Most of us feel a sense of relief when we see an ambulance or patrol car racing through an intersection. We picture trained professionals, fully alert and focused, rushing to save lives.
What a lot of people don’t realize is that these vehicles are mobile command centers. Inside, there’s a complex setup of screens, radios, keyboards, and communication systems working together to support the response effort.
While this in-vehicle technology helps emergency responders coordinate quickly, navigate safely, and stay connected, it also comes with a less visible risk: emergency vehicle distraction.
A study from ITS America and Texas A&M University explored how in-vehicle technology affects the way emergency drivers perform. The researchers found a clear tension between staying connected and multitasking while driving. Every officer, firefighter, and EMS driver has to manage this tension on nearly every shift.
Let’s take a closer look at the findings of this study.
Inside the Emergency Cockpit
Emergency vehicles carry far more equipment than an ordinary car. Even a standard patrol vehicle can include:
- Mobile Computer Terminals (MCTs)
- Video displays
- Multi-channel radios
- GPS navigation
- Radar speed devices
- Siren and light controls
Of all the tools in front of the driver, MCTs are the biggest source of emergency vehicle distraction. They display maps, messages, call notes, alerts, and live video. While they’re vital for coordination, they pull on the same visual and manual resources as texting. Drivers look down, lift a hand off the wheel, and switch mental focus away from traffic.
The Hidden Scale of the Problem
We don’t have a complete national picture because many departments track emergency crashes differently, and distraction-related details often go underreported. Still, the numbers we do have raise concern.
- In 2023, distracted driving led to 3,275 deaths across the United States.
- The same year, 198 deaths involved emergency vehicles.
- More than half of those killed were people in other vehicles, not responders.
State-level data tells a similar story:
- Texas reported more than 1,000 emergency vehicle crashes between 2010 and 2014 linked to distraction or inattention.
- Illinois recorded 137 emergency crashes over three years tied to in-vehicle tasks.
- Austin Police Department data showed that more than half of their distraction-related crashes involved officers interacting with their MCTs.
Researchers also found that some agencies don’t record distractions well. Some even shared that explanations like “swerving to avoid wildlife” or “dodging debris” are often used in reports: not necessarily because that’s what happened, but because it’s easier than listing “was looking at the computer.”
What Emergency Responders Say
Interviews with responders highlight the demanding nature of the job inside the vehicle.
- Police officers typically drive alone. They’re expected to read dispatch updates, switch radio channels, type into an MCT, check maps, and watch traffic. Everything happens quickly, and the calls keep coming, so the pressure to keep up is constant.
- EMS drivers experience similar pressures. Once the medic is treating a patient in the back, the driver works alone at the front. They monitor hospital updates, follow directions, and manage vehicle controls while driving a large ambulance through busy areas. EMS driver distraction becomes more likely when the information is coming from multiple sources simultaneously.
- Fire officers may be managing several radio channels, communicating with multiple units, and tracking updates before they arrive at the scene. Some described their MCT systems as slow to respond, forcing them to spend longer looking away from the road.
The Science of Multitasking Behind the Wheel
Researchers have long shown that people don’t truly multitask. The brain switches rapidly between tasks, and each switch costs time and accuracy. Multitasking while driving adds more strain because driving already requires several mental resources at once.
Dr. Christopher Wickens’ Multiple Resource Theory helps explain why driving and device use are such a dangerous combination.
Driving already uses your eyes, your hands, your sense of space, and your ability to make quick decisions. When you add something like reading a message, typing, or glancing at a digital map, you’re asking the brain to handle two things that draw on the same mental resources.
Even listening to multiple audio sources, like dispatch updates and radio chatter, adds strain. The brain can only process so much at once, and the extra noise eats into the attention you need for scanning the road and anticipating hazards.
Which Tasks Cause the Most Distraction?
Based on field interviews and observational data, the tasks most associated with emergency vehicle crashes include:
- Reading or responding to call notes on the MCT while the vehicle is moving.
- Typing reports or entering updates in the vehicle.
- Navigating static or outdated maps instead of turn-by-turn navigation.
- Looking up driver or patient data while in transit.
- Switching between multiple radio channels or managing multiple comm systems.
Many agencies noted that these systems are poorly integrated. Responders often find themselves toggling between screens, looking down for 2-3 seconds, and moving their hands away from the steering wheel, all while in motion.
Real-Life Examples of Distractions Causing Harm
Sadly, the risks are not abstract. The Texas A&M report shared several cases where emergency vehicle distraction played a part in serious harm:
- An ambulance driver in Columbus, Ohio, veered off the road while distracted by a GPS. The vehicle rolled over, and the patient was ejected and killed.
- A Texas officer entering notes into an MCT ran a stop sign and struck a motorcyclist.
- In New York, an officer checking his in-car computer ran a red light and collided with another patrol car.
- An EMT in West Nyack, NY, distracted by GPS, hit a parked truck. His partner was paralyzed.
Each incident underscores the same point: inside an emergency vehicle, attention is a precious and limited resource.
What Are Some Proposed Solutions?
Several strategies can reduce crash risk in emergency vehicles by making systems easier and safer for drivers to use.
1) Voice Control and Audible Feedback
Voice-activated systems can dramatically reduce visual and manual distractions. When call notes are read aloud or commands can be given by voice, drivers can keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel.
2) Single-Button Responses
Some departments are moving toward one-touch solutions. Instead of typing or scrolling through menus, a quick tap can acknowledge a message or send an update.
3) Crew Resource Management
Having two people in the vehicle instead of one can also help. When one person drives and the other handles the radios, navigation, and communication, it takes a huge amount of pressure off the driver. It costs more to staff, but it’s a proven way to reduce risk.
4) Better Interface Design
Clearer layouts, larger buttons, and integrated GPS reduce the need to switch between tools. A single, consolidated MCT interface lowers task-switching demands and helps prevent multitasking while driving.
5) Policy and Training
Policies and training go hand in hand. Some agencies, like the Washington State Patrol, have banned device use while driving altogether, even though officers are legally exempt from distracted-driving laws.
Programs like the SAFE Driving Campaign help remind responders that getting there safely is part of doing the job right.
Barriers to Change
Of course, knowing what to do and actually doing it are two different things. Implementing safer systems and practices comes with several hurdles.
-
Cultural Challenges
Many responders see multitasking as normal or even expected. Changing that mindset takes leadership, reinforcement, and clear policy.
-
Inconsistent Data Collection
Another challenge is how departments record crashes. Reports don’t always capture the role of distraction. Without consistent data, it’s harder to assess progress or set priorities.
-
Technology Limitations
Some agencies still rely on old systems that don’t integrate well with modern tools. Replacing or upgrading them takes funding and long-term planning.
-
The Pressure of Time
Responders work under intense pressure. The need to move quickly can push drivers to keep interacting with systems while driving. But slowing down for a moment can prevent a crash and protect everyone involved.
Final Thoughts: The Road Ahead
So, are emergency vehicle operators driving distracted?
Mostly, yes. But the distraction doesn’t look like the typical mobile-phone problem seen in everyday traffic. It comes from the unavoidable demands of the job, the constant flow of data, and the systems responders rely on to help others.
In fact, MCT distraction can be more dangerous than civilian texting.
For us here at the Driver Research Institute, the takeaway is clear: if we want to truly improve emergency vehicle operator safety, we must look beyond simply “alerting the driver”. We need to design smarter systems, enforce safer policies, and give emergency responders the tools and time they need to drive attentively.
There’s still a lot of work to do, and we’re committed to being part of the solution. If you want to learn more about our research or explore ways to support safer emergency response systems, get in touch with DRI.
