Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among persons convicted of driving while impaired.

BACKGROUND: Large numbers of convicted drunk drivers are entering alcohol treatment programs, yet little information is available about their need for psychiatric treatment. This study of convicted drunk drivers estimates lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders (alcohol and drug abuse and dependence, major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and antisocial personality disorder) and compares rates with estimates from a US population-based survey. METHODS: Six hundred twelve women and 493 men, aged 23 to 54 years, convicted of driving while impaired, who had been referred to a screening program in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, were located and interviewed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule between January 25, 1994, and June 30, 1997. Psychiatric diagnoses were compared with findings from the National Comorbidity Survey for the western region of the United States, conducted between September 14, 1990, and February 6, 1992. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent of female and 91% of male offenders reported a lifetime alcohol-use disorder, compared with 22% and 44%, respectively, in the National Comorbidity Survey sample. Thirty-two percent of female and 38% of male offenders had a drug-use disorder, compared with 16% and 21%, respectively, in the National Comorbidity Survey sample. For offenders with alcohol-use disorders, 50% of women and 33% of men had at least 1 additional psychiatric disorder other than drug abuse or dependence, mainly posttraumatic stress disorder or major depression. CONCLUSION: Drunk-driving offenders need assessment and treatment services not only for alcohol problems but also for drug use and the other psychiatric disorders that commonly accompany alcohol-related problems.

Victim impact panels: do they impact drunk drivers? A follow-up of female and male, first-time and repeat offenders.

OBJECTIVE: To examine gender differences and re-arrest rates of first-time and repeat offenders following referral to Victim Impact Panels (VIPs). METHOD: Study participants (N = 6,702; 79% men) were first-time and repeat driving-while-impaired offenders who were referred to and completed a screening program in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, from 1989 to 1994. Whether subjects were mandated to attend a VIP was self-reported in a personal interview. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to test the effects of VIP referral and other predictors of recidivism. Separate models were developed for female and male first-time and repeat offenders. RESULTS: After controlling for multiple risk factors, VIP referral was not statistically associated with recidivism for female or male first offenders. However, female repeat offenders referred to VIPs were significantly more likely to be re-arrested compared with those not referred, with an odds of rearrest more than twice that of females not referred. CONCLUSIONS: Although many factors influence recidivism, this study raises the possibility that VIPs may have a negative impact on female repeat offenders.

Alcohol use inventory: screening and assessment of first-time driving-while-impaired offenders. II. Typology and predictive validity.

This study evaluated the use of Alcohol Use Inventory (AUI) for driving-while-impaired (DWI) screening, by determining whether DWI offenders (n = 1644), grouped according to their reported alcohol involvement on the AUI, would have different rates of recidivism in a 5-year follow-up. Cluster analysis using the six second-order scales produced six groups (clusters 1-6) described as the Low-Profile (50%), Alcohol-Preoccupation (14%), Enhanced (22%), Enhanced-Disrupt (9%), Anxious-Disrupt (3%), and High-Profile (1%) types. They were characterized by different sociodemographic profiles. Members of cluster 4 were associated with the highest DWI recidivism rate (40%), committing one or more further DWI, and clusters 5 and 6 were associated with the highest rate of committing two or more DWIs. Rates of subsequent traffic convictions and crashes were, however, not statistically different among the clusters. Predictors of DWI recidivism included male gender, young age, less-educated, high blood-alcohol concentration at arrest, and clusters of 3 and 4. Different typologies indicated that the needs for treatment might be different. Evaluators should keep in mind the strength of AUI, use risk factors identified in the study, and take measures of test-taking defensiveness to enhance overall predictive validity.

A multiple risk factor approach for predicting DWI recidivism.

A sample of DWI (driving while impaired) offenders was studied to compare various approaches for predicting reoffenses over a 4-year period. Logistic regression yielded multivariate predictor equations that were significant statistically, but were not helpful to clinicians in assessing risk for reoffending. As a different approach, five predictor variables that were consistently correlated with reoffense status were examined to determine the cut score at which the repeat offense rate exceeded the base rate. These were combined to yield the number of risk factors (from 0 to 5) for each offender. This method, used for the original and a hold-out sample, yields results as accurate as those derived from a logistic regression model that includes all the risk variables, and allows clinicians to classify offenders into low and high risk categories in a straightforward manner. Nearly half of offenders with four or five risk factors (age, years of education, arrest blood alcohol concentration (BAC), score on the receptive area scale of AUI and raw score on the MacAndrews scale of MMPI-2) were rearrested compared to the base rate (25%). However, this method is not sufficiently precise to accurately predict which individuals will and will not be rearrested. Although generalizability of specific algorithms across populations needs to be examined, this method appears promising as a clinically accessible way to classify, in a given offender population, those who are most likely to repeat the offense.

Victim impact panels: who is sentenced to attend? Does attendance affect recidivism of first-time DWI offenders?

BACKGROUND: Victim Impact Panels (VIPs) have been implemented widely in the United States by judges as a deterrent to drinking and driving, but there is little evidence of their utility in preventing recidivism. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to examine judges' referral patterns to the VIPs among a multiethnic population of convicted first-time driving while impaired (DWI) offenders and to compare 5-year recidivism rates of those mandated and not mandated to attend the VIP. METHODS: Study participants included 5,238 convicted first-time DWI offenders who were referred to a screening program in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, and who completed a personal interview with a master's-level counselor between April 1989 and October 1995. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate judges' preferences in mandating offenders to attend a VIP. The percent of subjects reoffending in the 5 years following their referral for screening was calculated by standard life-table analyses. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to test the effects of known independent predictors for recidivism. Separate models were developed for the entire population, non-Hispanic offenders, and Hispanic/Mexican national subgroups. RESULTS: Female judges who regularly adjudicated DWI offenders were more likely to refer offenders to a VIP. Judges were less likely to refer men and offenders with less than 12 years of education and an unknown arrest blood alcohol concentration (BAC), and of Hispanic/Mexican national or other race/ ethnicity. Judges were more likely to refer unmarried offenders to a VIP. After controlling for multiple risk factors, referral to VIP was not a strong predictor of recidivism in Hispanic and non-Hispanic ethnic groups, with 95% confidence limits ranging from 0.8 to 1.0, compared to those not referred. CONCLUSIONS: Female judges were more likely than male judges to refer offenders to a VIP, and referral patterns varied by offender characteristics. The VIP referral did not increase rearrest rates but lowered them marginally to not at all. This study should be followed up with a randomized design to control for referral patterns and to further define the impact of mandating offenders to the VIP.

Use of computer interview data to test associations between risk factors and pregnancy outcomes.

Computer interviews have been used in a variety of settings as a means of gathering data and providing health education information. The objective of this study was to determine whether data gathered from a computer interview have predictive validity in determining pregnancy outcomes. Pregnant women (N = 190) completed a computer-assisted interview to provide risk factor information. Medical records were reviewed to obtain prenatal and birth outcome information. Twenty-nine percent experienced prenatal complications and nearly half experienced problems related to labor and delivery. After known risk factors were controlled for, self-reported psychosocial problems, low social support, and substance abuse by the father were associated with pregnancy complications. An unbalanced diet and low social support were associated with lower infant birth weight. Findings suggest that data collected via computer interviews can provide useful risk factor screening information.

What every mental health professional should know about alcohol.

Mental health professionals are playing an increasing role in the treatment of alcohol problems. Yet many such professionals have had little specialized training in this area. This article presents a 50-item self-assessment quiz regarding basic knowledge that might be expected of professionals treating alcohol problems. Expanded answers are provided, along with normative data from samples of clinical psychology students and Ph.D. alumni. Students currently in training scored significantly higher on this quiz than did graduated clinical psychologists, reflecting in part a higher percentage of current psychology students receiving specific training in alcohol problems.