Sampling Procedures and Survey Methodologies for the 1996 Survey with Comparisons to Earlier National Roadside Surveys

Self Cite

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...

Section: Survey Sampling Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

2007 National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use by Drivers: Drug Results

Lacey¹,

Kelley-Baker²,

Furr‐Holden³

et al. 2009

Self Cite

“…All three prior national roadside surveys limited the area of coverage to the 48 contiguous States. All three surveys were conducted between 10 p.m. and midnight, and between 1 a.m. and 3 a.m. on both Friday and Saturday nights, when heavy drinking was most likely to occur and alcohol-involved crashes were most frequent (Lestina, Greene, Voas, & Wells, 1999). From a practical standpoint, these national surveys had to limit survey locations to roadways with sufficient traffic to provide enough interviews to justify the expense of employing a survey crew.…”

Section: Survey Sampling Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Generally, the basic sampling plan of the 2007 study mirrored that of the 1996 survey (see Lestina et al, 1999). However, the 1996 survey collected data from the 24 Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) from NHTSA's National Automotive Sampling System/Crashworthiness Data System 2 (NASS/CDS), whereas the 2007 study used the 60 PSUs from NHTSA's larger National Automotive Sampling System/General Estimates System (NASS/GES) (NHTSA, 1991), which provides a more comprehensive sample of the continental United States.…”

Section: Survey Sampling Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

2007 National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use by Drivers: Methodology

Lacey¹,

Kelley-Baker²,

Furr‐Holden³

et al. 2009

114

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.

“…Counties with a population of less than 20,000 were not sampled, and in counties with larger populations, roadways with average daily traffic below 2,000 were excluded from the surveys (for details, see Lestina et al, 1999). Drivers were selected for interviews and breath tests using a geographically stratified multi-stage cluster sample.…”

Section: Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative risk of fatal crash involvement by BAC, age, and gender

Zador¹,

Krawchuk²,

Voas³

2000

Objective: To re-examine and refine estimates for alcohol-related relative risk of driver involvement in fatal crashes by age and gender as a function of BAC using recent data.Methods: Logistic regression was used to estimate age/sex specific relative risk of fatal crash involvement as a function of the BAC of fatally injured and surviving drivers by combining crash data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System with exposure data from the 1996 National Roadside Survey of Drivers. Results In general, the relative risk of involvement in a fatal passenger vehicle crash increased steadily with increasing driver BAC in every age/sex group among both fatally injured and surviving drivers. A .02 percentage point BAC increase among 16-20 year old male drivers was estimated to more than double the relative risk of fatal single vehicle crash injury. At the midpoint of the .08-.10 BAC range, the relative risk of a fatal single-vehicle crash injury varied between 11.4 (drivers 35 and older) and 51.9 (male drivers, 16-20). With few exceptions, older drivers had lower risk of being fatally injured in a single vehicle crash than younger driversand females were at lower risk than comparable males. Conc/usionrThis is the first study that systematically estimated relative risk for drinking drivers with BACs between .08% and .10% (these relative risk estimates apply to BAC range mid-points at.09%). The results clearly show that drivers at non-zero BACs somewhat below.10% pose substantially elevated risk both to themselves and to other road users.