Driving and safety in KFL&A

Driver seat belt use

In 2013 and 2014 in KFL&A, 87.8% (84.6, 90.3) of residents 16 and over have driven a motor vehicle in the past year.  All figures that present data on drivers are answered only by those who have driven a motor vehicle in the past year.

Figure 1. Residents that always wear seat belts when driving a motor vehicle, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 1.  Residents that always wear seat belts when driving a motor vehicle, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 1

In 2013 and 2014, 94.5% (90.4, 96.9) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when driving a motor vehicle.  In Ontario, there is an increasing trend over time in the proportion of residents that always wear a seat belt when driving a motor vehicle.

Figure 2.  Residents that always wear seat belts when driving a motor vehicle, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

Table 2.  Residents that always wear seat belts when driving a motor vehicle, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 2

In 2013 and 2014, 94.5% (90.4, 96.9) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when driving a motor vehicle.  In Ontario and KFL&A, a higher proportion of females than males always wear a seat belt when driving a motor vehicle.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, so does the proportion of drivers who always wear a seat belt when driving a motor vehicle.

Passenger seat belt use in the front seat

Figure 3. Residents that always wear seat belts when a front seat passenger, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 3.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a front seat passenger, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 3

In 2013 and 2014, 94.8% (92.2, 96.5) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when a front seat passenger.  In Ontario, there is an increasing trend over time in the proportion of residents that always wear a seat belt when a front seat passenger.

Figure 4.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a front seat passenger, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

Table 4.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a front seat passenger, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 4

In 2013 and 2014, 94.8% (92.2, 96.5) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when a front seat passenger.  In Ontario, a higher proportion of females than males always wear a seat belt when a front seat passenger.  As well, in Ontario, a lower proportion of residents ages 16 to 34 always wear a seat belt when a front seat passenger than other age groups.

Passenger seat belt use in the back seat

Figure 5. Residents that always wear seat belts when a back seat passenger, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 5.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a back seat passenger, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 5

In 2013 and 2014, 90.1% (86.6, 92.8) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when a back seat passenger, which was slightly higher than Ontario.  In Ontario, there is an increasing trend over time in the proportion of residents that always wear a seat belt when a back seat passenger.

Figure 6.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a back seat passenger, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

Table 6.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a back seat passenger, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 6

In 2013 and 2014, 90.1% (86.6, 92.8) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when a back seat passenger, which was slightly higher than Ontario.  In Ontario, a higher proportion of females than males always wear a seat belt when a back seat passenger.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, so does the proportion of drivers who always wear a seat belt when a back seat passenger.

Passenger seat belt use in a taxi

Figure 7. Residents that always wear seat belts when a passenger in a taxi, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 7.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a passenger in a taxi, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 7

In 2013 and 2014, 61.7% (55.6, 67.5) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when a passenger in a taxi.  In Ontario, there is an increasing trend in the proportion of residents that always wear a seat belt when a passenger in a taxi over time.

Figure 8.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a passenger in a taxi, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

Table 8.  Residents that always wear seat belts when a passenger in a taxi, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 8

In 2013 and 2014, 61.7% (55.6, 67.5) of KFL&A area residents always wear a seat belt when a passenger in a taxi.  In Ontario, a higher proportion of females than males always wear a seat belt when a passenger in a taxi.  As well, in Ontario, a higher proportion of residents ages 65 and over always wear a seat belt when a passenger in a taxi.

Figure 9. Frequency that residents use cell phones (excluding hands-free use) while driving, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Table 9.  Frequency that residents use cell phones (excluding hands-free use) while driving, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Interpretation for Figure 9

In 2013 and 2014, 75.1% (69.7, 79.8) of KFL&A area residents never used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) while driving.  There were no differences between KFL&A and Ontario.

Figure 10. Residents that used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving, KFL&A and Ontario

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Table 10.  Residents that used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Interpretation for Figure 10

In 2013 and 2014, 8.1%* (5.3, 12.2) of KFL&A area residents used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving.  In Ontario, there is a decreasing trend over time in the proportion of residents that used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving.  This corresponds with an increase in hands-free cell phone use while driving (Figure 13).  Please note this question was not asked in 2003.

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size 

Figure 11.  Residents that used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Table 11.  Residents that used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Interpretation for Figure 11

In Ontario, a higher proportion of males than females used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of drivers who used cell phones (excluding hands-free use) often or sometimes while driving decreases.

Hands-free use cell-phone use while driving

Figure 12. Frequency that residents used hands-free cell phones while driving, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Table 12.  Frequency that residents used hands-free cell phones while driving, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Interpretation for Figure 12

In 2013 and 2014, 20.7% (16.7, 25.3) of KFL&A area residents used hands-free cell phones often or sometimes while driving, which was slightly lower than Ontario.

Figure 13. Residents that used hands-free cell phones often or sometimes while driving, KFL&A and Ontario

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Table 13.  Residents that used hands-free cell phones often or sometimes while driving, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Interpretation for Figure 13

In Ontario, there is an increasing trend over time in the proportion of residents that used hands-free cell phones while driving.  This corresponds with a decrease in non-hands-free cell phone use while driving (Figure 10).  Please note this question was not asked in 2003.

Figure 14.  Residents that used hands-free cell phones often or sometimes while driving, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Table 14.  Residents that used hands-free cell phones often or sometimes while driving, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Interpretation for Figure 14

In Ontario, a higher proportion of males than females used hands-free cell phones while driving.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of drivers who used hands-free cell phones while driving decreases.  For most categories (total, females, ages 16 to 34 and ages 35 to 64) KFL&A residents showed a lower proportion of having used hands-free cell phones while driving than Ontario.

Driving while tired

Figure 15. Frequency that residents drove when feeling tired, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

Table 15.  Frequency that residents drove when feeling tired, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 15

In 2013 and 2014, 31.7% (26.9, 36.9) of KFL&A area residents often or sometimes drove when feeling tired.

Figure 16.  Residents that often or sometimes drove when feeling tired, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 16.  Residents that often or sometimes drove when feeling tired, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 16

There were no differences between KFL&A and Ontario and no trends over time were seen in the proportion of residents that often or sometimes drove when feeling tired.  

Figure 17.  Residents that often or sometimes drove when feeling tired, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Table 17.  Residents that often or sometimes drove when feeling tired, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Interpretation for Figure 17

In Ontario, a higher proportion of males than females often or sometimes drove when feeling tired.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of drivers who often or sometimes drove when feeling tired decreases.  

Speed at which residents drive compared to other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario

Figure 18. Speed at which residents drive compared to other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 18.  Speed at which residents drive compared to other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 18

In 2013 and 2014, 23.8% (19.6, 28.5) of KFL&A area residents felt they drive faster compared to other drivers.  There were no differences between KFL&A and Ontario and no trends over time were seen (data not shown for 2003 or 2009 and 2010).

Figure 19.  Residents that drive faster compared to other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Table 19.  Residents that drive faster compared to other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

Interpretation for Figure 19

In Ontario, a higher proportion of males than females felt they drive faster compared to other drivers.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of drivers who felt they drive faster compared to other drivers decreases.   

Aggressiveness at which residents drive compared with other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario

Figure 20. Aggressiveness with which residents drive compared with other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario

Table 20.  Aggressiveness at which residents drive compared with other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 20

In 2013 and 2014, 45.5% (39.8, 51.2) of KFL&A area residents felt they drive less aggressively compared to other drivers.  There were no differences between KFL&A and Ontario and no trends over time were seen (data not shown for 2003 or 2009 and 2010).

Figure 21.  Residents that drove less aggressively compared with other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

Table 21.  Residents that drove less aggressively compared with other drivers, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 21

In Ontario, a higher proportion of females than males felt they drive less aggressively compared to other drivers.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of drivers who felt they drive less aggressively compared with other drivers decreases.   

Drivers who were drinking and driving

Figure 22. Residents that drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario

Table 22.  Residents that drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 22

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 4.3% (3.9, 4.8) of residents drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour.  The proportion of those who drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour has decreased over time.  A higher proportion of males than females drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of drivers who drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour decreases.   The estimates for KFL&A were too unstable to report.

Figure 23. Frequency that residents drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014*

*This question was only asked of those who said they had driven after having two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Table 23.  Frequency that residents drove after having two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)*

*This question was only asked of those who said they had driven after having two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Interpretation for Figure 23

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 52.8% (46.8, 58.8) of residents who had driven after having two or more drinks in the previous hour had done this three or more times.

Passengers riding with drivers who were drinking and driving

Figure 24. Passengers riding with drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario

Table 24.  Passengers riding with drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

Interpretation for Figure 24

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 7.1% (6.6, 7.6) of passengers rode with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  The proportion of passengers riding with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour has decreased over time.  A higher proportion of male than female passengers rode with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  As well, in Ontario, as ages increases, the proportion of passengers riding with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour decreases.   The estimates for KFL&A were too unstable to report.

Figure 25. Frequency that passengers rode with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014*

*This question was only asked of those who said they were with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Table 25.  Frequency that passengers rode with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)*

*This question was only asked of those who said they were with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Interpretation for Figure 25

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 42.2% (38.6, 45.9) of passengers riding with a driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour had done this three or more times.

ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who were drinking and driving

Figure 26. ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Table 26.  ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Interpretation for Figure 26

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 5.9% (5.1, 7.0) of ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  A higher proportion of males than females were ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers that had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  Residents aged 16 to 34 had the highest proportion of ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers that had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  The estimates for KFL&A were too unstable to report.

Figure 27. Frequency that ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers had two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014*

*This question was only asked of ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Table 27.  Frequency that ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers had two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)*

*This question was only asked of ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Interpretation for Figure 27

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 47.1% (38.0, 56.4) of ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour had done this three or more times.

Passengers riding with ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who were drinking and driving

Figure 28.  Passengers riding with ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Table 28.  Passengers riding with ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, by age and sex, Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)

*Use with caution due to high variability of estimate as a result of small sample size

NR - not releasable due to small numbers.

Interpretation for Figure 28

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 6.6% (5.7, 7.6) of passengers were riding with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  A higher proportion of male than female were passengers of ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo drivers that had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  Residents aged 16 to 34 had the highest proportion of passengers riding 

with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver that had two or more drinks in the previous hour.  The estimates for KFL&A were too unstable to report.

Figure 29. Frequency that passengers had rides with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014*

*This question was only asked of passengers who had rides with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Table 29.  Frequency that passengers had rides with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)*

* This question was only asked of passengers who had rides with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour.

Interpretation for Figure 29

In Ontario in 2013 and 2014, 40.6% (33.0, 48.7) of passengers riding with an ATV, snowmobile, motor boat or seadoo driver who had two or more drinks in the previous hour, had done this three or more times.

Helmet use when riding an ATV

Figure 30. Residents that always wear a helmet when riding on an ATV, KFL&A and Ontario*

* This question was only asked of ATV users

Table 30.  Residents that always wear a helmet when riding on an ATV, KFL&A and Ontario, % (95% confidence interval)*

* This question was only asked of ATV users

Interpretation for Figure 30

In 2013 and 2014, 55.0% (43.4, 66.2) of KFL&A area residents always wear a helmet when riding an ATV.  

Figure 31.  Residents that always wear a helmet when riding on an ATV, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014

* This question was only asked of ATV users

Table 31.  Residents that always wear a helmet when riding on an ATV, by age and sex, KFL&A and Ontario, 2013 and 2014, % (95% confidence interval)*

* This question was only asked of ATV users

Interpretation for Figure 31

In 2013 and 2014, 55.0% (43.4, 66.2) of KFL&A area residents always wear a helmet when riding an ATV.  There were no differences between KFL&A and Ontario, and no differences between sexes.  In Ontario, those ages 65 and over were less likely to wear a helmet when riding an ATV.

Confidence intervals explained

Researchers look at the "confidence levels" of percentages being compared to decide if there is a statistically significant difference between percentages.   If the 95% confidence intervals of two estimates do not overlap, there is considered to be a significant difference between the estimates.  A statistically significant difference means that:

• the difference between two percentages is unlikely to have occurred by chance alone, and
• there is likely a true difference or change in the percentages.

In this report, 95% confidence intervals will accompany each percentage in all figures and tables.  The true or actual percentage falls within the 95% confidence interval range 95 times out of 100.  A wide confidence interval reflects a large amount of variability or imprecision.  Usually, the larger the sample size, the narrower the confidence intervals.  In tables, the 95% confidence intervals will be written with the percentage, followed by the 95% confidence interval range in brackets, e.g., 25.3% (12.3, 32.4).  In figures, the 95% confidence interval are represented by error bars at the top of each bar (column).