Journals / Adli Tıp Bülteni / 2019 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 2

The Evaluation of Driver Behaviors and Skills Relation with Consumption of Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Medicine in Professional Drivers

Profesyonel Araç Sürücülerinde Sürücü Davranışları ve Becerileri ile Alkol, Madde ve İlaç Kullanımının Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
100–107
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results of our study showed that drug abuse tests providing a forensic evidence in the workplace and traffic environment are important and needed to be actively applied.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Driver behavior and skills are among the main factors that constitute the risk of acci-dents in traffic.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of the study was to investigate the frequency of alcohol, drug abuse and medicine use in professional drivers and to evaluate the relationship between these substances and driver behavior and skills.Materials and Methods: The study was performed with 90 professional drivers working in 4 different town of İzmir. questionnaire form, Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND), CAGE Alcohol Screening Test, Driver Behavior Scale (DBS) and Driving Skills Scale (DSS) were applied to drivers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results of our study showed that drug abuse tests providing a forensic evidence in the workplace and traffic environment are important and needed to be actively applied.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Driver behavior and skills are among the main factors that constitute the risk of acci-dents in traffic. Driving behavior under the influence of alcohol and drug abuse is an important traffic problem that causes deaths, pecuniary damage and injuries. The aim of the study was to investigate the frequency of alcohol, drug abuse and medicine use in professional drivers and to evaluate the relationship between these substances and driver behavior and skills.Materials and Methods: The study was performed with 90 professional drivers working in 4 different town of İzmir. questionnaire form, Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND), CAGE Alcohol Screening Test, Driver Behavior Scale (DBS) and Driving Skills Scale (DSS) were applied to drivers. The data were analyzed statistically with SPSS 18.0 (p <0.05 significance level).Results: Drivers were between the ages of 20-67 and the average age was 42,9 ± 12,7 years. 46,7% of them have been professional drivers for more than 20 years. The majority of drivers used cigarettes (57,8%) and alcohol (63,3%). The reported substances and drugs use percentage from driv-ers were 55,6% painkillers to increase their attention and/or alertness in traffic, 12,2% tranquilizers, 1,1% steroids, 20% cannabis, 3,3% amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS), 2,2 % synthetic cannabis at least once through their life-time. Significant differences were found between alcohol and cannabis use and errors, rule violations and the ability to safe driving.Conclusion: It will be useful to consider driving behavior well-rounded with psychological, psychiatric and forensic toxicological aspects. The results of our study showed that drug abuse tests providing a forensic evidence in the workplace and traffic environment are important and needed to be actively applied.

Özet

Amaç: Sürücü davranışları ve sürücülük becerileri, trafikte kaza riskini oluşturan ana unsurlar arasında yer almaktadır. Alkol ve madde etkisi altında araç kullanma davranışı; ölümlere, maddi hasarlara ve yaralanmalara neden olan önemli bir trafik sorunudur. Bu çalışmada; profesyonel araç sürücülerinde alkol, madde ve ilaç kullanımı sıklığının araştırılarak, bu maddeler ile sürücü davranış ve becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma İzmir ilinin 4 farklı ilçesinde çalışan 90 profesyonel araç sürücüsü ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sürücülere sosyo-demografik ve madde kullanımına ilişkin soruların yer al-dığı anket formu, Fagerström Nikotin Bağımlılık Testi (FNBT), CAGE Alkol Tarama Testi, Sürücü Davranışları Ölçeği (SDÖ) ve Sürücülük Becerisi Ölçeği (SBÖ) uygulanmıştır. Veriler istatiksel ola-rak SPSS 18.0 programı ile analiz edilmiştir (p<0,05 anlamlılık düzeyi).Bulgular: Sürücüler 20-67 yaşları arasında olup yaş ortalaması 42,9± 12,7’dir. Sürücülerin %46,7’si 20 yıldan fazla süredir profesyonel araç sürücüsüdür. Sürücülerin çoğunluğunda sigara (%57,8) ve alkol (%63,3) kullanımı vardır. Sürücülerin %55,6’sı trafikte dikkatini arttırmak ve/veya uyanık kalmak amacıyla yaşam boyu en az bir kez ağrı kesici, %12,2’si sakinleştirici ilaç, %1,1’i steroid, %20’si esrar, %3,3’ü amfetamin tipi stimülanlar (ATS), %2,2’si sentetik esrar kullandığını belirtmiştir. Alkol ve esrar kullanımı ile hatalar, kural ihlalleri ve güvenli araç kullanma becerisi puan ortalamaları arasında anlamlı ilişki bulunmuştur.Sonuç: Alkol, madde ve ilaç etkisi altında araç kullanma davranışının psikolojik, psikiyatrik ve adli toksikolojik bakış açısıyla çok yönlü olarak ele alınması uygulamada fayda sağlayacaktır. Çalış-mamızın sonuçları ile işyeri ve trafik ortamında adli kanıt sunan madde testlerinin önemli olduğu ve aktif olarak uygulanması gerektiği görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKTAŞ, A., DÖĞER, R., AKGÜR, S. A. (2019). The Evaluation of Driver Behaviors and Skills Relation with Consumption of Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Medicine in Professional Drivers. Adli Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 2, 100–107. https://ajindex.com/articles/143412

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. WHO. World report on road traffic injury prevention. 2004 [Erişim Tarihi: 19Aralık 2018].http://apps.who.int/iris/bits-tream/handle/10665/42871/9241562609.pdf?sequence=1
  2. Elander J, West R, French D. Behavioral correlates of indi-vidual differences in road-traffic crash risk: an examination method and findings. Psychological bulletin. 1993;113(2): 279–294. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8451335.
  3. Sümer N, Özkan T. Sürücü Davranışları, Becerileri, Bazı Kişilik Özellikleri ve Psikolojik Belirtilerin Trafik Kazala-rındaki Rolleri. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 2002;17(50): 1–22.
  4. Schweizer TA, Vogel-Sprott M, Danckert J, Roy EA, Ska-kum A, Broderick CE. Neuropsychological Profile of Acu-te Alcohol Intoxication during Ascending and Descending Blood Alcohol Concentrations. Neuropsychopharmaco-logy. 2006;31(6): 1301–1309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.npp.1300941.
  5. Dry MJ, Burns NR, Nettelbeck T, Farquharson AL, White JM. Dose-Related Effects of Alcohol on Cognitive Functi-oning. Mendelson JE (ed.) PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science; 2012;7(11): e50977. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050977.
  6. Fell JC, Voas RB. The effectiveness of a 0.05 blood alco-hol concentration (BAC) limit for driving in the United States. Addiction. 2014;109(6): 869–874. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/add.12365.
  7. Drummer OH, Kourtis I, Beyer J, Tayler P, Boorman M, Ge-rostamoulos D. The prevalence of drugs in injured drivers. Forensic Science International. 2012;215(1–3): 14–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.01.040.
  8. Kumar S, Bansal YS, Singh D, Medhi B. Alcohol and Drug Use in Injured Drivers - An Emergency Room Study in a Regional Tertiary Care Centre of North West India. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. JCDR Research & Publications Private Limited; 2015;9(7): HC01-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/14840.6239.
  9. Grotenhermen F, Leson G, Berghaus G, Drummer OH, Krüger H-P, Longo M, et al. Developing limits for driving under cannabis. Addiction. 2007;102(12): 1910–1917. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02009.x.
  10. Ramaekers JG, Robbe HWJ, O’Hanlon JF. Marijua-na, alcohol and actual driving performance. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental. 2000;15(7): 551–558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1077(200010)15:7 3.0.CO;2-P. Rogeberg O, Elvik R. The effects of cannabis intoxication on motor vehicle collision revisited and revised. Addicti-on. 2016;111(8): 1348–1359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13347.
  11. Fraser S, Bilsker