• C A Soderstrom, J M Birschbach, and P C Dischinger.
• Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems, Baltimore 21201-1595.
• J Trauma. 1990 Oct 1;30(10):1208-13; discussion 1213-4.

AbstractThe culpability, crash-related traffic convictions, and pre- and post-crash driving records of a group of injured impaired (blood alcohol level greater than 80 mg/dl) drivers (N = 58) who were admitted to a Level I trauma center were compared with a group of admitted unimpaired drivers (N = 92). Both groups of drivers were 21 years of age or older, sustained moderate injuries (defined as having no injury of the brain, spinal column or cord, extremity, or pelvis with an Abbreviated Injury Score of greater than 2), and were discharged home. In the 140 crashes in which culpability was clearly defined, the impaired drivers caused a significantly greater percentage of their crashes (92.7%) compared to unimpaired (64.7%) drivers (p less than 0.001). Of the 55 unimpaired drivers who were considered culpable of causing their crashes, 12.7% received a traffic conviction compared with 39.2% of the 51 culpable impaired drivers. The mean number of total pre-crash traffic violations was higher for impaired drivers than for unimpaired drivers (p less than 0.01). While the mean number of total post-crash convictions for unimpaired and impaired was not significantly different, the mean number of pre- and post-crash alcohol convictions was significantly higher for impaired drivers compared to unimpaired drivers (p less than 0.02). The data suggest that injury protects from legal prosecution and does not alter impaired driving practices.

15 keywords...

hide…