Environmental Prevention Strategies to Reduce Hazardous Drinking and Impaired Driving: Experiences from Randomized Trials Mallie J. Paschall, Ph.D. Prevention Research Center, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation Oakland, CA
Studies Safer California Universities Alcohol Risk Management 14 cities Oregon Reducing Youth Access to Alcohol 36 communities CA Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) 24 cities Funded by NIAAA, SAMHSA
Common Goals Reduce Retail and Social Alcohol Availability to Underage Youth Reduce Hazardous Drinking Among Adolescents and Young Adults Reduce Drink-Driving Among Adolescents and Young Adults
Multi-Component Environmental Interventions Minor decoy and reward and reminder operations Party patrols and use of social host or response cost recovery ordinances Minor in possession enforcement RBS training and enforcement DUI sobriety checkpoints and saturation patrols Use of various types of media to increase awareness of alcohol problems, policies, and enforcement
Common Research Questions How do we get communities to do more evidencebased environmental interventions? Do multi-component environmental interventions have an effect on underage drinking, hazardous drinking and drink-driving? How does the community alcohol environment influence intervention implementation and effectiveness?
Buy-In and Cooperation Among Key Players in Each Community Alcohol prevention coordinators (county, city, or university) City government officials City and campus police departments Community-based organizations
Total Alcohol Problems per 1,000 Students, Fall 2007 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 21+ Under 21 600 400 200 0 Greek parties Dorm parties Campus events Off campus parties Bars/restaurants Outdoor settings
DUI and Riding with Drunk Driver Episodes per 1,000 Students, Fall 2007 100 90 80 70 60 50 21+ Under 21 40 30 20 10 0 Greek parties Dorm parties Campus events Off campus parties Bars/restaurants Outdoor settings
Percent Alcohol Sources Among Oregon 11th Graders Who Drank Alcohol in Past 30 Days, 2005 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Percent Perceived Ease of Obtaining Alcohol Among Oregon 11th Graders, 2005 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Very hard Sort of hard Sort of easy Very easy
Perceived Likelihood of Being Stopped by Police for Drinking and Driving Among Young Adults in 24 CA Cities (N = 1,857 drivers), 2012 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Very Likely Likely Unlikey Very Unlikely
Place of Last Drink Results from SPF SIG Intervention City, 2013 First-time DUI Offenders (N=300, 49% 18-25 yr olds) Repeat DUI Offenders (N=90, 18% 18-25 yr olds) Location Private Res. Vehicle Bar/Club Park/Beach Restaurant Other 127 29 85 5 39 13 Location Private Res. Vehicle Bar/Club Park/Beach Restaurant Other 29 9 35 2 11 3 42% 10% 28% 2% 13% 4% 32% 10% 39% 2% 12% 4%
Sample Workplan for SPF SIG Intervention City GOAL 3 Reduce Alcohol-Related Motor Vehicle Crashes ACTIVITY NUMBER PER YEAR RESPONSIBLE PARTY IMPLEMENTATION DATE Roadside DUI 4 SBPD Quarterly checkpoints Saturation patrols 4 SBPD Quarterly Media coverage of DUI enforcement Enforcement of Sales to Intoxicated Patrons (undercover operations) Visibility of Sales to Intoxicated Persons Enforcement 8 CADA, SBPD Quarterly 8 SBPD/ABC 8 CADA Quarterly
Types of Visibility in CA SPF SIG Study Radio PSAs Posters Flyers Signs on buses Letters to business owners and parents Marquees at schools re: DUI enforcement DUI checkpoints, mobile signs Neighborhood surveillance by police Bar visits by officers Press releases to local news media Social media (e.g., Nixle, Facebook)
Safer CA Universities Alcohol Risk Management (a) Drunk last time at off-campus party 0.5 0.49 0.48 0.47 0.46 0.45 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.41 0.4 0.39 0.38 Intervention Control 0.37 0.36 0.35 2003-04 2005-06 Survey years
Safer CA Universities Alcohol Risk Management (d) Drunk last time at any setting by intervention intensity 0.59 0.57 0.55 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.47 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.37 Control Low Medium High 0.35 2003-04 2005-06 Survey years
Safer CA Universities Alcohol Risk Management (e) DUI or RWDD related to off-campus party, by intervention intensity level 0.2 0.15 0.1 High Medium Low Control 0.05 2003-04 2005-06 Survey years
Rates for Successful Alcohol Purchase Attempts, Oregon RYAA
Oregon RYAA Intervention Effects by Enforcement Intensity Level (# Warnings/Citations) Any Alcohol Use Any Binge Drinking
Common Challenges Across Studies Establishing positive working relationships among key players (trust, coordination of enforcement and visibility) Local police departments under-staffed Some types of alcohol enforcement not viewed as important or worth the effort (e.g., party patrols, undercover operations) Media messages sometimes focused on health and safety more so than enforcement, were not coordinated with enforcement operations, and were not targeted to specific audiences
Change in Adolescent Heavy Drinking Prevalence by Comprehensiveness of Local Alcohol Policies in 50 California Cities Past Year Heavy Drinking 0.174 0.148 0.122 0.095 Low Policy comprehensiveness Moderate Policy comprehensiveness High Policy comprehensiveness 0.069 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Survey Wave
Change in Adolescent Alcohol Use Prevalence by Level of Adult Drinking in 50 California Cities 0.57 Low Level of Adult Alcohol Use Moderate Level of Adult Alcohol Use High Level of Adult Alcohol Use Past Year Alcohol Use 0.48 0.39 0.30 0.21 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Survey W ave
Conclusions Need to identify viable strategies to increase enforcement focusing on over-service of alcohol, DUI checkpoints and saturation patrols, hazardous alcohol use in private settings, and awareness/visibility of these enforcement activities Translational research is needed to determine how best to increase implementation these types of environmental interventions