Advertisement

Ignition Interlock Laws: Effects on Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes, 1982–2013

Published:January 05, 2017DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.10.043

      Introduction

      Alcohol-involved motor vehicle crashes are a major cause of preventable mortality in the U.S., leading to more than 10,000 fatalities in 2013. Ignition interlocks, or alcohol-sensing devices connected to a vehicle’s ignition to prevent it from starting if a driver has a predetermined blood alcohol content (BAC) level, are a promising avenue for preventing alcohol-involved driving. This study sought to assess the effects of laws requiring ignition interlocks for some or all drunk driving offenders on alcohol-involved fatal crashes.

      Methods

      A multilevel modeling approach assessed the effects of state interlock laws on alcohol-involved fatal crashes in the U.S. from 1982 to 2013. Monthly data on alcohol-involved crashes in each of the 50 states was collected in 2014 from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis Reporting System. Random-intercept models accounted for between-state variation in alcohol-involved fatal crash rates and autocorrelation of within-state crash rates over time. Analysis was conducted in 2015.

      Results

      State laws requiring interlocks for all drunk driving offenders were associated with a 7% decrease in the rate of BAC >0.08 fatal crashes and an 8% decrease in the rate of BAC ≥0.15 fatal crashes, translating into an estimated 1,250 prevented BAC >0.08 fatal crashes. Laws requiring interlocks for segments of high-risk drunk driving offenders, such as repeat offenders, may reduce alcohol-involved fatal crashes after 2 years of implementation.

      Conclusions

      Ignition interlock laws reduce alcohol-involved fatal crashes. Increasing the spread of interlock laws that are mandatory for all offenders would have significant public health benefit.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Alcohol-impaired driving. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812102.pdf. Published 2014. Accessed March 9, 2016.

      2. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Statistical analysis of alcohol-related driving trends, 1982-2005. http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/30000/30200/30206/810942.pdf. Published 2008. Accessed March 9, 2016.

      3. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2020 report; People saving people: “on the road to a healthier future.” www.nhtsa.gov/nhtsa/whatis/planning/2020Report/2020report.html. Published 1997. Accessed March 9, 2016.

        • Wagenaar A.C.
        • Maybee R.G.
        • Sullivan K.P.
        Mandatory seat belt laws in eight states: a time-series evaluation.
        J Saf Res. 1988; 19: 51-70https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4375(88)90044-8
        • Shults R.A.
        • Elder R.W.
        • Sleet D.A.
        • et al.
        Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to reduce alcohol-impaired driving.
        Am J Prev Med. 2001; 21: 66-88https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(01)00381-6
      4. Alcohol Policy Information System. Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limits: youth (underage operators of noncommercial motor vehicles). http://alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov/Blood_Alcohol_Concentration_Limits_Youth_Underage_Operators_of_Noncommercial_Motor_Vehicles.html. Published 2016. Accessed March 21, 2016.

      5. Alcohol Policy Information System. Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limits: adult operators of noncommercial motor vehicles. http://alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov/Blood_Alcohol_Concentration_Limits_Adult_Operators_of_Noncommercial_Motor_Vehicles.html?tab=specificDate&date=1/1/2015&dateStart=1/1/2015&dateEnd=1/1/2015&onlyChanges=False. Published 2016. Accessed March 21, 2016.

        • Wagenaar A.C.
        • Maldonado‐Molina M.M.
        Effects of drivers’ license suspension policies on alcohol‐related crash involvement: long‐term follow‐up in forty‐six states.
        Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007; 31: 1399-1406https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2007.00441.x
        • McCartt A.T.
        • Geary L.L.
        • Berning A.
        Observational study of the extent of driving while suspended for alcohol impaired driving.
        Inj Prev. 2003; 9: 133-137https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.9.2.133
        • Knoebel K.Y.
        • Ross H.L.
        Effects of administrative license revocation on employment.
        Accid Anal Prev. 1997; 29: 595-611https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(97)00012-2
        • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
        Evaluation of state ignition interlock programs: interlock use analyses from 28 states, 2006-2011.
        U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC2015 (Report No.: DOT HS 812 145)
      6. United States Department of Transportation. Minimum penalties for repeat offenders for DWI or DUI. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Tea21/factsheets/n_164.htm. Accessed December 19, 2016.

        • Beck K.H.
        • Rauch W.J.
        • Baker E.A.
        • Williams A.F.
        Effects of ignition interlock license restrictions on drivers with multiple alcohol offenses: a randomized trial in Maryland.
        Am J Pub Health. 1999; 89: 1696-1700https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.89.11.1696
        • Willis C.
        • Lybrand S.
        • Bellamy N.
        Alcohol ignition interlock programmes for reducing drink driving recidivism.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004; : 4https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004168.pub2
        • Elder R.W.
        • Voas R.
        • Beirness D.
        • et al.
        Effectiveness of ignition interlocks for preventing alcohol-impaired driving and alcohol-related crashes: a Community Guide systematic review.
        Am J Prev Med. 2011; 40: 362-376https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2010.11.012
        • Roth R.
        • Voas R.
        • Marques P.
        Interlocks for first offenders: effective?.
        Traffic Inj Prev. 2007; 8: 346-352https://doi.org/10.1080/15389580701598559
        • Lahausse J.A.
        • Fildes B.N.
        Cost-benefit analysis of an alcohol ignition interlock for installation in all newly registered vehicles.
        Traffic Inj Prev. 2009; 10: 528-537https://doi.org/10.1080/15389580903173706
        • Coben J.H.
        • Larkin G.L.
        Effectiveness of ignition interlock devices in reducing drunk driving recidivism.
        Am J Prev Med. 1999; 16: 81-87https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00117-2
        • Casanova-Powell T.
        • Hedlund J.
        • Leaf W.
        • Tison J.
        Evaluation of state ignition interlock programs: interlock use analyses from 28 states, 2006-2011.
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; and Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Washington, DC2015 (Report No.: DOT HS 812 145)
        • Bjerre B.
        Primary and secondary prevention of drink driving by the use of alcolock device and program: Swedish experiences.
        Accident Anal Prev. 2005; 37: 1145-1152https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2005.06.020
        • DeYoung D.J.
        • Tashima H.N.
        • Masten S.V.
        An evaluation of the effectiveness of ignition interlock in California.
        California Department of Motor Vehicles, Research and Development Section, Sacramento, CA2004
        • Vezina L.
        The Quebec alcohol ignition interlock program: impact on recidivism and crashes.
        Paper presented: at Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, Montréal. 2002;
        • Kaufman E.J.
        • Wiebe D.J.
        A difference-in-difference analysis of the impact of state ignition interlock laws on alcohol-involved crash deaths.
        Am J Public Health. 2016; 106: 865-871https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303058
        • Warren-Kigenyi N.
        • Coleman H.
        Research Note: DWI recidivism in the United States: an examination of state-level driver data and the effect of look-back periods on recidivism prevalence.
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC2014 (Report No.: DOT HS 811 911)
        • Zador P.L.
        • Krawchuk S.A.
        • Moore B.
        Drinking and driving trips, stops by the police, and arrests: Analyses of the 1995 National Survey of Drinking and Driving Attitudes and Behavior.
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2000; (Report No.: DOT HS 809 184)
        • Brewer R.D.
        • Morris P.D.
        • Cole T.B.
        • Watkins S.
        • Patetta M.J.
        • Popkin C.
        The risk of dying in alcohol-related automobile crashes among habitual drunk drivers.
        New Engl J Med. 1994; 331: 513-517https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199408253310806
      7. Schulman-Laniel J, Vernick JS, McGinty EE, Frattaroli S, Rutkow L. State ignition interlock laws for alcohol impaired driving prevention: a 50 state survey and analysis. J Law Med Ethics. In Press.

      8. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). www.nhtsa.gov/Data/Fatality-Analysis-Reporting-System-(FARS). Published 2013.

        • Hingson R.
        • Heeren T.
        • Winter M.
        Effects of recent 0.08% legal blood alcohol limits on fatal crash involvement.
        Inj Prev. 2000; 6: 109-114https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.6.2.109
        • Wagenaar A.C.
        • O’Malley P.M.
        • LaFond C.
        Lowered legal blood alcohol limits for young drivers: effects on drinking, driving, and driving-after-drinking behaviors in 30 states.
        Am J Public Health. 2001; 91: 801https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.91.5.801
        • Rivara F.
        • Thompson D.
        • Cummings P.
        Effectiveness of primary and secondary enforced seat belt laws.
        Am J Prev Med. 1999; 16: 30-39https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00113-5
        • O’Malley P.M.
        • Wagenaar A.C.
        Effects of minimum drinking age laws on alcohol use, related behaviors and traffic crash involvement among American youth: 1976-1987.
        J Stud Alcohol. 1991; 52: 478-491https://doi.org/10.15288/jsa.1991.52.478
        • Wagenaar A.C.
        • Toomey T.L.
        Effects of minimum drinking age laws: review and analyses of the literature from 1960 to 2000.
        J Stud Alcohol. 2002; : 206-225https://doi.org/10.15288/jsas.2002.s14.206
        • Fell J.C.
        • Tippetts A.S.
        • Voas R.B.
        Fatal traffic crashes involving drinking drivers: what have we learned?.
        Ann Adv Automot Med. 2009; 53: 63-76
        • Wagenaar A.C.
        • Toomey T.L.
        • Lenk K.M.
        Environmental influences on young adult drinking.
        Alcohol Res Health. 2004; 28: 230-235
        • Kelly E.
        • Darke S.
        • Ross J.
        A review of drug use and driving: epidemiology, impairment, risk factors and risk perceptions.
        Drug Alcohol Rev. 2004; 23: 319-344https://doi.org/10.1080/09595230412331289482
        • Bernat D.H.
        • Dunsmuir W.T.
        • Wagenaar A.C.
        Effects of lowering the legal BAC to 0.08 on single-vehicle-nighttime fatal traffic crashes in 19 jurisdictions.
        Accid Anal Prev. 2004; 36: 1089-1097https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2004.04.001
        • Trust for America’s Health, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
        The Facts Hurt: A State-By-State Injury Prevention Policy Report.
        Trust for America’s Health, Washington, DC2013
        • DeYoung D.J.
        An evaluation of the implementation of ignition interlock in California.
        J Saf Res. 2002; 33: 473-482https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4375(02)00049-X
        • Marques P.R.
        • Voas R.B.
        • Roth R.
        • AS T.
        Evaluation of the New Mexico Ignition Interlock Program.
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC2009