Siskind V
Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.
Accid Anal Prev. 1996 Jul;28(4):519-24. doi: 10.1016/0001-4575(96)00027-9.
A review was conducted of the subsequent driving records of over 25,000 Queensland drivers cited for a drink driving offence in 1988 who received at least one subsequent license restriction. The interval of follow-up was at least 3 years, average 3.9 years. Periods of driving disqualification were identified and, for each driver, the total amount of time during restricted and unrestricted driving was computed; the numbers of events, i.e. crashes and traffic offences, recorded during these periods were counted. Rates under disqualification and during legal driving, expressed per thousand person-years were derived by dividing total numbers of events by total time during which they could occur. Three categories of traffic violation were considered: drink driving offences; traffic offences unassociated with drink driving, and any offence involving driving. Since only 12% of the offenders and 9% of the reoffenders were female, detailed analyses are presented for men only; results for women were little different. Statistical inference assumed a Poisson model for crashes and a negative binomial model for offences, and analyses were performed after stratification by number of drink driving offences. Calculated rates during periods of disqualification were about one third of the rates during legal driving for crashes and all three categories of traffic offence, ranging from 25% in the case of unassociated offences to 35% for any driving offence. There were differences, some statistically significant, by age and between metropolitan, provincial city and rural regions of the State, but most were relatively minor. Drivers were apprehended more frequently earlier in the disqualification period than later. It is impossible from these data to distinguish between reduced driving levels and more cautious traffic behaviour during periods of license restriction. It is nonetheless clear that while such penalties are in operation, they substantially reduce the negative impact of convicted drink-drivers on the road. Unfortunately the data do not permit one to say whether or for how long the effect persists.
对1988年因酒驾被传唤且随后至少受到一次驾照限制的25000多名昆士兰司机的后续驾驶记录进行了审查。随访间隔至少为3年，平均为3.9年。确定了驾驶资格取消期，并计算了每位司机在受限和不受限驾驶期间的总时长；统计了这些期间记录的事故和交通违法事件数量。取消资格期间和合法驾驶期间的发生率（以每千人年为单位）通过将事件总数除以事件可能发生的总时长得出。考虑了三类交通违法行为：酒驾违法行为；与酒驾无关的交通违法行为，以及任何涉及驾驶的违法行为。由于只有12%的初犯者和9%的再犯者为女性，因此仅针对男性进行了详细分析；女性的结果差异不大。统计推断假设事故采用泊松模型，违法行为采用负二项式模型，并在按酒驾违法次数分层后进行分析。取消资格期间计算出的事故发生率以及所有三类交通违法行为的发生率约为合法驾驶期间的三分之一，与酒驾无关的违法行为发生率为25%，任何驾驶违法行为的发生率为35%。不同年龄以及该州大城市、省会城市和农村地区之间存在差异，有些差异具有统计学意义，但大多数差异相对较小。在取消资格期早期比后期更容易逮捕到司机。从这些数据中无法区分在驾照限制期间驾驶水平的降低和交通行为更加谨慎的情况。尽管如此，很明显，在实施此类处罚时，它们会大幅降低被定罪的酒驾司机对道路的负面影响。不幸的是，这些数据无法让人说明这种影响是否持续以及持续多久。
