Vehicles equipped with front crash prevention technology have been successful in reducing insurance claims resulting from collisions, according to a recent report from the Highway Loss Data Institute.

HLDI, which conducts scientific studies of insurance data to analyze human and economic losses caused by vehicle accidents, says this trend has become more apparent as more information is available for models with these systems. Vehicles with front crash prevention technology have lower rates of insurance claims for damage caused to other vehicles, as well as injuries to the occupants of those vehicles. The systems have also reduced claims related to the equipped vehicle and its occupants.

Front crash prevention technology includes systems that warn of an impending collision, brake automatically, or do both. HLDI says it has studied nine different systems from five automakers.

The analysis looked at both property damage liability and bodily injury liability. Property damage liability pays for damage caused to other vehicles, while bodily injury liability pays for injuries caused to other vehicle occupants or people on the road.

"Interestingly, the reductions in bodily injury claims are about twice the size of the property damage claim reductions," said Matt Moore, vice president of HLDI. "A large number of bodily injury claims are for whiplash injuries that occur when your vehicle strikes another from behind. That's the main type of crash that current front crash prevention systems are designed to avoid."

HLDI summarized its findings by highlighting differences among three different systems: Volvo's City Safety, Subaru's EyeSight, and the anti-collision features in the Honda Accord. The report says benefits vary from system to system, though it is unclear why this occurs.

City Safety was first introduced on Volvo's 2010 XC60. The system is designed to prevent low-speed collisions in urban traffic and is functional up to 19 miles per hour. A laser sensor in the windshield automatically applies the brakes if it senses that a collision is imminent.

HLDI previously compared the XC60's claim rate to other midsize luxury SUVs and the S60 to other midsize luxury cars to see if City Safety had any effect on claims. The organization determined that the system reduced claim frequency by 15 to 29 percent.

The organization also measured whether City Safety had less of an effect on older vehicles by comparing new models to those from 2010, when the technology was first introduced. HLDI says there was no diminished effect in this time.

City Safety was updated beginning with Volvo's 2014 models to function at speeds of up to 30 miles per hour. However, these updated models were not included in the HLDI studies.

HLDI's study of Honda's front crash prevention technology looked at several systems available on the Accord and Crosstour models. These included the forward collision and lane departure warning systems, which alert a driver when a collision is imminent or they are drifting out of their lane, and LaneWatch, which uses a camera to display a view of the passenger side blind spot on the vehicle's console screen.

The study found that Accords and Crosstours with these features had a reduced claim frequency when compared to the same models without the technology. However, only three of the reductions were statistically significant: bodily injury liability, which was 27 percent lower; medical payment insurance, which covers injuries to the occupants of an insured vehicle and was 22 percent lower; and property damage liability, which was 12 percent lower. The reductions in collision and personal injury protection claims were not statistically significant.

Honda also has a radar-based front crash prevention system for its Accord Touring model. This feature allows a driver to use adaptive cruise control, which maintains a safe following distance by applying the brakes as traffic conditions warrant, as well as forward collision and lane departure warnings.

This system also resulted in a reduction in claim frequency, though it was only statistically significant for bodily injury liability and property damage liability. Bodily injury liability was 39 percent lower, while property damage liability was 16 percent lower.

Collision and personal injury protection claims were higher in the radar-based system. HLDI says a likely reason for the higher collision claim severity is the need to repair the radar sensor, which is located in the front grille rather than inside the vehicle, after a collision. The average cost per claim for models with the radar system was $522 higher than for vehicles without the system.

HLDI also looked at EyeSight, an optional dual camera system located on the windshield of Subaru models. This technology has four features: a forward collision warning with automatic braking if the driver does not react in time, adaptive cruise control with the ability to come to a complete stop, lane departure warning, and a lead vehicle start alert which prompts a driver if they have not moved several seconds after the vehicle in front of them has proceeded.

The study determined that models equipped with EyeSight—including the Forester, Legacy, and Outback—had a bodily injury claim frequency 35 percent lower than comparable vehicles without the system. The claim frequency for property damage liability was 15 percent lower.

However, vehicles with this system also had a 22 percent higher medical payment claim frequency and a statistically insignificant reduction of 3 percent for personal injury protection liability. HLDI says the reason for these trends is unknown.