Prescription medication usage and crash culpability in a population of injured drivers.

Patricia Dischinger, Jingyi Li, Gordon S Smith, Shiu Ho, Kimberly Auman, Dawn Shojai
{"title":"Prescription medication usage and crash culpability in a population of injured drivers.","authors":"Patricia Dischinger,&nbsp;Jingyi Li,&nbsp;Gordon S Smith,&nbsp;Shiu Ho,&nbsp;Kimberly Auman,&nbsp;Dawn Shojai","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Unlabelled: </strong>There has been increasing concern regarding the role of prescription drug use in the causation of traffic crashes. The goal of this research is to describe the prevalence of prescription drug use among injured trauma patients and determine the association between classes of drugs and crash culpability, a surrogate measure of crash risk.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient records, including chronic medication usage, for all drivers admitted to a trauma center following a traffic collision in 2008 (N=1,558) were linked with police crash reports to determine crash culpability. Multivariable analyses explored the association between medication use and crash culpability among non-drinking drivers. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were compared among drivers who were and were not using central nervous system (CNS)-acting medications (single and multiple).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>61.5% of all drivers were using any medications and usage increased with age, as did numbers of prescriptions per driver. Logistic regression analyses revealed that drivers who used CNS medications had an increased risk of culpability; those on more than one such medication had a crude (unadjusted) odds ratio of 2.16 for having caused the crash. Among drivers less than 45 years old, CNS medications did not significantly increase the risk of crash culpability. However, among drivers aged 45 or greater, the odds ratios for one, two, or 2+ CNS medications vs. none increased dramatically from 1.89 to 4.23 to 7.99, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results suggest that special attention should be given to older drivers (45+) using two or more CNS-acting agents.</p>","PeriodicalId":87875,"journal":{"name":"Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference","volume":"55 ","pages":"207-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3256838/pdf/file082final.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unlabelled: There has been increasing concern regarding the role of prescription drug use in the causation of traffic crashes. The goal of this research is to describe the prevalence of prescription drug use among injured trauma patients and determine the association between classes of drugs and crash culpability, a surrogate measure of crash risk.

Methods: Patient records, including chronic medication usage, for all drivers admitted to a trauma center following a traffic collision in 2008 (N=1,558) were linked with police crash reports to determine crash culpability. Multivariable analyses explored the association between medication use and crash culpability among non-drinking drivers. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were compared among drivers who were and were not using central nervous system (CNS)-acting medications (single and multiple).

Results: 61.5% of all drivers were using any medications and usage increased with age, as did numbers of prescriptions per driver. Logistic regression analyses revealed that drivers who used CNS medications had an increased risk of culpability; those on more than one such medication had a crude (unadjusted) odds ratio of 2.16 for having caused the crash. Among drivers less than 45 years old, CNS medications did not significantly increase the risk of crash culpability. However, among drivers aged 45 or greater, the odds ratios for one, two, or 2+ CNS medications vs. none increased dramatically from 1.89 to 4.23 to 7.99, respectively.

Conclusions: These results suggest that special attention should be given to older drivers (45+) using two or more CNS-acting agents.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在受伤司机人群中处方药的使用和车祸的罪责。
未标注:人们越来越关注处方药在导致交通事故中的作用。本研究的目的是描述在受伤的创伤患者中处方药使用的流行程度,并确定药物类别和碰撞罪责之间的关系,碰撞风险的替代措施。方法:将2008年交通事故后入院创伤中心的所有司机(N= 1558)的患者记录,包括慢性药物使用情况,与警方的事故报告联系起来,以确定事故的罪责。多变量分析探讨了非酒驾者用药与车祸罪责之间的关系。比较了使用和未使用中枢神经系统(CNS)作用药物(单一和多种)的驾驶员的校正优势比和95%置信区间。结果:61.5%的司机正在使用任何药物,使用量随着年龄的增长而增加,每个司机的处方数量也在增加。Logistic回归分析显示,使用中枢神经系统药物的司机罪责风险增加;那些服用一种以上此类药物的人导致坠机的粗略(未经调整的)优势比为2.16。在45岁以下的司机中,中枢神经系统药物并没有显著增加车祸的罪责风险。然而,在45岁或以上的司机中,服用一种、两种或2+ CNS药物与不服用药物的比值比分别从1.89急剧增加到4.23到7.99。结论:这些结果表明,应特别注意年龄较大的司机(45岁以上)使用两种或两种以上的中枢神经系统药物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Visual and cognitive distraction metrics in the age of the smart phone: A basic review. Dynamics of Driver Distraction: The process of engaging and disengaging. Modeling situation awareness and crash risk. An opportunity for convergence? Understanding the prevalence and risk of distracted driving through the use of crash databases, crash investigations, and other approaches. Estimates of prevalence and risk associated with inattention and distraction based upon in situ naturalistic data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1