Changes in Alcohol Use and Drinking and Driving Outcomes From Before Arrest for Driving Under the Influence to After Interlock Removal.
Alcohol Consumption
Drinking and Driving
IIDs
Ignition Interlocks
Impaired Driving
Recidivism
Journal
Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research
ISSN: 1530-0277
Titre abrégé: Alcohol Clin Exp Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7707242
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
received:
18
09
2020
accepted:
14
01
2021
pubmed:
13
3
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
entrez:
12
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Half of the offenders convicted of impaired driving in the United States are sentenced to install alcohol ignition interlock devices (IIDs), which prevent them from starting their vehicles if they have been drinking. No research has yet explored offenders' patterns of alcohol consumption and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) from the time before the arrest to the time period after the IID is installed. This study aims to fill that gap in knowledge. Using the Timeline Follow-back interview procedure, we assessed the daily drinking of 153 convicted DUI offenders' self-reported total alcohol consumption and rates of self-reported driving after drinking over 4 phases: before DUI arrest, between arrest and IID installation, during the phase on the interlock, and after the interlock is removed. Because information about behaviors in each period was not available for every participant, comparisons were made using paired-sample contrasts. Compared with before the arrest, total alcohol use decreased by 50% in the 4-month phase following arrest and before IID installation, though it did not change much afterward. The frequency of drinking and driving decreased sharply after the arrest (-82%), with further decrease upon installation of the interlock (-58%, p = 0.05). The frequency of drinking and driving after the IID was removed returned to preinstallation drinking and driving status (+58%, p = 0.01). Participants made significant adjustments to their drinking behavior by adhering to the traditional DUI driving restrictions in the postarrest phase. Although installation of an IID was not associated with a significant change in drinking, it further reduced the frequency of drinking and driving. Evaluations of the IID experience should take into account information on an individual's drinking and DUI behaviors not only before the IID was installed, but before the individual was arrested.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Half of the offenders convicted of impaired driving in the United States are sentenced to install alcohol ignition interlock devices (IIDs), which prevent them from starting their vehicles if they have been drinking. No research has yet explored offenders' patterns of alcohol consumption and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) from the time before the arrest to the time period after the IID is installed. This study aims to fill that gap in knowledge.
METHODS
Using the Timeline Follow-back interview procedure, we assessed the daily drinking of 153 convicted DUI offenders' self-reported total alcohol consumption and rates of self-reported driving after drinking over 4 phases: before DUI arrest, between arrest and IID installation, during the phase on the interlock, and after the interlock is removed. Because information about behaviors in each period was not available for every participant, comparisons were made using paired-sample contrasts.
RESULTS
Compared with before the arrest, total alcohol use decreased by 50% in the 4-month phase following arrest and before IID installation, though it did not change much afterward. The frequency of drinking and driving decreased sharply after the arrest (-82%), with further decrease upon installation of the interlock (-58%, p = 0.05). The frequency of drinking and driving after the IID was removed returned to preinstallation drinking and driving status (+58%, p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
Participants made significant adjustments to their drinking behavior by adhering to the traditional DUI driving restrictions in the postarrest phase. Although installation of an IID was not associated with a significant change in drinking, it further reduced the frequency of drinking and driving. Evaluations of the IID experience should take into account information on an individual's drinking and DUI behaviors not only before the IID was installed, but before the individual was arrested.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33710667
doi: 10.1111/acer.14558
pmc: PMC8076067
mid: NIHMS1666463
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
743-751Subventions
Organisme : NIAAA NIH HHS
ID : R01 AA022312
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2021 by the Research Society on Alcoholism.
Références
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Mar;124:210-218
pubmed: 30677694
Traffic Inj Prev. 2013;14(3):215-29
pubmed: 23441939
Am J Prev Med. 1999 Jan;16(1 Suppl):81-7
pubmed: 9921390
J Stud Alcohol. 1988 Sep;49(5):443-9
pubmed: 3216648
Addiction. 1999 Dec;94(12):1861-70
pubmed: 10717964
Traffic Inj Prev. 2015;16(4):329-35
pubmed: 25133305
Addiction. 2010 Feb;105(2):226-39
pubmed: 19922520
Am J Prev Med. 2011 Mar;40(3):362-76
pubmed: 21335270
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2020 Mar;81(2):212-219
pubmed: 32359051
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2016 Sep;40(9):1953-60
pubmed: 27427288
Am J Prev Med. 2017 Apr;52(4):417-423
pubmed: 28065516
Forensic Sci Rev. 2020 Jan;32(1):55-81
pubmed: 32007928
Addiction. 1999 Dec;94(12):1849-59
pubmed: 10717963
Accid Anal Prev. 2011 Nov;43(6):1960-1967
pubmed: 21819824
Traffic Inj Prev. 2020;21(7):419-424
pubmed: 32783636
Addiction. 2003 Dec;98 Suppl 2:13-9
pubmed: 14984238
Accid Anal Prev. 2001 Sep;33(5):609-19
pubmed: 11491241
Accid Anal Prev. 2008 Jan;40(1):267-73
pubmed: 18215558
Addict Behav. 2010 Dec;35(12):1138-43
pubmed: 20822852
J Stud Alcohol. 1975 Jan;36(1):109-16
pubmed: 238066
Alcohol Res. 2014;36(1):81-9
pubmed: 26259002
Traffic Inj Prev. 2020;21(7):413-418
pubmed: 32658548