School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, USA.
Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation - Prevention Research Center, Berkeley, USA.
Drug Alcohol Rev. 2022 Nov;41(7):1610-1620. doi: 10.1111/dar.13519. Epub 2022 Jul 27.
Policy enforcement is crucial to achieve impacts on alcohol-related harm. It is not clear what level of enforcement intensity or 'dosage' is necessary for addressing drink driving and related harms. Given competing enforcement demands and agencies' resource constraints, understanding how much enforcement is sufficient to deter drink driving is critical.
This systematic literature review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) guidelines to examine research about dosage effects of enforcement and related visibility on drink-driving outcomes, including motor vehicle crashes and fatalities. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Effective Practice and Organization of Care tool and the JBI checklist.
The 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria for this review differed in measures of enforcement dosage and outcomes, making it difficult to synthesise results across studies and draw conclusions about a threshold or optimal level of enforcement. Although most included studies found that sustained enforcement was associated with reductions in drink driving or related harms, only two studies tested an optimal dosage. Due to study design limitations, a substantial percentage of these studies must be considered with caution.
Additional research with rigorous study designs with appropriate controls is needed to determine an optimal high visibility enforcement dosage level to help law enforcement agencies make realistic decisions about allocating enforcement resources to address drink driving.
Consistent evidence about a drink-driving enforcement dosage threshold is lacking, partly due to an insufficient number of well-designed studies. Addressing challenges of conducting rigorous studies in community settings is crucial.
政策执行对于实现减少与酒精相关的伤害至关重要。目前尚不清楚为了减少酒后驾车及相关危害,需要实施多大强度或“剂量”的执法力度。鉴于竞争执法需求和机构资源限制,了解实施多少执法力度足以阻止酒后驾车行为至关重要。
本系统文献综述遵循系统评价和荟萃分析报告规范(PRISMA)指南,以检查关于执法力度和相关可见度对酒后驾车结果(包括机动车事故和死亡)的剂量效应的研究,包括酒后驾车行为。使用 Cochrane 协作有效实践和护理组织工具以及 JBI 清单评估偏倚风险。
这篇综述纳入的 21 项研究在执法力度和结果的衡量标准上存在差异,因此难以对研究结果进行综合,并得出关于执法力度阈值或最佳水平的结论。尽管大多数纳入的研究发现持续的执法与减少酒后驾车或相关危害有关,但只有两项研究测试了最佳剂量。由于研究设计的限制,这些研究中有相当大比例必须谨慎考虑。
需要进行更多具有严格研究设计和适当对照的研究,以确定最佳高可见度执法剂量水平,帮助执法机构就如何分配执法资源以解决酒后驾车问题做出切合实际的决策。
关于酒后驾车执法剂量阈值的一致证据不足,部分原因是缺乏精心设计的研究数量不足。解决在社区环境中进行严格研究的挑战至关重要。