EVIDENCE LIBRARY
Can Stadium Alcohol Surveys Establish How Many Spectators Drove Impaired?
A 4,420-spectator study measured alcohol during Swedish football matches. Why its drinking rates cannot establish DUI prevalence or a fan’s departure BAC.
No. A stadium survey can measure alcohol among sampled spectators without establishing how many later drove or were impaired while driving. A 2017 Swedish study obtained breath readings from 4,420 football spectators: 46.8% had positive readings and 8.9% had reported alcohol values of at least 0.10%. Those are spectator survey findings, not rates of DUI, alcohol-related crashes or impaired driving.
The distinction matters when event-level alcohol statistics enter a DUI case. Presence at a drinking event does not supply a person’s test result, departure time, transport choice or driving performance.
What the researchers sampled
Durbeej and colleagues collected data at 12 matches in three arenas in Stockholm and Gothenburg during April–September 2015. Teams approached every third person crossing a selected imaginary line; when that person belonged to a group, the other group members were also invited. Of 6,132 people approached, 4,425 agreed, and five under-age participants were excluded from analysis.
Measurements occurred from about an hour before kickoff through halftime and approximately five minutes into the second half. They were not exit tests collected as spectators departed. That timing is central to interpreting any proposed link with later driving.
These were breath readings, not collected blood samples
The investigators used a Dräger Alcotest 6820 and reported the values using BAC terminology. They did not draw paired venous whole-blood specimens to verify each percentage. Serum/plasma, urine and alcohol-exposure biomarkers were not substitute measurements in this survey.
Participants received water to clear the mouth before an interview and breath test. This description does not demonstrate that the procedure met every requirement of any particular evidential DUI testing protocol. Research screening, validated evidential analysis and assessment of behavior answer different questions.
The denominator changes the meaning of the average
The mean reported alcohol value of 0.063% applied to participants with positive readings, not the entire group of 4,420. Among those with readings of at least 0.10%, the mean was 0.135%. Confusing either subgroup average with the average for every spectator would overstate the measured exposure.
Likewise, the 8.9% figure uses all sampled spectators as its denominator. It does not mean 8.9% of drivers leaving the arena exceeded a legal limit. The study did not establish a driver denominator at all, and its research definition of high intoxication is not a legal classification.
Associations did not identify an individual driver
In adjusted analyses, higher reported alcohol levels were associated with younger age, male sex, local derbies, weekend matches, supporter sections and reported drinking before entering. The model explained approximately 42% of outcome variance.
These associations do not show that attendance in a supporter section caused alcohol consumption or that any particular younger male spectator had a positive result. They also do not establish a diagnostic rule for driver impairment. The paper reports a nonsignificant difference in participation rates between supporter and other sections (p = .077), which should not be recast as proof of identical participation.
Why departure alcohol cannot be reconstructed from the survey
Alcohol consumption could continue after testing, and concentrations could rise or fall before a person left. The investigators acknowledge that later measurements might have yielded higher readings if drinking continued. That possibility does not establish a correction factor or prove the direction of change for each person.
A departure-time opinion would require individual evidence about drinking, timing, the actual specimen and pharmacokinetic assumptions. Even an actual alcohol reading does not, on its own, describe every driving function. The site’s controlled simulator trial addresses observed lane control; this spectator survey did not.
Limitations and appropriate use in DUI review
This was a cross-sectional study in selected Swedish football arenas, predominantly involving male spectators. Approximately 28% of approached spectators declined participation. Group recruitment and the selection of sections and match times also affect generalization. The authors caution against extending the findings to other sports and countries.
The study can inform event-level prevention research and demonstrate that substantial drinking occurred among the sampled spectators. It cannot determine whether a defendant drove, their alcohol concentration at a later event, crash causation or a DUI violation. Case-specific measurements and observations must remain separate from population descriptions.
Primary source
Durbeej N, Elgán TH, Jalling C, Gripenberg J. Alcohol intoxication at Swedish football matches: A study using biological sampling to assess blood alcohol concentration levels among spectators. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(11):e0188284. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188284.