Female drivers suspected for drunken or drugged driving

Alcohol Problems and Blood Alcohol Concentration among Swedish Drivers Suspected of Driving under the Influence

The purpose of the study was to map alcohol problems in relation to blood alcohol concentration in a large representative sample of male and female Swedish drivers suspected of drunk driving. Twenty-one hundred suspected DUI offenders (drivers suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol) were assessed with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Information from the police regarding BAC, age, gender, and place and time of the stop was also collected. More than half (58%) of the suspected DUI offenders had alcohol problems, and among these 24% had high levels of alcohol problems. Of specific interest was the observation that almost half (46%) of the suspects with a BAC below the Swedish legal limit of 0.02% had alcohol problems, a prevalence that did not increase until a BAC of 0.10%–0.15%. It can be concluded that the mere suspicion of drunk driving indicates alcohol problems.

Correlates of drug use and driving among undergraduate college students

OBJECTIVE

Drug use by drivers is a significant and growing highway safety problem. College students are an important population to understand drugged driving. The objective of this study was to examine correlates of drugged driving among undergraduate college students.

METHODS

We conducted an anonymous, confidential, 24-question survey at a large New England public university during the 2010-2011 academic year among undergraduates in courses that met a graduation requirement. Data include demographics; academics; housing status; lifestyle; personal values; high school/college drug use; and driving following alcohol use, drug use, or both; and as a passenger with a driver who used alcohol, drugs, or both. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Chi-square tests compared driver alcohol use, drug use, or both with demographic, academic, and lifestyle variables. Logistic regression analyses were performed with drugged driving as the dependent variable. Odds ratios and corresponding 95 percent confidence intervals were calculated for each of the potential explanatory variables in relation to the outcome.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-four of 675 students completed surveys (66% participation rate). Participants were representative of the student body with a mean age of 19.4 (±1.3 years), 51 percent male, 75 percent white, and 10 percent Hispanic. Seventy-eight percent lived on campus, 93 percent had a driver's license, and 37 percent had access to a car. Students disagreed that cannabinoids impair driving (18%) compared to other drugs (17%), stimulants (13%), depressants (11%), hallucinogens (8%), and alcohol (7%). Twenty-three percent drove after alcohol use and 22 percent drove after drug use. Forty-one percent reported having been a passenger with a driver who had been drinking and 37 percent with a driver using drugs. Drugged driving was more likely among males vs. females (30% vs. 14%, P < .01), those living off campus (34% vs. 19%, P < .01), those reporting that parties are important (33% vs. 14%, P < .01), those reporting that community service is not important (28% vs. 18%, P < .05), those reporting that religion is not important (28% vs. 14%, P < .01), and those reporting personal drug use in high school (75% vs. 14%, P < .01) and well as that their best friends used drugs in high school (42% vs. 12%, P < .01) and college (50% vs. 8%, P < .01). Those factors most associated with drugged driving included using drugs in high school (odds ratio [OR] = 9.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6-19.6) and best friends in college used drugs regularly (OR = 6.2, 95% CI: 3.4-11.6).

CONCLUSION

Self-reported drugged driving and riding as a passenger with a drugged driver is common among subgroups of college students. The identification of undergraduate subgroups at risk for drugged driving will guide the design and implementation of traffic safety activities.

Driving under the influence (DUI) among patients in opioid maintenance treatment (OMT): a registry-based national cohort study

AIMS

To investigate convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) before, during and after opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) and to examine factors associated with convictions for DUI during treatment.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Treatment data on all patients who started OMT in Norway between 1997 and 2003 (n = 3221) were cross-linked with national criminal records using unique person identifiers. Patients were followed over a 9-year period, before, during and in periods out of opioid maintenance treatment.

MEASUREMENTS

Data were formal charges leading to convictions recorded during four different time-periods: 3 years prior to application, waiting-list, in-treatment and in periods out of treatment.

FINDINGS

During OMT, convictions for DUI were reduced by almost 40% compared with pre-application levels. The conviction rate for DUI for males in the pre-application period was 9.59 per 100 person-years (PY) and for females, 3.44 per 100 PY. During OMT, rates of DUI convictions were reduced to 5.97 per 100 PY among men and to 1.09 per 100 PY among women. However, when estimating the effect of OMT on convictions for DUI, the interaction between gender and exposure to OMT was not statistically significant. Patients who remained in continuous treatment had fewer convictions for DUI during treatment compared with patients in discontinuous treatment. Compared with patients having no road traffic convictions during the pre-application period, patients with two or more pre-application convictions for DUI had higher odds [odds ratio (OR) = 3.69 (2.30-5.93)] for further convictions for DUI during OMT.

CONCLUSION

In Norway, patients receiving opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) have reduced convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) compared with their pre-treatment levels. Being male and having a previous history of several convictions for DUI were found to be important risk factors for convictions for DUI during OMT.

Mental disorders associated with driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs: a register-based study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Mental disorders are associated with driving under the influence (DUI), but the evidence is scarce and mostly focused on a limited group of repeat drunken drivers. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine which mental disorders were risk factors for DUI of alcohol only (DUIA), of illicit drugs (DUID) or of alcohol and psychoactive prescription drugs (DUIAP), and whether and how the risk differs over time.

METHODS

A register-based case-control study was conducted. Cases (n=44,188) suspected by the police of DUI during 1997-2007 and controls (n=45,148) were drawn from the general Finnish population. The official national register of hospital treatments was the data source for mental disorders. The effects of mental disorders on DUI were estimated using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Substance use disorders increased the risk of DUI overall. Childhood- and adolescence-onset disorders were a strong predictor of DUID, and bipolar and depressive disorders predicted DUIAP. The risk was highest soon after hospital admission with a psychiatric diagnosis, but it decreased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Actions to prevent DUI should be developed and implemented during the treatment of mental disorders.

Psychosocial characteristics of drunk drivers assessed by the Addiction Severity Index, prediction of relapse

Aims: To investigate psychosocial characteristics and problems of a representative sample of Swedish drunk drivers with special consideration of the gender of the driver; analyze criminal records of the drivers before and after enrolment in the study; identify psychosocial predictors of relapse to drunk driving. Methods: Psychosocial characteristics were assessed by the Addiction Severity Index (ASI). Alcohol problems were additionally assessed by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Criminal records were collected for the five year period before the enrolment, and for the subsequent two years, from Sweden’s official crime statistics. Results: About half of the investigated drivers had other psychosocial problems besides the drink driving offence. Female drivers had more alcohol, drug, psychiatric and relational problems, including with parents when growing up, than male drivers, but less previous and subsequent criminality. Heavily drunk drivers (blood alcohol concentration ≥0.1%) had more problems with alcohol, legal status and employment and support than the other drunk drivers. Problems with legal status, family and social relations and alcohol use increased the risk of relapse in drunk driving, while medical problems seemed to be a protective factor. Different ASI risk factors were identified for relapse in either traffic offences or other crimes. Conclusions: As well as the drunk driving offence, drunk drivers often have other psychosocial problems, female drivers in particular. Already the blood alcohol concentration per se gives some indication of the psychosocial problem profile of a drunk driver and the ASI profile has some prognostic value for relapse in drunk driving.

Trends in driving under the influence of drugs: a register-based study of DUID suspects during 1977-2007

Our aim was to describe the incidence and trends of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) and to examine the main drug findings and their trends in suspected DUID cases in Finland. A register-based study was conducted of all suspected DUID cases during 1977-2007. The data included 31,963 DUID offenders apprehended by the police with a positive finding for illicit/licit drug impairing driving performance. Toxicological results were analyzed in blood and/or urine specimens in one central laboratory. The incidence of suspected DUID cases increased 18-fold during 1977-2007. Most of the suspects were men (89.7%). However, the male-female ratio decreased from 13.9 to 7.3. The mean age decreased from 36.2 years in 1977 to 29.9 years in 2001 but has since reincreased. Most often found substances were benzodiazepines (75.7%), amphetamines (46.0%), cannabinoids (27.7%) and opioids (13.8%). Most common illicit drugs, amphetamines and cannabinoids, started to appear at the end of the 1980s. Poly-drug findings were common (77.1%). Suspected DUID cases have increased sharply after the introduction of a zero tolerance law, especially in regard to amphetamines. DUID is an increasing problem in Finland, and needs serious attention.

The impact of chronic pain patients' psychotropic drug knowledge and warning labels on the decision whether to drive a car or not

OBJECTIVE

The attitudes of patients towards driving a car while taking medication with psychotropic side effects is unclear. A growing number of patients use these psychotropic medicines on a daily basis, and this may interfere with their ability to drive a car.

METHODS

By means of a survey, we examined attitudes towards driving while using psychotropic medicinal drugs and the effect of warning labels on the decision whether to drive a car or not in patients with chronic pain.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight of 100 patients possessing a driver's license used psychotropic medication. Despite warning labels affixed on the packages that these drugs might impair driving ability, the majority (71%) of these patients continued driving a car. A point of concern is that 40% of these patients reported not to be more cautious in traffic after taking psychotropic drugs.

CONCLUSION

The results of this survey indicate that drug warning labels applied by Dutch pharmacies do not significantly change attitudes towards driving a car in patients taking medicinal drugs with psychotropic side effects. Future road-safety campaigns should pay more attention to the impairing effects of psychotropic drugs on driving.

A review of drug use and driving: epidemiology, impairment, risk factors and risk perceptions

The existing literature on the prevalence of drug driving, the effects of drugs on driving performance, risk factors and risk perceptions associated with drug driving was reviewed. The 12-month prevalence of drug driving among the general population is approximately 4%. Drugs are detected commonly among those involved in motor vehicle accidents, with studies reporting up to 25% of accident-involved drivers positive for drugs. Cannabis is generally the most common drug detected in accident-involved drivers, followed by benzodiazepines, cocaine, amphetamines and opioids. Polydrug use is common among accident-involved drivers. Studies of impairment indicate an undeniable association between alcohol and driving impairment. There is also evidence that cannabis and benzodiazepines increase accident risk. The most equivocal evidence surrounds opioids and stimulants. It is apparent that drugs in combination with alcohol, and multiple drugs, present an even greater risk. Demographically, young males are over-represented among drug drivers. Although there is an association between alcohol use problems and drink driving, it is unclear whether such an association exists between drug use problems and drug driving. Evidence surrounding psychosocial factors and driving behaviour is also equivocal at this stage. While most drivers perceive drug driving to be dangerous and unacceptable, there is less concern about impaired driving among drug drivers and drink drivers than from those who have not engaged in impaired driving. Risk perceptions differ according to drug type, with certain drugs (e.g. cannabis) seen as producing less impairment than others (e.g. alcohol). It is concluded that drug driving is a significant problem, both in terms of a general public health issue and as a specific concern for drug users.

Characteristics of drivers testing positive for heroin or ecstasy in Norway

An increasing number of heroin and ecstasy seizures were recorded by the Norwegian police and customs authorities in the 1990s. The number of apprehended drivers in whom heroin and ecstasy were detected also rose in the same period (Heroin, 1991: n = 17, 1999: n = 320. Ecstasy, 1995: n = 6, 1999: n = 123). Drivers who tested positive for heroin (detected in urine as the metabolite 6-monoacetyl-morphine, 6-MAM) or ecstasy (3,4-methylenedioxy-metamphetamine, MDMA, detected in blood) were characterized with regard to age distribution, drug use pattern, and earlier arrests. In 1998-1999, the police apprehended 9013 drivers on suspicion of being under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. Blood and urine samples from the drivers were sent to the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Division of Forensic Toxicology and Drug Abuse and analyzed for the most commonly abused drugs. 6-MAM was detected in urine in 7% of the cases (n = 637), representing 542 different drivers (male: 85%, n = 463, female: 15%, n = 79) as some drivers were rearrested several times during the selection period. MDMA was detected in 2% of the cases (n = 190), representing 177 drivers (male: 90%, n = 160, female: 10%, n = 17). The median ages of drivers who tested positive for 6-MAM or MDMA were 32 and 24 years, respectively. Multi-drug use was very common in both groups (83% and 98% for the heroin and ecstasy group, respectively). Drivers in both groups were followed back to 1985 to detect earlier arrests for the same offence. Of the heroin group, 78% (n = 417) had earlier been arrested for drunken or drugged driving. Alcohol was the drug most frequently detected on first arrest. Of the ecstasy group, 47% (n = 83) had earlier been arrested, and amphetamine was most frequently found on first arrest.

Testing for benzodiazepine inebriation--relationship between benzodiazepine concentration and simple clinical tests for impairment in a sample of drugged drivers

OBJECTIVE

To study how the various 25 subtests and observations of the Norwegian clinical test for impairment related to the blood benzodiazepine concentrations of apprehended drivers suspected of driving under the influence of benzodiazepines. The impact of single-dose intake in non-daily users of benzodiazepines on the clinical picture of inebriation was also studied.

METHODS

Included in the study were 818 drivers suspected of driving under the influence of non-alcoholic drugs with blood samples containing only one benzodiazepine. We determined which of the 25 subtests and observations of the clinical test for impairment related significantly to the blood benzodiazepine concentrations.

RESULTS

Significantly related to blood benzodiazepine concentrations were 13 subtests and observations. Of these, 9 withstood adjustment for a variety of background variables. Single dose intake in non-daily users only influenced 3 subtests and observations after adjustment for blood benzodiazepine concentration and background variables. Romberg's test, 1 observation concerning alertness (oriented for time and place), 4 tests on motor and coordination (walk and turn on line, finger-to-nose and finger-to-finger tests), 2 observations on speech (articulation and content) and 1 observation regarding appearance (general conduct) were related to blood benzodiazepine concentrations.

CONCLUSION

Many of these simple clinical tests are included in the standardized field sobriety test and are of value in revealing benzodiazepine impairment. The present study offered some possible additions. Combinations of these robust tests can also be used to reveal benzodiazepine inebriation in other contexts.

Clinical impairment of benzodiazepines--relation between benzodiazepine concentrations and impairment in apprehended drivers

BACKGROUND

Acute intake of benzodiazepines is followed by concentration-dependent deterioration of performance in controlled experimental studies. Whether this is true in a population of benzodiazepine users is uncertain. We studied the relationship in a population of suspected drugged drivers.

METHODS

In Norway physicians examine and take blood samples from nearly all suspected drivers. Our material comprised 818 samples containing only one benzodiazepine and our reference group consisted of 10,759 cases containing only alcohol.

RESULTS

159 drivers (19%) were considered as not impaired and 659 (81%) as impaired. None of the background factors, e.g. gender, age or time of day when apprehended, related significantly to either the physician's conclusion or to blood levels of benzodiazepines. Impaired subjects had significantly higher blood levels of diazepam (n=411) (P<0.001), oxazepam (n=73) (P<0.05) and flunitrazepam (n=211) (P<0.05) than those not impaired. The risk of being assessed as impaired did rise with increasing benzodiazepine blood level, with odds ratios (ORs) for being assessed as impaired of 1.61, 3.65 and 4.11 for the three supratherapeutic drug levels. The corresponding OR found for different elevated blood-alcohol concentrations were 1.49, 2.94 and 10.49.

CONCLUSION

The blood concentration of benzodiazepines was the only characteristic which was related to impairment. This indicated a drug-concentration related effect of benzodiazepines on performance and paves the way for a discussion on legal limits for benzodiazepines in relation to driving.

Are drunk-driving offenders referred for screening accurately reporting their drug use?

Several studies report that a substantial percentage of offenders arrested for impaired driving test positive for drugs of abuse besides alcohol. Current guidelines recommend screening offenders for both alcohol and other drug use, yet little is known about the accuracy of self-reports of drug use in this population. We compared drug abuse and dependence DSM-III-R diagnoses from an initial, court-ordered screening evaluation of 583 female and 495 male convicted drunk-driving offenders with diagnoses obtained via a voluntary, non-coerced interview 5 years later. At initial screening, fewer than 6% of offenders were diagnosed with drug abuse or dependence. Among offenders who did not receive an initial drug diagnosis, 28% subsequently reported having experienced drug use problems consistent with a retrospective diagnosis of drug abuse or dependence by the age at which they were screened. Half of those with a retrospective diagnosis of drug dependence reported their initial screening responses were "very accurate". We conclude that, although many drunk-driving offenders undergoing screening have diagnosable drug problems, a high proportion under-report their drug use. We suggest that certain modifications to screening procedures, such as urine drug screening, reducing barriers to treatment, and training counselors in motivational interviewing techniques, may increase accurate identification of drug use problems in this population.

Rearrest rates among Norwegian drugged drivers compared with drunken drivers

The rearrest rates among Norwegian drugged (n=1102) and a group of drunken drivers (n=850) (BAC: 0.16-0.19%) apprehended during 1992, were 57% (n=629) and 28% (n=238), respectively, when followed prospectively for 7 years. The most important risk factors for recidivism among drugged drivers were previous arrests for drugged or drunken driving (rearrest rate among previous arrests: 73%, no previous arrest: 42%), multi-drug detection at selection (multi-drug: 62%, single drug: 41%), sex (male: 61%, female: 35%) and age (below 36 years: 60%, 36 years and older: 44%). Most of the recidivist drugged drivers were rearrested during the year of selection (21%), followed by 13, 7 and 6%, retrospectively, during the following years. When followed both retrospectively and prospectively for a period extending from 1984 to 1998, 71% (n=779) and 40% (n=344) of the selected drugged and drunken drivers, respectively, were arrested two or more times.

Drugged drivers in Norway with benzodiazepine detections

Norwegian drugged drivers with benzodiazepine (BZD) detections have been studied with regard to drug use pattern and rearrest rate. During 1995, 3343 drivers were apprehended by the police in Norway due to the suspicion of influence by drugs. Blood samples from all drivers were sent to the National Institute of Forensic Toxicology (NIFT). The samples were analysed using a standard program covering the most commonly abused drugs on the marked in Norway. BZDs, representing some of the most frequently detected drugs, were found in approximately 30% (n = 1051) of the cases, represented by 14% (n = 150) female and 86% (n = 901) male drivers. In 8% of the cases, one BZD only was detected, half of these cases with one BZD could reflect therapeutic use. One or more BZDs were combined with illegal drug(s) (73%), other prescribed drugs (10%), and/or alcohol (24%). 62% of the drivers with BZD detections, had earlier been arrested for the same offence, or six cases per rearrested driver. The frequency of earlier arrests were lower for female (34%) than for male (67%) drivers. Alcohol was most frequently found for those arrested for the first time before 1992, while BZD or illegal drugs were most frequently found for those with their first arrest during 1992-1995. Our study shows that apprehended drivers using BZD are mainly represented by drug abusers due to frequent multi-drug use, blood concentrations representing doses above therapeutic levels and high rearrest rate for the same offence. A treatment program or other reactions, are thus necessary in addition to fines, prison penalty and suspension of driving licence.

Human factors in the causation of road traffic crashes

Road traffic crashes (RTCs) are responsible for a substantial fraction of morbidity and mortality and are responsible for more years of life lost than most of human diseases. In this review, we have tried to delineate behavioral factors that collectively represent the principal cause of three out of five RTCs and contribute to the causation of most of the remaining. Although sharp distinctions are not always possible, a classification of behavioral factors is both necessary and feasible. Thus, behavioral factors can be distinguished as (i) those that reduce capability on a long-term basis (inexperience, aging, disease and disability, alcoholism, drug abuse), (ii) those that reduce capability on a short-term basis (drowsiness, fatigue, acute alcohol intoxication, short term drug effects, binge eating, acute psychological stress, temporary distraction), (iii) those that promote risk taking behavior with long-term impact (overestimation of capabilities, macho attitude, habitual speeding, habitual disregard of traffic regulations, indecent driving behavior, non-use of seat belt or helmet, inappropriate sitting while driving, accident proneness) and (iv) those that promote risk taking behavior with short-term impact (moderate ethanol intake, psychotropic drugs, motor vehicle crime, suicidal behavior, compulsive acts). The classification aims to assist in the conceptualization of the problem that may also contribute to behavior modification-based efforts.

Speed freaks? A literature review detailing the nature and prevalence of dance drugs and driving

Considerable interest has lately been expressed in motor car driving whilst under the influence of drugs. Unlike depressant drugs (e.g. alcohol) dance drugs are often perceived to enhance driving skills. The physical effects and the current lack of police roadside testing are possible contributing reasons for dance drug driving. This paper aims to show through a literature review on the subject, the demographics of those involved in dance drug driving and the extent to which certain dance drugs are implicated in drug driving incidents. Drug driving is found to be highest amongst the 18-35 year age group and more prevalent amongst adult males. Prevalence figures for driving under the influence of individual drugs are also given. The numbers of people involved in accidents/fatalities and testing positive for amphetamine, cocaine and other dance drugs is small. Although self-reporting especially of illegal activities is difficult to accurately evaluate, most of the reported studies use actual blood/urine samples and so can be considered accurate. The literature does not highlight any real concerns regarding dance drug driving in terms of prevalence although it does highlight the paucity of research in this area, in particular 'Culture E and driving'.

Drugged driving in the Nordic countries--a comparative study between five countries

The purpose of this study was to compare whether the high incidence of drugged driving in Norway was different to that in the other Nordic countries. All blood samples received by Nordic forensic institutes during one week in 1996, from drivers suspected by the police of driving under the influence (Denmark: n = 255, Finland: n = 270, Iceland: n = 40, Sweden: n = 86, Norway: n = 149), were analysed for alcohol and drugs (benzodiazepines, cannabinoids, amphetamines, cocaine, opiates and a number of antidepressant drugs) independent of the primary suspicion, and using the same analytical cut-off levels at the different institutes. The primary suspicion was directed towards drugs in more than 40% of the Norwegian cases, drugs were detected in more than 70% of these samples. In only 0-3% of the cases from Denmark, Finland and Iceland, were drugs suspected, while the corresponding frequency for Sweden was 17%. However, evidential breath analyses were used for about three-quarters of the Swedish drivers suspected to be influenced by alcohol. Blood alcohol concentrations (BAC's) below the legal limits were found in 32, 18 and 2% of the Norwegian, Icelandic and Finnish cases, respectively (BAC < 0.05%), in 10% of the Danish cases (BAC < 0.08%) and in 20% of the Swedish cases (BAC < 0.02%). Drugs were most frequently found in the Norwegian and Swedish cases with no alcohol (80-83%). Similar frequencies of drugs in samples with BAC's above the legal limits (19-22%), were obtained for all countries. Benzodiazepines, tetrahydrocannabinol and amphetamine represented the most commonly detected drugs. Our results show that differences between Norway and other Nordic countries with regard to drugs and driving, are connected to the selection criteria made by the police and with more focus on drugged driving in Norway.

Role of drugs and alcohol in impaired drivers and fatally injured drivers in the Strathclyde police region of Scotland, 1995-1998

During the 4-year study period, 1995-1998, the Department of Forensic Medicine and Science, University of Glasgow received a total of 752 biological samples from drivers suspected of driving under the influence of drink and/or drugs in the Strathclyde region of Scotland. The majority of samples were blood and had been primarily obtained from males. Drugs were detected in 68 and 90% of blood and urine samples, respectively. Toxicological analyses revealed that cannabis was the most frequently encountered illegal drug which was detected in 39% of all drug positive blood samples. Benzodiazepines were detected in the majority of drug positive samples with 82% containing at least one member of this group. Polydrug use was prevalent, with the average number of drugs detected per sample increasing from 2.0 in 1995 to 3.1 in 1998. For comparison, the results of toxicological analyses from 151 fatally injured drivers are described. Although the majority of samples tested negative for the presence of drugs and alcohol, drugs were found to be present in 19% and alcohol was detected in 33%. As the majority of drugs had been prescribed or administered post-accident, this study shows that alcohol was the main causative factor conducive to fatal road traffic accidents.

Study of rearrests for drunken driving in Norway

The National Institute of Forensic Toxicology (NIFT) in Oslo receives blood samples from all Norwegian drivers suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol. It is well known that a large proportion of the arrested drunken drivers are repeat offenders. The purposes of this investigation was to find the arrest rates (the percentage of subjects arrested once or more) among drunken drivers followed retrospectively and prospectively during the 11-year period 1984-1994 and the probability of 'abstaining' from becoming a recidivist during the 9 years subsequent to the year of selection. By examining the rearrest rates during the 3 following years for drivers selected in 1986, 1989, 1991 and 1992 we tried to look for major effects due to the change in the Norwegian road traffic act of 1988. Altogether 45% of the selected drunken drivers were arrested two or more times. Totally the '9-year survival rate' (i.e. not being rearrested) was 60% for drivers with blood alcohol concentration (BAC) selected from the interval 0.06-0.09%; 56% from BAC 0.13-0.16% and 51% from 0.26-0.29%. The data were further evaluated with respect to frequency of rearrest during 3 years after selection, and was around 30% in 1986, while it was lower for drivers selected in 1992 (19%). An explanation for the reduction in rearrest rate may be the changes in the road traffic act which took place in 1988.

Drugged driving, a review based on the experience in Norway

Since 1959, the Norwegian Road Traffic Act has prohibited driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. On suspicion, the police request a clinical examination from any driver, as well as blood analyses for illegal and prescribed drugs affecting driving performance. During the last few years, there has been a marked increase in the number of drivers suspected of be influenced by drugs (1983, n = 900; 1995, n = 3329). The most commonly detected drugs are tetrahydrocannabinol, amphetamine, benzodiazepines and opiates. Multi-drug use is frequently found (> 60%). The occurrence of amphetamine (1991, n = 216; 1995, n = 937) and heroin (1991, n = 19; 1995, n = 172) has increased considerably. The frequency of drugged drivers apprehended in roadside traffic appears to be at least 10-fold higher in Norway than most other countries. This is probably mainly due to differences between national road traffic acts and the level of attention to the problem, and not to national differences in the prevalence of drugged driving.