Ignition interlock devices
Evidence Ratings
Scientifically Supported: Strategies with this rating are most likely to make a difference. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently positive results.
Some Evidence: Strategies with this rating are likely to work, but further research is needed to confirm effects. These strategies have been tested more than once and results trend positive overall.
Expert Opinion: Strategies with this rating are recommended by credible, impartial experts but have limited research documenting effects; further research, often with stronger designs, is needed to confirm effects.
Insufficient Evidence: Strategies with this rating have limited research documenting effects. These strategies need further research, often with stronger designs, to confirm effects.
Mixed Evidence: Strategies with this rating have been tested more than once and results are inconsistent or trend negative; further research is needed to confirm effects.
Evidence of Ineffectiveness: Strategies with this rating are not good investments. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently negative and sometimes harmful results. Learn more about our methods
Strategies with this rating are most likely to make a difference. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently positive results.
Evidence Ratings
Scientifically Supported: Strategies with this rating are most likely to make a difference. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently positive results.
Some Evidence: Strategies with this rating are likely to work, but further research is needed to confirm effects. These strategies have been tested more than once and results trend positive overall.
Expert Opinion: Strategies with this rating are recommended by credible, impartial experts but have limited research documenting effects; further research, often with stronger designs, is needed to confirm effects.
Insufficient Evidence: Strategies with this rating have limited research documenting effects. These strategies need further research, often with stronger designs, to confirm effects.
Mixed Evidence: Strategies with this rating have been tested more than once and results are inconsistent or trend negative; further research is needed to confirm effects.
Evidence of Ineffectiveness: Strategies with this rating are not good investments. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently negative and sometimes harmful results. Learn more about our methods
Strategies with this rating are most likely to make a difference. These strategies have been tested in many robust studies with consistently positive results.
Health factors shape the health of individuals and communities. Everything from our education to our environments impacts our health. Modifying these clinical, behavioral, social, economic, and environmental factors can influence how long and how well people live, now and in the future.
Ignition interlocks are devices that can be installed in vehicles to prevent operation by a driver who has a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) above a specified level. Interlocks are most often installed in vehicles of people who have been convicted of alcohol-impaired driving. Interlocks can be mandated by courts or offered by state licensing agencies as an alternative to a suspended driver’s license, often as a provision of a restricted license. Requirements for use of interlock devices varies by state based on BAC level, number of offenses, and other conditions. Interlocks are generally installed for the length of time a license would be suspended, usually 6 to 24 months1. States can levy penalties on offenders for failure to install devices2.
What could this strategy improve?
Expected Benefits
Our evidence rating is based on the likelihood of achieving these outcomes:
Reduced impaired driving
Reduced alcohol-related crashes
What does the research say about effectiveness?
There is strong evidence that installing ignition interlock devices for people convicted of alcohol-impaired driving reduces re-arrest rates while interlocks are installed1, 3. When removed, however, re-arrest rates are similar to those convicted of alcohol-impaired driving who do not use interlocks1, 3, 4. Ignition interlock devices have also been shown to reduce alcohol-related crashes5, 6, 7.
Drivers with interlocks appear to have fewer alcohol-related crashes than drivers whose licenses have been suspended for an alcohol-impaired driving conviction1, 4. States with laws that require interlock use for all drunk driving offenders, including first-time offenders, have greater reductions in crash rates and crash-related deaths than states with laws that require interlock use for high-risk offenders (e.g., repeat offenders) only5, 6, 8. A Washington-based study also indicates that interlock installation requirements for first-time offenders decreases recidivism and crashes7.
How could this strategy impact health disparities? This strategy is rated no impact on disparities likely.
Implementation Examples
As of 2017, every state has an ignition interlock law, although specifics vary. Twenty-nine states and Washington, D.C. have mandatory ignition interlock provisions for all convicted drunk driving offenders. Florida, Hawaii, New Jersey, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Wyoming require ignition interlocks for first-time convicted offenders with a certain BAC level or higher9.
Implementation Resources
CDC-Ignition interlock - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Increasing alcohol ignition interlock use.
NCSL-Ignition interlock - National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). State ignition interlock laws.
Footnotes
* Journal subscription may be required for access.
1 CG-Motor vehicle injury - The Guide to Community Preventive Services (The Community Guide). Motor vehicle injury prevention.
2 CDC-Ignition interlock - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Increasing alcohol ignition interlock use.
3 Miller 2015c - Miller PG, Curtis A, Sønderlund A, Day A, Droste N. Effectiveness of interventions for convicted DUI offenders in reducing recidivism: A systematic review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 2015;41(1):16-29.
4 IAS-Anderson 2006 - Anderson P, Baumberg B. Alcohol in Europe: A public health perspective. London, UK: Institute of Alcohol Studies (IAS); 2006.
5 McGinty 2017 - McGinty EE, Tung G, Shulman-Laniel J, et al. Ignition interlock laws: Effects on fatal motor vehicle crashes, 1982-2013. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2017;52(4):417-423.
6 Ullman 2016 - Ullman DF. Locked and not loaded: First time offenders and state ignition interlock programs. International Review of Law and Economics. 2016;45:1-13.
7 McCartt 2013 - McCartt AT, Leaf WA, Farmer CM, Eichelberger AH. Washington State’s alcohol ignition interlock law: Effects on recidivism among first-time DUI offenders. Traffic Injury Prevention. 2013;14(3):215-229.
8 Kaufman 2016 - Kaufman EJ, Wiebe DJ. Impact of state ignition interlock laws on alcohol-involved crash deaths in the United States. American Journal of Public Health. 2016;106(5):865-871.
9 MADD-Ignition interlock 2017 - Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). 2017 Ignition interlock report. 2017.
To see citations and implementation resources for this strategy, visit:
countyhealthrankings.org/strategies-and-solutions/what-works-for-health/strategies/ignition-interlock-devices
To see all strategies:
countyhealthrankings.org/whatworks