoot that could be required to be signposted when retailers sell mobility scooters.

2. About the authors

2.1. Dr Duncan Guest is an Associate Professor of Psychology from the Department of Psychology at Nottingham Trent University. Dr Guest has led a two year funded project by the Road Safety Trust to explore hazard perception in mobility scooter users. His research focuses on cognition, applied aspects of cognition, and cognition in particular sub-populations (e.g., older adults). He undertakes a variety of applied research, and in this instance has forged a broad network across manufacturers, retailers and charities in the independent living sector.

2.2. Nottingham Civic Exchange is Nottingham Trent University’s pioneering civic think tank with a primary focus on issues relating to the city and the region. Nottingham Civic Exchange enables discovery by creating a space where co-produced approaches are developed to tackle entrenched social issues. Nottingham Civic Exchange supports the role of NTU as an anchor institution in the city and the region. Nottingham Trent University holds engagement with communities, public institutions, civic life, business and residents at the core of its mission.

3. Submission – Road Safety

3.1. This submission responds to the categories of question laid out in the terms of reference for the inquiry published in March 2019.

3.2. Mobility Scooters have become one of the most popular methods of assisting mobility and short distance travel due to their easy operation, compact design and because they can be used indoors and outdoors (Ntaki, 2013). In the UK numbers have increased from an estimated 90,000 in 2005 (House of Commons Transport Committee, 2009) to 300,000-350,000 in 2014 (Research Institute for Consumer Affairs, 2014) with this number estimated to increase by 5-10% per year. Not much is known about MMS accidents. However, in 2014 there were 209 reported mobility scooter related collisions within England and Wales, including nine fatal road accidents (Department for Transport, 2015). In a study of 43 MMS users, Hoenig, Pieper, Branch and Cohen (2007) found that 18% of users reported collisions during a three-month period, suggesting the number of minor accidents is quite high. The number of injuries is thought to be underestimated, because of the inconsistent coding of data (Gibson, Ozanne-Smith, Clapperton, Kitching & Cassell, 2011) and it is thought that fewer than half of Britain’s police forces collect data on collisions involving mobility scooters (Department for Transport, 2015). As most MMS users do not have insurance, this also means that claim data cannot be reliably used to establish accident rates. To our knowledge there are no estimates of current numbers of mobility scooter users in the UK beyond the estimate provided by RICS (2014).

3.3. How effective is the Government’s current approach to road safety?

3.4. In terms of MMS, to the best of our knowledge, there is no government approach to road safety for this user group.

3.5. Our research team, headed by Dr Duncan Guest, received a two-year grant from the Road Safety Trust to explore hazard perception in mobility scooter users at road crossings. This grant used questionnaires, face-to-face interviews and collected data on MMS users driving on a set route around Nottingham City Centre (using eye tracking glasses and HD Cameras attached to scooters) to explore what MMS users saw as hazardous. This all led to the creation of See and Scoot; a free online video training tool. See and Scoot identifies the main types of hazards users face and provides some advice on how to handle them. This is the first training of its kind as it is a) evidenced based, b) online and accessible to any user c) has footage shot from the user’s perspective d) uses live footage of real events and is not staged. We are currently in the process of evaluating this training tool in combination with Nottingham City Council Shopmobility. Since launching in March 2019, it has been positively received by manufacturers, retailers, charities and local government. The work has been presented at several academic conferences and industry events. See and Scoot was recently promoted at Europe’s largest independent living sector event – NAIDEX 2019. Dr Guest is also scheduled for an invited talk at the Older Road User conference (Sept 2019) organised by Road Safety GB and the RAC). The work has also drawn significant public interest. In Nov 2017 this work was filmed by the BBC and featured on national BBC news, multiple BBC radio stations and in various online media. Most recently our launch of See & Scoot (March 2019) has been well covered in the industry by THINK magazine, MASIS, Independent Living, Road Safety GB and Stay Safe.

3.6. Importantly, See and Scoot fills a large gap in current work around safety for mobility scooters, which nationally is patchy and uncoordinated. Whilst the legislation around their use is clear, adherence to this is not enforced (Thoreau, 2016) and there is little guidance for scooter users on safe driving. The UK Road Traffic Act (1988) defines MMS as Class Two or Class Three invalid carriages. Both can be used on the pavement (at 4mph) but have differing weight and speed restrictions. Only Class Three MMS are allowed on the road. No driving licence is required to drive an MMS, and anyone is able to purchase an MMS without training.

3.7. In relation to enhancing MMS driving behaviour safety, much of the training available has focused on vehicular control. However, empirical research into these training programs is limited, and there are several methodological issues with the research to date, including small samples and lack of control conditions in training evaluation. Furthermore, research has typically focused on low-level handling skills, specifically training vehicular control (Hall et al., 2005; Nitz, 2008; Jannick, Erren-Woltes, de Kort & van de Kooji, 2008; Walker, Morgan, Morris, DeGroot, Hollingsworth & Gray, 2010; Koontz, Brindle, Kankipati, Feathers & Cooper, 2010; Eck et al., 2012). Equally important, however, is the need to investigate the higher-order cognitive skills, particularly of hazard perception and hazard avoidance.

3.8. Although some safety training for MMS users does exist (Mortenson, Hoag, Higgins, Emery, & Joyce, 2016; Townsend & Watson, 2013), in the UK this is not coordinated at a national level. We have identified a wealth of local manufacturer, charity, local authority or police schemes, online tools, videos and written guidance and advice, however, much of this does not cover all the necessary needs, is limited in its distribution and does not take an evidence-based approach. To our knowledge, there appears to be no formal evaluation of the training interventions that are currently used in the UK, nor is there any research to indicate the beneficial use of these for MMS users. Furthermore, research has shown that whilst training is available, MMS users do not always use this. In a recent survey of 270 MMS users in the UK, we have found that only 38% of respondents had received training (Gous, Guest, Crundall, Mackenzie & Young, 2018). Of these, 41% had received training for their MMS when buying or renting one, with a further 39% reporting only ever being familiarised with MMS controls. Importantly, only 4% of users reported having received outside training or observation of their scooter in a real-world environment. In an international survey of MMS users, only 25% were found to have received training (Mortenson et al., 2016). Others have found that training was received by 59%, and that the same organisation from which the MMS was bought provided the training for 42% of users (Barton et al., 2014).

3.9. Concerns about the lack of training available have also been raised by MMS users, stakeholders and other members of the public. In our recent survey, we found that 91% of MMS users thought more could be done to promote safe use (Gous et al., 2018). Accordingly, it would seem appropriate to implement training interventions more widely so that they are more easily accessible to MMS users, and to conduct and evaluate the impact of these training interventions on driving behaviour safety (Jancey et al., 2013; Runge & Cole, 2002). Our work is currently doing this. An international survey backs up our study. It showed stakeholders were aware that training does not often exist, but strongly believed that its use would improve driving skills and increase confidence (Mortenson et al., 2014). A UK-wide RICA survey of 480 MMS users also identified that there was a lack of training available for MMS users and that familiarisation of MMSs was necessary to ensure safe use (RICA, 2014).

3.10. In this context, our See & Scoot training tool is unique because it is based on two years of research, it prepares users for the potential situations they could find themselves in and it is accessible across the industry, because it is freely available online. Importantly, the footage is also from the user perspective and is live footage, which we believe is more useful for preparing scooter users than staged footage.

3.11. Importantly, our experience of our 2-year project also shows us that public attitude to MMS users is relatively negative. Part of this appears to stem from near accidents with scooter users. However, some of these are caused by a lack of understanding from the public about how scooters operate and the issues that may influence MMS user behaviour or how agile MMS are. There is a need to better understand public perception and to work with the industry to help improve safety through educating both users and non-users.

3.12. Are there any areas where the Government’s current approach to road safety could be improved?

3.13. There is currently no guidance at all for road safety for MMS users. This is a gap that our research team are trying to address. However, there is also a significant gap in knowledge about the built environment and scooter users, with many pedestrian crossings unsuitable for this user group. In general, pedestrian crossings are much better in town and city centres (although many can still be problematic) but outside of these areas crossings are sometimes poor.

3.14. The law is also significantly lagging behind, by referring to MMS as invalid carriages. Only some classes of invalid carriages are allowed to use the road (class 3). However, they are not allowed to use cycle lanes or bus lanes. In some instances, this places a mobility scooter user in the centre of the road rather than at the side of the road, a space that might be safer for them.

3.15. We believe a national, evidence-based framework for developing road safety advice for this user group and exploring the way in which this user group uses and has problems with aspects of road related built environment is required. Our work is leading the way here.

3.16. What interventions would be most effective at reducing the number and severity of road traffic accidents?

3.17. For MMS users, what is required is evidence-based training tools that can be easily accessed by new and existing users and that is supported by government and industry. That is what we have tried to produce but recognise reach into this user group will take time. We call for a strategic framework for promoting safe use of MMS, and this is something we are talking to people in the industry about, in terms of trying to create such a framework.

3.18. Currently, the only research on MMS safety focuses on vehicle handling. Although a pre-requisite of using an MMS, this rarely prepares scooter users for the types of situations/hazards they might face and how best to negotiate these safely. The existing research shows a benefit of vehicle handling training, however this research is limited by significant design and analysis issues. Dr Duncan Guest can provide details of the studies and literature and their limitations.

3.19. In terms of road safety for MMS users, a mandatory test is often mooted as a method of improving safety. At present however, there is no knowledge base to support such a test (what would be in it, how it would be administered, whether it would be effective). Care should be taken in thinking through the economic, social and health impact of such a move. Whilst it may improve safety, it may also stop many disabled people from using an MMS. This could be significantly counterproductive, as use of them is associated with significant benefits in terms of increasing freedom, social engagement, independence and quality of life (Edwards & McCluskey, 2010; Lofqvist, Petterson, Iwarsson, & Brandt, 2012; Ordonez, 2006; Sund, Iwarsson, Anttila & Brandt, 2015; Wressle & Samelsson, 2004 May, Garrett & Ballantyne, 2010. Fomiatti, Moir, Richmond & Millsteed, 2014, Zagol & Krasuski, 2010).

3.20. Given these myriad benefits, introducing some form of test might improve safety but at a net economic cost, due to disabled and mobility impaired users not being able to live independently, and thus relying on carers, either employed or family, who then may not be able to work. In addition, use of an MMS also enable many users to remain in work for longer. In addition, the costs of creating and administering a test would be large. As such we advocate a better framework of research and advocacy around safe use of MMS.

3.21. What evidence is there on the effectiveness of these interventions?

3.22. Only a small number of studies have explored training interventions (see Toosizadeh et al., 2014 for a review). These studies show that training interventions for improving vehicular handling of an MMS are beneficial. However, it is important to note that the available literature is very limited making it difficult for any firm conclusions to be made. Furthermore, the studies noted above have several significant limitations, such as no control group and lack of statistical analysis (Toosizadeh et al., 2014).

3.23. The significant weaknesses in the literature mean that there is no clear evidence base to support a framework of road safety work with this user group. In terms of our work on See & Scoot, we are currently in the process of analysing data from our evaluation of the training. This is in conjunction with Nottingham City Council Shopmobility scheme. We are able to provide indicative results in person.

3.24. How can interventions to reduce the number and severity of road traffic accidents best be implemented?

3.25. As noted above, the issue here relates to the lack of evidence base as well as the economic cost of any significant intervention such as requiring some form of test. What is required is a better industry wide framework for developing evidence based guidance on road safety for this user group, with the result being a co-ordinated attempt to educate this user group around safe scooting. Whilst this may mean a patchwork of independently run courses, we believe a central part of this would be online training that is widely accessible for users, charities, local authorities and manufacturers. This should be around handling and hazard perception. We also believe that once an evidence base is established, a media campaign focusing on improving road safety for this user group would be effective.

4. Recommendations

4.1. Very few MMS users currently receive any meaningful training on MMS use. Our research shows the vast majority of users believe more could be done in terms of providing training. However, the evidence base for improving road safety for MMS users is almost non-existent, with most research focusing on ways to improve vehicle handling and this research having considerable limitations. Investment is required to provide an evidence base as to how best to improve road safety for this user group. We will shortly have evidence on whether our See & Scoot training resource is effective. As a freely available online training tool, this tool offers a cost-effective model to provide training UK wide.

4.2. Whilst schemes to promote safe scooting are run by local authorities, charities, manufacturers and retailers, this is relatively uncoordinated at a national level, with little work establishing the usefulness of these approaches. We advocate the creation of a national framework to which such schemes can be part. This framework would enable the co-ordination of research, publicising of evidence-based interventions and enable cross-fertilised knowledge throughout the industry. It would also be able to determine best practice for MMS scooter training, something which manufacturers in the industry may well support. It could also promote useful cost-free interventions such as See & Scoot.

4.3. Neither MMS users, nor other road users receive guidance about MMS road safety. Part of the issue around road safety and MMS users is other road users not understanding the actions of MMS users, which are influenced by the physical environment, vehicle handling issues, and positional issues (having a reduced line of sight because users are sitting low down). Improving road safety for this user group requires educating both this user group and other road users. A public awareness campaign may help this.

4.4. Some of the legislation around scooter use is antiquated and may need to be revised, for example, rules about MMS not being able to use cycle lanes.

4.5. Dr Duncan Guest is happy to speak to committee members in more depth around his research in the area of MMS and road safety.

Dr Duncan Guest, Associate Professor in Psychology, Nottingham Trent University.
Email: duncan.guest@ntu.ac.uk.

Current research collaborators