Citation

Thomas FD, Darrah J, Graham LA, Berning A, Blomberg RD, Finstad KA, Griggs C, Crandall M, Schulman CI, Kozar RA, Lai JT, Mohr NM, Chenoweth J, Cunningham KW, Babu KM, Dorfman JD, Van Heukelom J, Ehsani JP, Fell JC, Whitehill JM, Brown T, Moore C. NHTSA Office of Behavioral Safety Research. Washington, DC: US DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2022.

Affiliation

https://www.nhtsa.gov/

Copyright

(Copyright 2022, NHTSA Office of Behavioral Safety Research)

The full document is available online.

Abstract

Over the last few decades, interest in how drugs other than alcohol may be affecting roadway safety has increased. Studies conducted by NHTSA and others have provided substantial insights on the topic of drugged driving, but a gap in knowledge exists regarding drug prevalence among drivers and other road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists who are seriously or fatally injured in crashes in the United States. The current study sought to fill this gap by examining drug prevalence among a large sample (N = 7,279) of seriously injured roadway users presenting to seven selected trauma centers and fatally injured crash victims presenting directly to four medical examiners at selected sites. Overall, 55.8% of the injured or killed roadway users tested positive for one or more drugs (including alcohol) on this study's toxicology panel. The most prevalent drug category detected was cannabinoids (active THC) with 25.1% positive, followed by alcohol (23.1%), stimulants (10.8%), and opioids (9.3%). Overall, 19.9% of the roadway users tested positive for two or more categories of drugs. For drivers specifically, the results showed associations of drug positivity with age, sex, time of crash, and day of crash (weekday versus weekend). The results in this report provide a first look at drug prevalence among a large sample of seriously or fatally injured roadway users. This study's results can only be used to describe drug prevalence among the specific populations sampled and with full awareness of the study's limitations. The study results should not be used to imply impairment or increased risk associated with drug presence. Future similar research at these sites or others across the country could be used for monitoring changes in drugged driving over time and could inform traffic safety stakeholders to better tailor impaired driving countermeasures for particular regions or types of road users.


Keywords: cannabis impaired driving; ethanol impaired driving; alcohol, drugs, drivers, drugged driving, drug prevalence, injured road users, pedestrians, bicyclists, trauma