Evaluation of a designated driver intervention to prevent alcohol-related road accidents in the clubs of Milan, Italy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20882/adicciones.220Keywords:
alcohol, blood alcohol concentration (BAC), designated driver, driving under the influence (DUI), evaluationAbstract
Objective. The present study is an evaluation of a designated driver intervention. The objectives were: (1) to verify the intervention assumption, which is that offering incentives, linked to a positive result of the breathalyser test (when leaving the club, leads to a decrease in the percentage of drivers leaving the club with a BAC above the legal limit; (2) to understand the reason why drivers take part in the intervention and assess whether the operation was effective in lowering the amount of alcohol consumed during the night; (3) to verify the assumption that there is a bias in the selection of designated drivers. Method: Pre-experimental research design with a control group and no pre-test. The two conditions of the independent variable were: presence or absence of the “Safe Driver” intervention. A group of drivers who took part in the intervention (DDs N=124) was compared with a group that did not (non-DDs N=139). Results. (1) DDs’ mean BAC was significantly lower than non-DDs’, but (2) the incentive motivated just 5% of DDs to drink less, and (3) there is a bias in the selection of DDs that present a lower drinking risk profile than non-DDs. Discussion. The effectiveness of the intervention doesn’t seem to be supported by strong evidence. The free-entrance incentive is not effective in motivating drivers to drink less. More research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of designated driver interventions where the bias in the selection of drivers has been removed, by, for example, using other incentives and to have a clear understanding of designated drivers’ risk profile.References
World Health Organization. Drinking and driving: a road safety manual for decision-makers and practitioners. Global Road Safety Partnership 2007.
ISTAT Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (IT). [Data on traffic accidents in Italy during the year 2006]. 2007. Italian.
Fornari L. Drink-driving and perceptions: a field survey in the recreational settings of Milano, Italy. Project UMG. Communication presented at Club Health 2008 conference. Ibiza, Spain, 23rd-25th June 2008.
Ditter SM, Elder RW, Shults RA, Sleet DA, Compton R, Nichols JL. Effectiveness of designated driver programs for reducing alcohol-impaired driving. A Systematic Review. Am J Prev Med 2005; 28: 281-87.
Boots K. The designated driver program: an outcome evaluation. Health Promot J Austr 1994; 4: 26-9.
Brigham T, Meier S, Goodner V. Increasing designated driving with a program of prompts and incentives. J Appl Behav Anal 1995; 28: 83–94.
Meier S, Brigham T, Gilbert B. Analyzing methods for increasing designated driving. J Prev Intervention Community 1998; 17:1-14.
Winsten J. Promoting designated drivers: the Harvard Alcohol Project. Am J Prev Med 1994; 10: 11-4.
Timmerman M, Geller E, Glindemann K, Fournier A. Do the designated drivers of college students stay sober? J Safety Res 2003; 34: 127-33.
Campbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally; 1963.
Caudill BD, Harding WM, Moore BA. At-risk drivers use safe ride
services to avoid drinking and driving. J Subst Abuse 2000; 11:149-59.
Kelly E, Darke S, Ross J. A review of drug use and driving: epidemiology, impairment, risk factors and risk perceptions. Drug Alcohol Rev 2004; 23:319-44.
Aspler R, Hardin W, Goldfein J. The review and assessment of designated driver programs as an alcohol countermeasure approach, Washington DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1987.
DeJong W, Wallack L. The role of designated driver programs in the prevention of alcohol-impaired driving: a critical reassessment. Health Educ Q 1992; 19: 429–42.
