Lapham Sandra C, C'de Baca Janet, Lapidus Jodi, McMillan Garnett P
Behavioral Health Research Center of the Southwest, Albuquerque, NM 87102, USA.
Addiction. 2007 Oct;102(10):1618-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01967.x.
This study, conducted within a driving under the influence (DUI) court intervention, evaluated the degree to which removing electronic monitoring (EM) and/or mandatory vehicle sales requirements increased rates of post-sentence traffic violations among repeat DUI offenders.
Randomized trial.
A total of 477 repeat DUI offenders entering the Driving under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII) Intensive Supervision Program (DISP), Multnomah County, Oregon.
Subjects were randomized into four intervention groups. Group 1: standard DISP with EM and vehicle sales requirements; group 2: standard DISP with mandatory vehicle sale, but without EM; group 3: standard DISP with EM, but without mandatory vehicle sale; and group 4: standard DISP without EM or mandated vehicle sale. Standard DISP includes treatment for alcohol abuse and dependence, polygraph testing, regular court appearances, and probation or court-based monitoring.
The risk of re-arrest for traffic violations was compared among the four groups using hazard ratio estimates from complementary log-log regression models.
Compared with group 1, subjects in group 2 initially had increased re-arrest risks, but this effect dissipated within 3 years of entering DISP. Group 3 subjects had a 96% increase in re-arrest rates. Group 4 subjects had smaller increased risks than predicted, with re-arrest rates similar to those of group 1 at the end of the follow-up period.
Although some of the findings suggest that mandatory vehicle sales may deter future traffic violations, inconsistent results across groups make this finding equivocal. Positive effects of EM, while large in the short term, appear to have a relatively small long-term value in reducing traffic arrest rates.
本研究在酒驾法庭干预措施范围内开展,评估取消电子监控和/或强制车辆销售要求对再次酒驾违法者判决后交通违规率的影响程度。
随机试验。
俄勒冈州马尔特诺马县共有477名再次酒驾违法者进入醉酒驾驶强化监管项目(DISP)。
将受试者随机分为四个干预组。第一组:接受带有电子监控和车辆销售要求的标准DISP;第二组:接受带有强制车辆销售要求但无电子监控的标准DISP;第三组:接受带有电子监控但无强制车辆销售要求的标准DISP;第四组:接受既无电子监控也无强制车辆销售要求的标准DISP。标准DISP包括酗酒和酒精依赖治疗、测谎测试、定期出庭以及缓刑或法庭监管。
使用互补对数-对数回归模型的风险比估计值,比较四组之间再次因交通违规被捕的风险。
与第一组相比,第二组受试者最初的再次被捕风险增加,但在进入DISP后3年内这种影响消失。第三组受试者的再次被捕率增加了96%。第四组受试者的风险增加幅度小于预期,随访期结束时再次被捕率与第一组相似。
尽管一些研究结果表明强制车辆销售可能会威慑未来的交通违规行为,但各组结果不一致,这一结论并不明确。电子监控的积极效果虽然在短期内很大,但在降低交通逮捕率方面的长期价值似乎相对较小。