Evidence based practice is a mainstream concept in clinical practice and hence medical education. It is thought to have had had a major impact on healthcare by engendering good practice through sound judgement of scientific evidence and continued professional development amongst its practitioners. This approach is less common outside the mainstream medical community, in areas such as injury prevention. In specifically considering road traffic injury prevention, it is noteworthy that World Health Organisation (WHO) figures suggest that 140,000 people are injured on the worlds roads each day, 3,000 of whom are killed and 15,000 are disabled for life. On the 7th April 2004, the WHO dedicated World Health Day specifically to Road Safety and proposed advocacy by healthcare practitioners as part of the solution to this injury burden. The WHO have provided a definition of advocacy; a combination of individual and social actions designed to gain political commitment, social acceptance and system support for a particular goal or programme. Nevertheless, there has been little study of the effectiveness of health professionals in driving the implementation of measures to reduce death and injury of the roads [4]. In stating a role for public health professionals for advocacy towards reducing injury burden, the strategic imperative requires that policy makers acquire objective evidence of effectiveness, public acceptability and cost effectiveness, and it has been argued that advocacy can narrow the gap between what is known to be effective, acceptable and efficient and what is practiced. National policy for road safety is determined by the Department for Transport, with road safety having a ministerial level appointment. However, in addition to the national effort, local provision is effected by Police Forces and Highways Authorities. Whilst these operate in some respects to national standards (national laws are enforced, legislative requirements to ensure safe and efficient highways are constructed) there is considerable scope for local autonomy and at this level there is considerable scope for local political accountability. It is the group of professionals delivering services at a local level that are considered in this paper, but it is acknowledged that there is no clear divide between national and local. (Author/publisher)
Abstract