Alcohol consumption and driving intentions amongst hotel patrons

Promotion of responsible drinking in hotels

This study reports on an intervention programme to promote responsible drinking in hotels. The licensees of eight hotels agreed to participate in a trial of measures designed to assist patrons to avoid drink-driving, and seven other hotels were used as controls. The interventions acceptable to licensees comprised commercial-quality promotional material with the theme "0.05 Know Your Limits", and a breath analysis machine and poster on its use. Patrons leaving the hotels on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights were interviewed and breath-tested. Although the intervention material had been seen by one-third of patrons in the intervention hotels, there was no significant difference between them and control hotel patrons in either median BAC or the proportion who were going to drive with BAC over the legal limit. There was poor compliance by hotels with the intervention procedures, indicating that a major impediment to the implementation and evaluation of programmes to promote responsible drinking is a lack of motivation by many licensees, despite support by some licensees and the Australian Hotels Association.

One for the road: On the utility of citation data for identifying problem hotels

Drink drivers arrested in Tasmania are routinely asked by police where they had last been drinking, and these data were examined for 716 drivers arrested in Southern Tasmania during a 4-month period in 1992. Nearly half (43%) of arrested drink drivers cited individual hotels as the place where they had last been drinking. This enabled a citation score to be assigned to each of the 82 hotels in metropolitan Hobart. The distribution of citation scores was highly skewed, with eight hotels accounting for 45% of hotel citations, and two accounting for 20%. The hotels' citation scores were compared in relation to the rank order of their licence fees, since better measures of patronage proved unobtainable. Some hotels with small total alcohol sales did appear to have an unexpectedly large number of citations, suggesting less than responsible serving practices. Hoteliers' comments were sought on the interpretation of citation scores, and incorporated into a discussion of the limitations of the data in determining the extent of individual hotel responsibility for drink drivers. Important questions remaining include (1) what is the validity of citations made by drink drivers at the time of arrest; (2) what appropriate and quantifiable denominator can be used to adjust the number of citations to the level of patronage; and (3) what level of citations is too high and requires action?

Trends in hotel patronage and drink driving in Hobart, Tasmania

From 1990 to 1991 in the Hobart region there was a marked fall in both hotel patronage and the proportion of patrons subsequently driving with their blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit. This was associated with smaller falls in the number of drink drivers charged and alcohol-related road accidents, which continued in the following year. It appears that the pattern of drinking and driving is changing, presumably in response to random breath testing and tougher penalties for offences.

When problem servers pour in problematic places: Alcoholic beverage servers' willingness to serve patrons beyond intoxication

Our objective was to examine alcoholic beverage servers' willingness to over-serve as an explanation for intoxication that occurs in drinking establishments. Survey data were collected in 2000 from 911 alcoholic beverage servers in the State of Indiana, USA, with a grant from Indiana University. Chi-squared, analysis of variance, and step-wise regression were used to examine the influence of personal factors, location factors, management policies and practices, and larger societal control efforts on willingness to over-serve. Our findings support the need to examine managements' economic motivation and servers' personal drinking patterns as motivations for serving beyond intoxication in future research.

Think they're drunk? Alcohol servers and the identification of intoxication

Despite alcohol server training programs and legal liability aimed at controlling intoxication, server intervention appears to be rare. Given the difficulty in assessing intoxication, it can be assumed that improvement in assessment skills would increase the likelihood of intervention. Unfortunately, little is known regarding practices servers use to identify intoxication. In order to build a more informed base for policy formation and server training, the focus of this inquiry was to examine practices used by servers to assess intoxication. The analysis was based upon questionnaires mailed to a random probability sample of licensed servers from one state (N = 822). Indicators found to be most important were examined in relation to a variety of occupational characteristics. Implications for training curricula, policy formation, and future research are discussed.

Personal and situational influences on drink driving and sober driving among a cohort of young adults

OBJECTIVES

To compare personal and situational influences on incidents involving drink driving with those involving sober driving.

METHODS

Information on a range of road safety practices was sought in face to face interviews conducted with 969 members of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study cohort at age 26 years. A total of 750 study members reported an incident that involved the opportunity to consume alcohol and also travel by motor vehicle. Of these, 87 were classified as "drink drive incidents" and 663 as "sober drive incidents".

RESULTS

Study members who were male, of lower socioeconomic status, had no school qualifications, or were dependent on alcohol or marijuana at age 21 were significantly more likely to report a drink drive incident at age 26. Compared with the sober drive incidents, the drink drive incidents were more commonly associated with driving alone, drinking at bars, and no advanced planning. For drink drive incidents the amount of alcohol consumed was influenced by the conviviality of the occasion, whereas for sober drive incidents it was the need to drive. One quarter of those reporting drink drive incidents stated they had used marijuana and/or LSD at the event at which they drank.

CONCLUSIONS

Drink drive and sober drive incidents differed, particularly with regard to decisions made before the event. Prevention efforts could usefully be targeted toward these decisions.