Risk of road accident associated with the use of drugs: A systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence from epidemiological studies

• The risk of road accident associated with use of drugs is assessed.
• A meta-analysis is performed based on 264 estimates of risk.
• Estimates of risk are developed for eleven drugs.
• Risk is found to be associated with the use of all these drugs.
• The poor quality of many studies limits causal inference.

This paper is a corrigendum to a previously published paper where errors were detected. The errors have been corrected in this paper. The paper is otherwise identical to the previously published paper. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that have assessed the risk of accident associated with the use of drugs when driving is presented. The meta-analysis included 66 studies containing a total of 264 estimates of the effects on accident risk of using illicit or prescribed drugs when driving. Summary estimates of the odds ratio of accident involvement are presented for amphetamines, analgesics, anti-asthmatics, anti-depressives, anti-histamines, benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, opiates, penicillin and zopiclone (a sleeping pill). For most of the drugs, small or moderate increases in accident risk associated with the use of the drugs were found. Information about whether the drugs were actually used while driving and about the doses used was often imprecise. Most studies that have evaluated the presence of a dose-response relationship between the dose of drugs taken and the effects on accident risk confirm the existence of a dose-response relationship. Use of drugs while driving tends to have a larger effect on the risk of fatal and serious injury accidents than on the risk of less serious accidents (usually property-damage-only accidents). The quality of the studies that have assessed risk varied greatly. There was a tendency for the estimated effects of drug use on accident risk to be smaller in well-controlled studies than in poorly controlled studies. Evidence of publication bias was found for some drugs. The associations found cannot be interpreted as causal relationships, principally because most studies do not control very well for potentially confounding factors.