Dataset Information

Screening and Brief Advice to Reduce Adolescents' Risk of Riding With Substance-Using Drivers.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Alcohol- and drug-related car crashes are a leading cause of death for adolescents in the United States. This analysis tested the effects of a computer-facilitated Screening and Brief Advice (cSBA) system for primary care on adolescents' reports of driving after drinking or drug use (driving) and riding with substance-using drivers (riding). METHOD:Twelve- to 18-year-old patients (N = 2,096) at nine New England pediatric offices completed assessments only during the initial 18-month treatment-as-usual (TAU) phase. Subsequently, the 18-month cSBA intervention phase began with a 1-hour provider training and implementation of the cSBA system at all sites. cSBA included a notebook-computer with self-administered screener, immediate scoring and feedback, and 10 pages of scientific information and true-life stories illustrating substance-related harms. Providers received screening results, "talking points" for 2 to 3 minutes of counseling, and a Contract for Life handout. Logistic regression with generalized estimating equations generated adjusted relative risk ratios (aRRR) for past-90-day driving and riding risk at 3- and 12-month follow-ups, controlling for significant covariates. RESULTS:We found no significant effects on driving outcomes. At 3 months, cSBA youth were less likely than TAU to report riding with a drinking driver (aRRR = 0.70, 95% CI [0.49, 1.00]), and less likely to report riding with a driver who had used cannabis or other drugs (aRRR = 0.46, 95% CI [0.29, 0.74]). The effect was even greater (aRRR = 0.34, 95% CI [0.16, 0.71]) for riding with drinking drivers who were adult family members. All effects dissipated by 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:Screening and pediatrician brief advice shows promise for reducing adolescents' risk of riding with substance-using drivers.

SUBMITTER: Knight JR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6090102 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Screening and Brief Advice to Reduce Adolescents' Risk of Riding With Substance-Using Drivers.

Knight John R JR Csemy Ladislav L Sherritt Lon L Starostova Olga O Van Hook Shari S Bacic Janine J Finlay Caroline C Tauber Jessica J Brooks Traci T Kossack Robert R Kulig John W JW Shaw Judith J Harris Sion Kim SK

Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs 20180701 4

<h4>Objective</h4>Alcohol- and drug-related car crashes are a leading cause of death for adolescents in the United States. This analysis tested the effects of a computer-facilitated Screening and Brief Advice (cSBA) system for primary care on adolescents' reports of driving after drinking or drug use (driving) and riding with substance-using drivers (riding).<h4>Method</h4>Twelve- to 18-year-old patients (N = 2,096) at nine New England pediatric offices completed assessments only during the init ...[more]

PMID: 30079877

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: Risky driving behaviors among adolescents, such as riding with a drinking or impaired driver (RWID) or driving while under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or drugs, are significant public health concerns. Few studies have examined associations of RWID and DUI with future substance use and problems after controlling for baseline substance use. Given that the DUI/RWDD event may be a teachable moment to prevent future consequences (e.g., when injured or arrested), it is important to understand how this risk behavior relates to subsequent use and problems. This study therefore examined characteristics of adolescents who reported DUI and RWID and assessed their risk of future alcohol and marijuana use and consequences 6 months later. Methods: Participants were 668 adolescents aged 12 to 18 (inclusive) recruited at 1 of 4 primary care clinics in Pittsburgh and Los Angeles as part of a larger randomized controlled trial. They completed surveys about their health behaviors at baseline and 6 months after baseline. We examined baseline characteristics of adolescents who reported DUI and RWID and then assessed whether past-year DUI and RWID at baseline were associated with alcohol and marijuana use and consequences 6 months after baseline. Results: Fifty-eight percent of participants were female, 56% were Hispanic, 23% were Black, 14% were White, 7% were multiethnic or other, and the average age was 16 years (SD?=?1.9). At baseline, participants who reported RWID or DUI were more likely to be older, report past-year use of alcohol and marijuana, and more likely to have an alcohol use disorder or cannabis use disorder versus those who did not report RWID or DUI, respectively. At 6-month follow-up and after controlling for baseline demographics and baseline alcohol use, RWID was associated with more frequent drinking episodes in the past 3 months and greater number of drinks in the past month when they drank heavily. DUI at baseline was associated with more frequent heavy drinking episodes and alcohol and marijuana consequences 6 months later. Conclusions: RWID and DUI are significantly associated with greater alcohol and marijuana use over time. This study highlights that teens may be at higher risk for problem substance use in the future even if they ride with someone who is impaired. Prevention and intervention efforts for adolescents need to address both driving under the influence and riding with an impaired driver to prevent downstream consequences.

Project description:BackgroundSubstance use in pregnancy is associated with severe maternal and fetal morbidities and substantial economic costs. However, few studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of substance use treatment programs in pregnant women. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the economic impact of a behavioral intervention that integrated motivational enhancement therapy with cognitive behavioral therapy (MET-CBT) for treatment of substance use in pregnancy, in comparison with brief advice.MethodsWe conducted an economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial by collecting data on resource utilization and performing a cost minimization analysis as MET-CBT and brief advice had similar effects on clinical outcomes (e.g., alcohol and drug use and birth outcomes). Costs were estimated from the health care system's perspective and included intervention costs, hospital facility costs, physician fees, and costs of psychotropic medications from the date of intake assessment until 3-month postpartum. We compared effects of MET-CBT on costs with those of brief advice using Wilcoxon rank sum tests.ResultsAlthough the integrated MET-CBT therapy had higher intervention cost than brief advice (median = $1297/participant versus $303/participant, p < 0.01), costs of care during the prenatal period, delivery, and postpartum period, as well as for psychotropic medications, were comparable between the two groups (all p values ≥ 0.55). There was no statistically significant difference in overall cost of care (median total cost = $26,993/participant for MET-CBT versus $27,831/participant for brief advice, p = 0.90).ConclusionsThe MET-CBT therapy and brief advice resulted in similar clinical outcomes and overall medical costs. Further research incorporating non-medical costs, targeting women with more severe substance use disorders, and evaluating the impact of MET-CBT on participants' quality of life will provide additional insights.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00227903 . Registered 27 September 2005.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment may reduce substance misuse but has received minimal study among women who are treated in reproductive health settings. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to determine whether "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" that is delivered either electronically or by clinician are more effective than enhanced usual care in decreasing days of primary substance use. STUDY DESIGN:Women from 2 reproductive centers who smoked cigarettes or misused alcohol, illicit drugs, or prescription medication were allocated randomly to "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" delivered electronically or by clinician or to enhanced usual care. Assessments were completed at baseline and at 1-, 3-, and 6-months after a baseline has been established. Coprimary outcomes were days/months of primary substance use and postintervention treatment use. A sample size of 660 women was planned; randomization was stratified by primary substance use and pregnancy status. "Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" groups were compared with enhanced usual care groups with the use of generalized estimation equations, and effect sizes were calculated with the use of Cohen's d. RESULTS:Between September 2011 and January 2015, women were assigned randomly to a group: 143 women (16.8% pregnant) in the electronic-delivered "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" group, 145 women (18.6% pregnant) in the clinician-delivered "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" group, and 151 women (19.2% pregnant) in the enhanced usual care group; the retention was >84%. Based on the generalized estimating equations model, predicted mean days per month of use at baseline for primary substance were 23.9 days (95% confidence interval, 22.4-25.5) for the electronic-delivered group, 22.8 days (95% confidence interval, 21.4-24.3) for the clinician-delivered group, and 23.5 days (95% confidence interval, 22.2, 24.9) for enhanced usual care, which respectively declined to 20.5 days (95% confidence interval, 19.0-22.2), 19.8 days (95% confidence interval,18.5-21.3), and 21.9 days (95% confidence interval, 20.7-23.1) at 1 month; 16.9 days (95% confidence interval, 15.0-19.0), 16.6 days (95% confidence interval, 14.8-18.6), and 19.5 days (95% confidence interval, 18.1-21.1) at 3 months; and 16.3 days (95% confidence interval, 14.3-18.7), 16.3 days (95% confidence interval, 14.4-18.5), and 17.9 days (95% confidence interval, 16.1-19.9) at 6 months. Estimated declines were greater in the electronic-delivered group (? [standard error]=-0.090[0.034]; P=.008; Cohen's d, 0.19 at 1 month, 0.30 at 3 months, and 0.17 at 6 months) and the clinician-delivered group (? [standard error]=-0.078[0.037]; P=.038; Cohen's d, 0.17 at 1 month, 0.22 at 3 months, and 0.06 at 6 months) compared with enhanced usual care. Treatment use did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION:"Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" significantly decreased days of primary substance use among women in reproductive healthcare centers; neither resulted in more treatment use than enhanced usual care.

Project description:BackgroundMany young people report they want to stop smoking and have tried to do so, but most of their quit attempts fail. For adult smokers, there is strong evidence that group behavioural support enhances quit rates. However, it is uncertain whether group behavioural support enhances abstinence in young smokers trying to quit.FindingsA cluster randomised trial for young people trying to stop smoking to compare the efficacy of a school-based 9 week intensive group behavioural support course versus a school-based 7 week brief advice only course. Participants were assessed for evidence of tobacco addiction and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was used if it was deemed appropriate by the therapist. Both types of course aimed to recruit approximately one hundred participants from approximately ten schools.The primary outcome was successful quitting at 4 weeks after quit day judged according to the Russell standard. Had the trial been completed, abstinence at 6 months after quit day and the relationships between successful quit attempts and 1) psychological assessments of dependence prior to quitting 2) salivary cotinine concentration prior to quitting and 3) sociodemographic characteristics would also have been assessed. The proportion of participants who stopped smoking in each arm of the trial were compared using Chi square tests.The trial was stopped shortly after it had started because funding to support the therapists running the stop smoking group behavioural support programme was withdrawn. Only three stop smoking courses were completed (two group support courses and one brief advice pharmacotherapy course). Seventeen participants in total entered the trial. At the end of the courses, one participant (10%) attending the group support programme had stopped smoking and no participant attending the brief advice programme had stopped smoking.DiscussionThe trial was stopped so we were unable to determine whether group support helped more young people to stop smoking than brief advice. Engagement and recruitment of participants proved much more difficult than had been anticipated. Fifteen of the seventeen participants reported that quitting smoking was either pretty important or very important to them. Thus, the stop smoking success rate could, nevertheless, be considered disappointing.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN25181936.

Dataset Information

Screening and Brief Advice to Reduce Adolescents' Risk of Riding With Substance-Using Drivers.

Publications

Screening and Brief Advice to Reduce Adolescents' Risk of Riding With Substance-Using Drivers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets