popa_bar_abba,
That doesn’t make any sense. There is no more higher probability of driver impairment causing a 1 car crash than a 2 car crash, and even if it is higher, I don’t believe it would be so significantly higher as to make checking for impairment protocol in one and not the other.
You’re making this up. Give us proof.
Assuming the first responders do not know the cause of the crash and are just transporting patients to the hospital, in the case of a single car crash, the patient you are transporting is more likely to be the cause of the crash than in the case of a multiple car accident.
So as a simplistic model, let’s say that 20% of the people who cause wrecks do so because they are impaired in some way, and 0% of the people involved who didn’t cause it are impaired. Next, you have two incidents, a single car (1-occupant) crash, and a crash involving two vehicles (1-occupant per vehicle). In each crash, there is one injury. For the single car crash, there is a 100% chance that you are transporting the person who caused the wreck, so there is a 20% chance of impairment. In the second case, there is only a 50% chance that you are transporting the person who caused the wreck, so there is only a 10% chance of impairment.
I would also argue that impairment is more likely in the single car crash, because you remove a component of human error from the potential causes.