Amy Berning served as the project Contracting Officer's Technical Representative. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) provided funding and support for the assessment of alcohol use disorders. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) provided funding for the assessment of drug use disorders. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) provided support for querying participants about intervention with the Criminal Justice System. AbstractThis report describes the methodology for the 2007 U.S. national field study to estimate the prevalence of alcohol-, drug-, and alcohol-and-drug-involved driving, primarily among nighttime weekend drivers, but also daytime Friday drivers. This study involved randomly stopping drivers at 300 locations across the continental United States; sites were selected through a stratified random sampling procedure. Data were collected during a 2-hour Friday daytime session at 60 locations, and during four 2-hour nighttime periods (10 p.m. to midnight and 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. on both Friday and Saturday nights) at 240 locations. Both self-report and biological measures were taken. An objective was to obtain at least 7,500 oral fluid samples for analysis. Biological measures included breath alcohol measurements on 9,413 respondents, oral fluid samples from 7,719 respondents, and blood samples from 3,276 respondents. Oral fluid and blood samples were subjected to laboratory screening and LC/MS-MS and GC/MS confirmation respectively for both alcohol and 20 categories of drugs. These data are being analyzed to develop the first national prevalence estimate of alcohol-and drug-involved driving. This first report describes the field methods used to conduct this study, including data collection procedures. Overall response rates are also presented. Two other reports will present the results of the data collection and analyses; one will focus on alcohol use prevalence estimates among drivers and compare them with previous National Roadside Surveys conducted in 1973, 1986, and 1996; the other report will provide drug use prevalence estimates among drivers. AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to acknowledge the extensive assistance we received from State and local officials in the conduct of this project. Our data collection procedures were not routine by any means and the willingness of State officials to help us identify local police agencies and the agencies' willingness to participate in the project were essential to our success.

Amy Berning served as the project's Contracting Officer's Technical Representative. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) provided funding and support for the assessment of alcohol use disorders. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) provided funding for the collection of additional blood samples and the administration of the drug use disorders assessment. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) provided support for querying participants about interaction with the criminal justice system. AbstractThis report presents the first national prevalence estimates for drug-involved driving derived from the recently completed 2007 National Roadside Survey (NRS). The NRS is a national field survey of alcohol-and drug-involved driving conducted primarily among nighttime weekend drivers, but also daytime Friday drivers. The survey involved randomly stopping drivers at 300 locations across the continental United States; sites were selected through a stratified random sampling procedure. This included data that we collected during a two-hour Friday daytime session at 60 locations and during four 2-hour nighttime periods (10 p.m. to midnight and 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. on both Friday and Saturday) at 240 locations. Both self-report and biological measures were taken. Biological measures included breath alcohol measurements on 9,413 respondents, oral fluid from 7,719 respondents, and blood samples from 3,276 respondents. Oral fluid and blood samples were subjected to laboratory screening and LC/MS-MS and GC/MS confirmation for 75 drugs and metabolites, including illegal, prescription, and over-the-counter drugs. These data were analyzed to develop the first national prevalence estimate of alcohol-and drug-involved driving. Two prior reports on the 2007 NRS described: (1) the sampling plan and data collection methodology, summarizing the response patterns to the various stages of the multi-part survey; and (2) the prevalence estimates for alcohol-involved driving derived from the study, and comparing them with the three previous National Roadside Surveys (NRS). iii AcknowledgementsThe authors received extensive assistance from State and local officials in the conduct of this project. Our data collection procedures were not routine. The willingness of officials to help us identify cooperating local law enforcement agencies and the willingness of agencies to participate in the project were essential to our success. To all those who helped in conducting this study, the authors express their sincere gratitude. ) which presents the prevalence estimates for alcohol-involved driving derived from the study, and compares those estimates with data from the three previous National Roadside Surveys. MethodologyThree prior national roadside surveys of drivers to estimate prevalence of drinking and driving and determine changes over time have been conducted in the United States. These surveys, which included a brief interview and a breath sample to determine blood alcohol concentration (BAC), were conducted on a s...

Amy Berning served as the project's Contracting Officer's Technical Representative. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) provided funding and support for the assessment of alcohol use disorders. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) provided funding for collection of additional blood samples and the administration of the drug use disorders assessment. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) provided support for querying participants about interaction with the Criminal Justice System. AbstractThis report presents the prevalence estimates for alcohol-involved driving derived from the recently completed U.S. national field survey of alcohol-and drug-involved driving (primarily of nighttime weekend drivers, but also daytime Friday drivers) and compares those estimates with the three previous National Roadside Surveys. This survey involved randomly stopping drivers at 300 locations across the 48 contiguous United States. Data were collected during 2-hour Friday daytime sessions (9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. or 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.) at 60 locations and during four 2-hour nighttime periods (10 p.m. to midnight and 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays) at 240 locations. Both self-report and biological measures were taken. Biological measures included breath-alcohol measurements on 9,413 respondents, oral fluid samples from 7,719 respondents, and blood samples from 3,276 respondents. A prior report described the sampling plan and data collection methodology and summarized the response patterns to the various stages of the multipart survey. A third report, based on analyses of the oral fluid and blood specimens collected, will present the first national prevalence estimate of drug-involved driving and of alcohol-plus-drug-involved driving. This report focuses on the alcohol breath-test results and how they relate to previous national surveys. It also summarizes response patterns to survey questions and to an alcohol-use-disorder-screening instrument. The data indicate a continuing trend over the past three decades of fewer alcohol-involved drivers on the Nation's roads during weekend nights.

Background-Drug-impaired driving has received increased attention resulting from development of rapid drug-screening procedures used by police and state laws establishing per se limits for drug levels in drivers. Venues that host electronic music dance events (EMDEs) provide a unique opportunity to assess drug-impaired driving among a high proportion of young adult drug users. EMDEs are late-night dance parties marked by a substantial number of young adult attendees and elevated drug involvement. No studies to date have examined drug-impaired driving in a natural environment with active drug and alcohol users. Methods-SixEMDEs were sampled in San Diego, California, and Baltimore, Maryland. A random sample of approximately 40 attendees per event were administered surveys about alcohol and other drug (AOD) use and driving status, given breath tests for alcohol, and asked to provide oral fluid samples to test for illicit drug use upon entering and exiting the events.Results-Driving status reduced the level of alcohol use (including abstaining) but the impact on drug-taking was not significant. However, 62% of individuals who reported their intention to drive away from the events were positive for drugs or alcohol upon leaving. This suggests that these events and settings are appropriate ones for developing interventions for reducing risks for young adults.

Background Various national surveys suggest that cannabis use is rising nationally, and many States have passed legislation that has potential to increase usage even further. This presents a problem for public roadways, as research suggests that cannabis impairs driving ability. Methods Anonymous oral fluid samples and breath tests were obtained from more than 900 weekend nighttime drivers randomly sampled from six jurisdictions in California. Oral fluid samples were assayed for the presence of Schedule I drugs. Drivers also completed information on self-reported drug use and possession of a medical cannabis permit. Data from the 2007 National Roadside Survey (collected using comparable methods) were used as a comparison. Results Using the 2010 data, a total of 14.4% of weekend nighttime drivers tested positive for illegal drugs, with 8.5% testing positive for delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). THC-positive rates varied considerably among jurisdictions, from a low of 4.3% in Fresno to a high of 18.3% in Eureka. A comparison with the 2007 NRS data found an increase in THC-positive drivers in 2010, but no increase in illegal drugs other than cannabis. Drivers who reported having a medical cannabis permit were significantly more likely to test positive for THC. Conclusions Cannabis-involved driving has increased in California since 2007. Nearly 1-in-10 weekend, nighttime drivers tested positive for THC, and in some jurisdictions, the rate was nearly 1-in-5. The possible contribution of cannabis legislation, such as decriminalization and medical cannabis usage, is discussed.

Men have long held the lead in motor-vehicle crashes. However, recent research from a variety of countries indicates that women are closing the gap. The relative increase in females involved in crashes has been associated with an increase in crash exposure. But is it simply that there are more women driving that is causing this increase? Or are there other mediating factors? The main goal of this research effort was to shed some light on this controversy. We found evidence that most of the observed increase in female drivers' fatalities was due to a parallel increase in female driving exposure but that some groups of female drivers (mainly underage female drivers) have become more vulnerable to some risk-taking driving behaviors than others.

Small rural communities can safely and effectively conduct low-staff sobriety checkpoints on a weekly basis. Such programs can be expected to result in large reductions in drivers operating at higher BACs.

This article describes the methodology used in the 2007 U.S. National Roadside Survey to estimate the prevalence of alcohol- and drug-impaired driving and alcohol- and drug-involved driving. This study involved randomly stopping drivers at 300 locations across the 48 continental U.S. states at sites selected through a stratified random sampling procedure. Data were collected during a 2-hour Friday daytime session at 60 locations and during 2-hour nighttime weekend periods at 240 locations. Both self-report and biological measures were taken. Biological measures included breath alcohol measurements from 9,413 respondents, oral fluid samples from 7,719 respondents, and blood samples from 3,276 respondents.