Malhotra Neha, Starkey Nicola J, Charlton Samuel G
Transport Research Group, School of Psychology, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Transport Research Group, School of Psychology, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Sep;106:44-52. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.05.011. Epub 2017 May 29.
This study explored the patterns of drug driving in New Zealand by investigating 1) drivers' perceptions about impairment caused by legal and illegal drugs 2) countermeasures employed by drivers when under the influence of drugs (e.g., decisions not to drive) 3) drivers' attitudes about police enforcement of drug driving and 4) the factors that predict the likelihood of engaging in drug driving. Participants (n=434) were licensed drivers who completed an online questionnaire. Results of the questionnaire indicated that drivers rated hallucinogens and opiates as being the illegal drugs producing the highest level of driving impairment and cannabis the lowest. For legal drugs, sedatives were rated as having the highest driving impairment and anti-nausea and anti-depressants the lowest. Respondents' drug use history had an effect on their ratings of impairment for anti-anxiety drugs, anti-depressants, kava, sedatives, cannabis and hallucinogens such that drug users reported higher impairment ratings than Non-user. Making a decision not to drive after taking drugs was reported by users of alcohol (73.6%), cannabis (57.0%), strong painkillers (42.5%), and anti-depressants (10.0%). Respondents who reported drink driving were 3.26 times more likely to report drug driving than those reporting no drink driving. Respondents also showed greater acceptance towards driving under the influence of legal drugs (43.5%) compared to illegal drugs (10.3%). Those who did not have favourable attitudes about drug driving were less likely to report having driven under the influence of drugs. Drivers in this sample were less aware of the potential negative effects of legal drugs on driving compared to illegal drugs. More than half the respondents from this study acknowledged drug driving as a road safety issue which needs more resources dedicated to it.
本研究通过调查以下方面，探索了新西兰的药物驾驶模式：1）驾驶员对合法和非法药物造成的驾驶能力受损的认知；2）驾驶员在药物影响下采取的应对措施（例如，决定不开车）；3）驾驶员对警方打击药物驾驶执法的态度；4）预测药物驾驶可能性的因素。参与者（n = 434）为持有驾照的驾驶员，他们完成了一份在线问卷。问卷结果表明，驾驶员将致幻剂和阿片类药物列为造成驾驶能力受损程度最高的非法药物，而大麻的影响程度最低。对于合法药物，镇静剂被评为造成驾驶能力受损程度最高，抗恶心药和抗抑郁药的影响程度最低。受访者的用药史对他们对抗焦虑药、抗抑郁药、卡瓦、镇静剂、大麻和致幻剂的受损程度评级有影响，吸毒者报告的受损程度评级高于非吸毒者。饮酒者（73.6%）、大麻使用者（57.0%）、强效止痛药使用者（42.5%）和抗抑郁药使用者（10.0%）报告称在服药后决定不开车。报告有酒后驾驶行为的受访者报告药物驾驶的可能性是未报告酒后驾驶行为受访者的3.26倍。受访者对在合法药物影响下驾驶的接受度（43.5%）也高于在非法药物影响下驾驶的接受度（10.3%）。那些对药物驾驶持不赞成态度 的人报告在药物影响下驾驶的可能性较小。与非法药物相比，该样本中的驾驶员对合法药物对驾驶潜在负面影响的认知较少。该研究中超过一半的受访者承认药物驾驶是一个道路安全问题，需要投入更多资源加以解决。
