Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Controlled Clinical Trial
. 2019 Sep 20;9(9):e031839.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031839.

Effect of an educational leaflet on the frequency of seat belt use and the rate of motor vehicle accidents during pregnancy in Japan in 2018: a prospective, non-randomised control trial with a questionnaire survey

Mamoru Morikawa  1 , Takashi Yamada  2 , Hiromasa Kogo  3 , Masaki Sugawara  4 , Akira Nishikawa  5 , Yoshiyuki Fukushi  6 , Emi Kato Hirayama  7 , Shin-Ichi Ishioka  8 , Hidemichi Watari  9
Affiliations
Controlled Clinical Trial

Effect of an educational leaflet on the frequency of seat belt use and the rate of motor vehicle accidents during pregnancy in Japan in 2018: a prospective, non-randomised control trial with a questionnaire survey

Mamoru Morikawa et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether an educational leaflet had any effect on seat belt use, seat preference and motor vehicle accidents rate during pregnancy in Japan.

Design: Prospective, non-randomised control trial with a questionnaire survey.

Setting: Eight obstetric hospitals in Sapporo, Japan.

Participants: 2216 pregnant women, of whom 1105 received the leaflet (intervention group) and 1111 did not (control group).

Interventions: Distribution of an educational leaflet on seat belt use to women in the intervention group.

Primary outcome measures: The effect of an educational leaflet on seat belt use, each pregnant woman's seat preference and the women's rates of motor vehicle accidents rate during their pregnancies. To evaluate the effects, the intervention group's responses to the questionnaires were compared with those of the control group.

Results: The proportion of subjects who always used seat belts during pregnancy was significantly higher in the intervention group (91.3%) than in the control group (86.7%; p=0.0005). Among all subjects, the percentage of women who preferred the driver's seat was lower during pregnancy (27.0%) than before pregnancy (38.7%), and the percentage of women who preferred the rear seat was higher during pregnancy (28.8%) than before pregnancy (21.0%). These two rates did not differ between two groups. Seventy-one women (3.2%) reported experiencing a motor vehicle accident during pregnancy. The motor vehicle accident rate for the intervention group (3.3%) was similar to that for the control group (3.2%).

Conclusions: An educational seat belt leaflet was effective in raising the rate of consistent seat belt use during pregnancy, but it did not decrease the rate of motor vehicle accidents. The wearing of seat belts should be promoted more extensively among pregnant women to decrease rates of pregnancy-related morbidity and mortality from motor vehicle accidents.

Keywords: leaflet; pregnancy; seatbelt; traffic accidents.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of the rates of ‘always seat belt use’ (ASU) and seat position preferred between intervention group and control group. Black bar: intervention group; white bar: control group. (A) Rate of non-ASU before pregnancy but ASU during pregnancy. (B) Rate of ASU before pregnancy but non-ASU during pregnancy. (C) Rate of changing preference for driver’s seat (DS) before pregnancy to non-DS (PS; front or rear passenger’ s seat) during pregnancy. (D) Rate of changing preference for non-DS (PS) before pregnancy to Ds during pregnancy. (E) Rate of changing preference for front seat (FS; DS or front passenger’s seat) before pregnancy to rear seat (RS) during pregnancy. (F) Rate of changing preference for RS before pregnancy to FS during pregnancy.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of the rates of ‘always seat belt use’ (ASU) and seat position preferred between data of 2013 studyand control group in this study (2018). Grey bar: 2013 study; white bar: control group in this study. Headings of A–F. See the figure legends of figure 1.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. El-Kady D, Gilbert WM, Anderson J, et al. . Trauma during pregnancy: an analysis of maternal and fetal outcomes in a large population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;190:1661–8. 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.02.051 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baerga-Varela Y, Zietlow SP, Bannon MP, et al. . Trauma in pregnancy. Mayo Clin Proc 2000;75:1243–8. 10.4065/75.12.1243 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mendez-Figueroa H, Dahlke JD, Vrees RA, et al. . Trauma in pregnancy: an updated systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;209:1–10. 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.01.021 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Murphy NJ, Quinlan JD. Trauma in pregnancy: assessment, management, and prevention. Am Fam Physician 2014;90:717–22. - PubMed
    1. Zangene M, Ebrahimi B, Najafi F. Trauma in pregnancy and its consequences in Kermanshah, Iran from 2007 to 2010. Glob J Health Sci 2014;7:304–9. 10.5539/gjhs.v7n2p304 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources