Cargando…
Twelve-Month Prevalence and Changes in Driving After Drinking: United States, 1991–1992 and 2001–2002
BACKGROUND: Drinking and driving has been identified as one of the most important contributors of motor vehicle fatalities. This paper addressed the existing gap in our public health knowledge regarding the current prevalence of driving after drinking and how this has changed over the past decade. M...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6527254/ |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Drinking and driving has been identified as one of the most important contributors of motor vehicle fatalities. This paper addressed the existing gap in our public health knowledge regarding the current prevalence of driving after drinking and how this has changed over the past decade. METHODS: Prevalence rates of drinking and driving in 2001–2002, and changes in those prevalence rates between 1991–1992 and 2001–2002, were examined in two large nationally representative surveys of the U.S. population. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of driving after drinking was 2.9 percent in 2001–2002, representing approximately six million U.S. adults. This rate was about three-quarters of the rate observed in 1991–1992 (3.7 percent), reflecting a 22-percent reduction. Generally, the male–female differentials in the rate of driving after drinking decreased over the past decade. However, the sex ratios increased substantially for underaged youth over the past decade, reflecting the sharp decrease in prevalence of driving after drinking among 18- to 20-year-old women. Constant and emerging subgroups at high risk for drinking and driving included Whites, Native Americans, males, underaged young adults, and 21- to 25-year-olds. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study highlighted the need to continue to monitor prevalence and changes in driving after drinking. Results are discussed in the context of strengthening existing prevention and intervention efforts and developing new programs with the sociodemographic differentials observed in this study in mind. |
---|