Fatal Crashes from Drivers Testing Positive for Drugs in the U.S., 1993–2010

Wilson, Fernando A.; Stimpson, Jim P.; Pagán, José A.

doi:10.1177/003335491412900409

Cited by 50 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Δ 9 -THC has been shown to impair cognition, psychomotor function, and actual driving performance in a dose related manner. The degrees of impairment observed in laboratory or actual driving tests after doses up to 300 µg/kg Δ 9 -THC were comparable to the impairing effects of an alcohol dose producing a blood alcohol concentration ≥ 0,05g/dl [10][11][12]. Data on THC used as medical prescriptions are limited; only Stott et al described the single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics of THC/CBD oromucosal spray treatments on twelve subjects, whose received either single doses of THC/CBD spray as multiple sprays (from 5.4 mg THC and 5.0 mg CBD to 21.6 mg THC and 20.0 mg CBD).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 74%

The therapeutic use of cannabinoids: Forensic aspects

Indorato

Liberto

Ledda

et al. 2016

Forensic Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 74%

The therapeutic use of cannabinoids: Forensic aspects

Indorato

Liberto

Ledda

et al. 2016

Forensic Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Psychoactive prescription drugs are commonly and increasingly identified in the blood and urine samples of drug-impaired drivers (Bezemer et al, 2014;Burch et al, 2013;Christophersen and Mørland, 2008;Jones et al, 2009;Karjalainen et al, 2015;NBFM, 2014;Wilson et al, 2014). Because psychoactive drugs may impair driving ability, their users are at increased risk of traffic accidents (Dassanayake et al, 2011;Gustavsen et al, 2008;Hetland and Carr, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-prescribed use of psychoactive prescription drugs among drug-impaired drivers in Sweden

Tjäderborn

Jönsson

Sandström

et al. 2016

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To determine the prevalence of non-prescribed drug use among subjects suspected of drug-impaired driving with a confirmed intake of a psychoactive prescription drug, and to identify associated factors. Methods:Subjects investigated for drug-impaired driving in Sweden during 2006-2009 with a confirmed intake of diazepam, flunitrazepam, tramadol, zolpidem or zopiclone were identified using the Swedish Forensic Toxicology Database. Information on dispensed prescription drugs was retrieved from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register. Non-prescribed use was defined as a confirmed use of a psychoactive prescription drug intake confirmed by toxicological analysis in a subject by whom it was not dispensed in the 12 months preceding the sampling. Prevalence proportions were calculated for each drug and logistic regression was used to identify associated factors. Results: In total, 2225 subjects were included. The median age (range) was 34 (15-80) years and 1864 (83.8%) subjects were male. Non-prescribed use was found in 1513 subjects (58.7%); for flunitrazepam 103 (76.3%), diazepam 1098 (74.1%), tramadol 192 (40.3%), zopiclone 60 (29.7%), and zolpidem 60 (21.2%) subjects, respectively. Younger age and multiple-substance use were associated with nonprescribed use, whereas ongoing treatment with other psychoactive drugs was negatively associated with nonprescribed use. Conclusions: Non-prescribed use of psychoactive prescription drugs was common in subjects suspected of drug-impaired driving and was more frequent for benzodiazepines and tramadol compared to zolpidem and zopiclone. The young and multi-substance users were more likely, whereas subjects with ongoing prescribed treatment with other psychoactive drugs were less likely, to use non-prescribed drugs.

show abstract

“…Wilson et al ([2014]) found that 54.9% of marijuana-positive drivers in the United States had elevated BACs. Various studies have demonstrated that the combined use of marijuana and alcohol is associated with significantly greater cognitive impairment and crash risk than the use of one alone (Asbridge [2014]; Downey et al [2013]; Ramaekers et al [2004]; Sewell et al [2009]).…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Establishing legal limits for driving under the influence of marijuana

Wong

Brady

2014

Inj. Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marijuana has become the most commonly detected non-alcohol substance among drivers in the United States and Europe. Use of marijuana has been shown to impair driving performance and increase crash risk. Due to the lack of standardization in assessing marijuana-induced impairment and limitations of zero tolerance legislation, more jurisdictions are adopting per se laws by specifying a legal limit of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) at or above which drivers are prosecuted for driving under the influence of marijuana. This review examines major considerations when developing these threshold THC concentrations and specifics of legal THC limits for drivers adopted by different jurisdictions in the United States and other countries.

show abstract

Fatal Crashes from Drivers Testing Positive for Drugs in the U.S., 1993–2010

Cited by 50 publications

References 27 publications

The therapeutic use of cannabinoids: Forensic aspects

The therapeutic use of cannabinoids: Forensic aspects

Non-prescribed use of psychoactive prescription drugs among drug-impaired drivers in Sweden

Establishing legal limits for driving under the influence of marijuana

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About