Tiffini Diage University of Wisconsin, Madison

Objective

 Ignition Interlock Device (IID) sentencing, impact on Wisconsin motor vehicle crashes?

 IID locks out vehicle ignition ○ Breath sample >0.02% BAC ○ Rolling re-test required

WI Alcohol Related MVC’s, 2007

 17,847 people involved  Injuries - 4,190  Hospitalizations - 991  ED visits - 3199  Deaths - 331  50% were sober victims *CODES Data provided by Wayne Bigelow; Center for Health Systems Research and Analysis, University of Wisconsin – Madison

Proposed Wisconsin OWI Law

 Mandatory IID Sentencing Requirements  All repeat offenders (2 nd offense or more)  All 1 st time offenders with BAC > 0.15

 Offender pays $1,200 / device / year

Methods

 Literature review – current evidence  Experience from other states  Impact analysis using Wisconsin data

Databases Reviewed, 2007

FARS DUI Related Crashes Drivers w/ Prior DUI WI DOT 2007 DUI Convictions 1 st offense 2007 DUI Convictions 2 nd or repeat offense

FARS = Fatal Accident Reporting System WI DOT = Wisconsin Department of Transportation

Results

 Literature evidence  IID’s lower recidivism while device is installed (Risk Ratio 0.05 – 0.33)  Long-term effectiveness, uncertain  Experience from other states  New Mexico ○ 85% reduction in recidivism ○ 25% reduction in alcohol related crashes  California ○ Increase in non-alcohol related crashes with IID users compared on non-IID users

Wisconsin Data, 2007

 FARS – 142 fatal crashes  30 with prior DUI’s (21%)  27 were 1 st offense, 3 were 2 nd offense  CODES – 4,190 injuries  No information on priors or BAC  WI DOT - 40,260 DUI convictions  23,689 1 st offenders (58%)  16,571 2 nd – 13 th repeat offense (42%)

Findings

 Impact of IID law on WI public health?

 Interaction with few fatal cases from 2007  Large potential impact on repeat offenders  Low “in use” recidivism  Decrease drunk driving exposure  Reduction in risk of alcohol related crashes  Forward evaluation: IID data fields in CODES and FARS

Discussion/Considerations

 Political motivation vs. evidence based intervention  Ideology of policy based intervention?

 Punitive measure vs. prevention/treatment  Could IID compliment treatment approach?

 Proper evaluation is required for public health assessment  Effectiveness, unintended consequences  Data communication – i.e. sentencing, manufacturer, law enforcement

IID Data Motor Vehicle Crash Data

Acknowledgements

 Timothy E. Corden, MD  Steven Hargarten, MD  Injury Research Center staff  Sergeant William Brown, Milwaukee Co. Sheriffs OWI Task Force Leader  WI Department of Transportation staff  Wayne Bigelow; Center for Health Systems Research and Analysis, University of Wisconsin – Madison