Many states are moving toward legalization or decriminalization of drugs. Doing so creates a dilemma for transportation safety professionals who recognize that these actions will likely increase death and serious injury on the nation’s roads and highways. The unfortunate rise in drugged driving will require a shifting of infrastructure safety dollars to reduce fatal and serious crashes related to such things as lane departures, centerline crossings, and other high-severity crash types.
To assist transportation agencies, policies to deter driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) require sound scientific evidence for measuring and detecting drug prevalence. To deter drivers from DUID, the accurate screening and detection for drugs at the roadside is key. The use of oral fluid (OF) samples, the Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) observations, and the Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE) training are methodologies used to screen for DUID. However, these efforts also demand resources. Because the use of any resource has a cost, the optimal design, implementation, and use of policies should be guided by what is both scientifically and economically sound. Economic evaluations of policy alternatives should help decide which among them can reasonably be implemented by a given jurisdiction, which in turn will increase the implementation of DUID programs that lower crash potential for all concerned stakeholders and road users.
The overarching goal of this study is to assess and compare the costs required by drug detection approaches (ARIDE, DRE, and OF, either separately or combined) to achieve a target reduction in DUID outcomes. The study is being conducted in two phases. In Phase I, study feasibility is assessed by identifying the existence and availability of information and data. Phase II, which will occur conditional to the success of Phase I, will conduct the economic evaluation.
