International approaches to driving under the influence of cannabis: A review of evidence on impact

- More published evaluations of cannabis and driving countermeasures are needed.
- Few evaluations of legal approaches to drug-impaired driving are cannabis specific.
- Evidence-based per se limits for cannabis have been proposed, but debate is ongoing.
- Roadside drug testing holds some promise for deterring driving after cannabis use.
- Key differences in methods and indicators make relevant study comparisons difficult.

BackgroundThere are knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness of different approaches designed to prevent and deter driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC). Policymakers are increasingly interested in evidence-based responses to DUIC as numerous jurisdictions worldwide have legally regulated cannabis or are debating such regulation. We contribute a comprehensive review of international literature on countermeasures that address DUIC, and identify where and how such measures have been evaluated.MethodsThe following databases were systematically searched from 1995 to present: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, and Criminal Justice Abstracts. Hand searching of relevant documents, internet searches for grey literature, and review of ongoing email alerts were conducted to capture any emerging literature and relevant trends.ResultsNumerous international jurisdictions have introduced a variety of measures designed to deter DUIC. Much interest has been generated regarding non-zero per se laws that set fixed legal limits for tetrahydrocannabinol and/or its metabolites detected in drivers. Other approaches include behavioural impairment laws, zero-tolerance per se laws, roadside drug testing, graduated licensing system restrictions, and remedial programs. However, very few evaluations have appeared in the literature.ConclusionsAlthough some promising results have been reported (e.g., roadside testing), it is premature to draw firm conclusions regarding the broader impacts of general deterrent approaches to DUIC. This review points to the need for a long-term commitment to rigorously evaluate, using multiple methods, the impact of general and specific deterrent DUIC countermeasures.