Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Related Consequences (relate + consequence)
Selected AbstractsAssessing the Severity of Hazardous Drinking and Related Consequences Among Incarcerated WomenALCOHOLISM, Issue 5 2010David R. Strong Background:, Recent epidemiological efforts have demonstrated the utility of measuring individual differences in the severity of alcohol use along a single severity continuum marked by alcohol-related problems, symptoms of alcohol dependence, and the social consequences of drinking. Translation of this utility to specialized clinical populations is not assured. The expected inter-relationships among problems, symptoms and consequences, and enhanced sensitivity of combined assessments require confirmation in applied clinical settings. Method:, Subjects were 245 incarcerated women who met Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test criteria for hazardous use of alcohol. Participants were recruited from a statewide adult correctional facility for an ongoing clinical trial testing the effectiveness of brief motivational interviewing on alcohol use and HIV risk behaviors. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 56 (M = 34.1, SD = 8.9), 71.4% were Caucasian, and 65.7% reported <12 years of education. Results:, Analyses suggested that the 6 problems of alcohol abuse, 7 symptoms for alcohol dependence, and 14 alcohol-related social consequences loaded to a single factor (0.38 to 0.85) that formed a continuum of alcohol severity. Contrary to epidemiological studies, physical fights and being arrested were the most prevalent consequences and were associated with lower alcohol severity in this population. Three of the five items that discriminated best between higher and lower alcohol severity were related to familial and relationship consequences. Conclusions:, Consistent with epidemiological studies, alcohol severity can be measured among incarcerated hazardously drinking women on a single continuum that includes alcohol problems, symptoms, and social consequences. Replication of the expected alignment of problems and symptoms supports the construct validity of the continuum and further challenges the proposed hierarchical structure of abuse/dependence distinction. Large differences in rates of specific consequences and observed effectiveness of tailored social consequence items suggest the benefits of cross-sample validation to improve evaluation of clinical outcomes. [source] Socio-economic status predicts drinking patterns but not alcohol-related consequences independentlyADDICTION, Issue 7 2010Taisia Huckle ABSTRACT Aim To identify independent relationships between socio-economic status and drinking patterns and related consequences and to identify socio-economic groups at risk for heavier consumption. Design and setting Three comparable national telephone surveys were utilized: 1995, 2000 and 2004. The respondents were aged 18,65 years. Contextual information includes that a number of liberalized alcohol policy changes occurred over the time of the surveys. Results Educational qualification, income and occupation were associated independently with alcohol consumption. There were indications that the different dimensions of drinking (quantity and frequency) had different relationships with socio-economic status (SES). For example, lower SES groups drank heavier quantities while higher SES groups drank more frequently. SES, however, did not play a major role predicting drinking consequences once drinking patterns were controlled for, although there were some exceptions. It was the lower-to-average SES groups that were at greater risk for drinking heavier quantities compared to other SES groups in the population (as they had sustained increases in the quantities they consumed over time where other SES groups did not). Conclusion Socio-economic status was related independently to drinking patterns and there were indications that SES interacted differently with the different dimensions of drinking (quantity and frequency). For the most part, socio-economic status was not related independently to the experience of alcohol-related consequences once drinking patterns were accounted for. It was the lower-to-average SES groups that were at greater risk for drinking heavier quantities compared to other SES groups in the population. [source] Age of Drinking Onset as a Moderator of the Efficacy of Parent-Based, Brief Motivational, and Combined Intervention Approaches to Reduce Drinking and Consequences Among College StudentsALCOHOLISM, Issue 7 2010Kimberly A. Mallett Background:, The current study tested age of onset as a moderator of intervention efficacy on drinking and consequence outcomes among a high-risk population of college students (i.e., former high school athletes). Methods:, Students were randomized to one of four conditions: assessment only control, combined parent-based intervention (PBI) and brief motivational intervention (BMI), PBI alone, and BMI alone. Participants (n = 1,275) completed web-administered measures at baseline (summer before starting college) and 10-month follow-up. Results:, Overall, the combined intervention demonstrated the strongest and most consistent reductions across all outcomes, particularly with the youngest initiators. Participants who initiated drinking at the youngest ages had significantly lower peak drinking, typical weekly drinking, and reported consequences at follow-up when they received the combined intervention when compared to the control group. The BMI and PBI groups, when examined independently, demonstrated significant effects across outcomes but were inconsistent across the different age groups. Conclusion:, Results suggest the combination of a PBI and a peer-delivered BMI is an appropriate and efficacious way to reduce drinking and related consequences among individuals who initiated drinking earlier in adolescence and are at an increased risk of experiencing alcohol problems. [source] A DISMANTLING TRIAL OF MOTIVATIONAL INTERVIEWING AND FEEDBACK AMONG HEAVY DRINKING COLLEGE STUDENTSALCOHOLISM, Issue 2008ST Walters Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a brief intervention that has been shown to reduce heavy drinking among college students. To date, all college studies of MI (and most adult studies) have used an intervention format that includes a feedback profile delivered in an MI style. This presentation will discuss the results of a dismantling trial of motivational interviewing, and feedback among heavy drinking college students. After an initial screen, 350 heavy drinking students were randomized to: (1) MI with feedback, (2) MI without feedback, (3) Web feedback only, (4) Assessment only, or (5) Delayed assessment only. At 6 months, only MI with feedback showed an effect over control in reducing drinks per week, peak BAC, and drinking related consequences. Neither MI nor feedback alone had an effect over assessment. Drinking severity moderated the effect of the interventions. [source] The Relationship between Eligibility Criteria for Participation in Alcohol Brief Intervention Trials and Other Alcohol and Health-Related VariablesTHE AMERICAN JOURNAL ON ADDICTIONS, Issue 3 2001Stephen A. Maisto Ph.D. In clinical trials of brief interventions for alcohol use, individuals typically are defined as eligible for the research through meeting quantity- frequency (QF) of alcohol consumption criteria, alcohol-related problems criteria, or both. The purpose of this study was to evaluate preintervention and posttreatment differences among three groups of research participants eligible for participation in a brief intervention clinical trial by meeting the AUDIT total score criterion only, the QF criterion only, or both. The participants were 301 men and women 21 years of age or older who presented for medical treatment at one of twelve primary care clinics and were screened for participation in the clinical trial. Participants completed an assessment protocol at preintervention and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postintervention. The analyses showed statistical differences among the three subgroups on three outcome dimensions of alcohol consumption, related consequences and behaviors, and medical complications; for both consumption and complications, the AUDIT + QF participants showed greater severity than participants in either of the other two groups. For consequences, AU DIT + QF participants scored higher than the QF participants on one variable constituting this dimension. The overall subgroup differences were maintained at six months in the consumption and consequences data. The implications of these findings for sensitivity of brief intervention trial design, the discovery of patient moderators of intervention effectiveness, and clinical practice are discussed. [source] | ||||||||||