Drug Testing and Drug-Involved Driving of Fatally Injured Drivers in the United States: 2005-2009

摘要

The Office of National Drug Control Strategy (ONDCP) identified drugged driving as a major initiative in the 2011 National Drug Control Strategy. A primary goal of the Strategy is to reduce the frequency of drugged or drug-involved driving by 10 percent between 2009 and 2015 by making drug-involved driving prevention a national priority on par with efforts to combat drunk driving. Specifically, this goal will be achieved by raising awareness of the dangers of drugged driving and providing technical assistance to states considering anti-drugged driving laws (ONDCP, 2011). In order to effectively curb drug-involved driving and the dangers it poses, various factors associated with drug-related motor vehicle crashes must first be elucidated. Information is needed so that states may more effectively combat drug-involved driving by taking a more consistent and targeted enforcement approach based on empirical research. This report uses data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) to provide a description of drug-involved driving and its correlates. In 2010, the National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) under the U.S. Department of Transportation released a brief statistical summary reporting the first ever analysis of drug involvement among deceased drivers in fatal crashes based on FARS data for 2005 through 2009 (NHTSA, 2010). In 2009, 21,978 drivers were killed in motor vehicle crashes nationwide, and 63 percent were tested for the presence of drugs. In the same year, 3,952 tested positive for drug involvement, representing 18 percent of all fatally injured drivers. This report begins with the NHTSA statistical summary of 2009 data and provides additional analysis to inform the drugged driving initiative as outlined in the National Drug Control Strategy. It is descriptive and is intended to lay a foundation for additional analysis. The report also highlights variability in the existing data, particularly between states, and identifies some areas for improving data reporting to permit more robust analysis of factors associated with druginvolved driving.