Dataset Information

Do Brief Alcohol Interventions Reduce Driving After Drinking Among College Students? A Two-step Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

College students who drink are at an increased risk of driving after drinking and alcohol-involved traffic accidents and deaths. Furthermore, the persistence of driving after drinking over time underscores a need for effective interventions to prevent future drunk driving in adulthood. The present study examined whether brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) for college students reduce driving after drinking.

Methods

A two-step meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) was conducted using a combined sample of 6801 college students from 15 randomized controlled trials (38% male, 72% White and 58% first-year students). BAIs included individually delivered Motivational Interviewing with Personalized Feedback (MI + PF), Group Motivational Interviewing (GMI), and stand-alone Personalized Feedback (PF) interventions. Two outcome variables, driving after two+/three+ drinks and driving after four+/five+ drinks, were checked, harmonized and analyzed separately for each study and then combined for meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.

Results

BAIs lowered the risk of driving after four+/five+ drinks (19% difference in the odds of driving after drinking favoring BAIs vs. control), but not the risk of driving after two+/three+ drinks (9% difference). Subsequent subgroup analysis indicated that the MI + PF intervention was comparatively better than PF or GMI.

Conclusions

BAIs provide a harm reduction approach to college drinking. Hence, it is encouraging that BAIs reduce the risk of driving after heavy drinking among college students. However, there may be opportunities to enhance the intervention content and timing to be more relevant for driving after drinking and improve the outcome assessment and reporting to demonstrate its effect.

SUBMITTER: Mun EY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8753781 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlcohol-induced blackouts, a form of anterograde amnesia that restricts the encoding of short-term memories into long-term ones, are among the most severe alcohol-related consequences. College students are at high risk of experiencing alcohol-induced blackouts, and there is a need to determine whether alcohol interventions can effectively reduce blackouts in this population. The current study uses data from 3 randomized clinical trials to examine the effect of various intervention approaches on alcohol-induced blackouts.MethodsFour interventions were compared over 3 studies: (i) a computerized feedback intervention (electronic Check-Up To Go [e-Chug]; Study 1); (ii) a single-session brief motivational intervention (BMI; Study 1); (iii) a BMI plus behavioral economic session focused on increasing substance-free activities (BMI + Substance-Free Activity Session [SFAS]; Studies 2 and 3); and (iv) a BMI plus supplemental Relaxation Training session (BMI + Relaxation Training; Studies 2 and 3). Studies 1 and 3 also included an assessment-only control condition. For each study, participants reported whether they had experienced an alcohol-induced blackout at each time point; binary logistic regressions examined differential likelihood of experiencing an alcohol-induced blackout over time.ResultsNeither the single-session BMI nor e-Chug reduced alcohol-induced blackouts over assessment only; however, participants in the BMI + SFAS or BMI + Relaxation Training condition were significantly less likely to experience an alcohol-induced blackout compared to assessment only at 1-month (Wald = 4.77, odds ratio [OR] = 0.53, p = 0.03) and 6-month follow-ups (Wald = 5.72, OR = 0.52, p = 0.02). Study 2 also revealed a larger effect for the BMI + SFAS over the BMI + Relaxation Training condition at 6 months (Wald = 4.11 OR = 0.22, p = 0.043), although this was not replicated in Study 3. The effects for the 2-session BMIs lasted 6 months, at which point maturation effects diminished differences between assessment-only and intervention conditions.ConclusionsTwo sessions of BMI are a substantial enough dose to result in reductions in alcohol-induced blackouts among college student heavy drinkers.

Project description:For over 2 decades, brief motivational interventions (BMIs) have been implemented on college campuses to reduce heavy drinking and related negative consequences. Such interventions include in-person motivational interviews (MIs), often incorporating personalized feedback (PF), and stand-alone PF interventions delivered via mail, computer, or the Web. Both narrative and meta-analytic reviews using aggregate data from published studies suggest at least short-term efficacy of BMIs, although overall effect sizes have been small.This study was an individual participant-level data (IPD) meta-analysis of 17 randomized clinical trials evaluating BMIs. Unlike typical meta-analysis based on summary data, IPD meta-analysis allows for an analysis that correctly accommodates the sampling, sample characteristics, and distributions of the pooled data. In particular, highly skewed distributions with many zeroes are typical for drinking outcomes, but have not been adequately accounted for in existing studies. Data are from Project INTEGRATE, one of the largest IPD meta-analysis projects to date in alcohol intervention research, representing 6,713 individuals each with 2 to 5 repeated measures up to 12 months postbaseline.We used Bayesian multilevel over dispersed Poisson hurdle models to estimate intervention effects on drinks per week and peak drinking, and Gaussian models for alcohol problems. Estimates of overall intervention effects were very small and not statistically significant for any of the outcomes. We further conducted post hoc comparisons of 3 intervention types (individual MI with PF, PF only, and group MI) versus control. There was a small, statistically significant reduction in alcohol problems among participants who received an individual MI with PF. Short-term and long-term results were similar.This study questions the efficacy and magnitude of effects of BMIs for college drinking prevention and intervention and suggests a need for the development of more effective intervention strategies.

Project description:Risky driving and hazardous drinking are associated with significant human and economic costs. Brief interventions for more than one risky behavior have the potential to reduce health-compromising behaviors in populations with multiple risk-taking behaviors such as young adults. Emergency department (ED) visits provide a window of opportunity for interventions meant to reduce both risky driving and hazardous drinking.We determined the efficacy of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) protocol addressing risky driving and hazardous drinking. We used a randomized controlled trial design with follow-ups through 12 months. ED patients aged 18 to 44 who screened positive for both behaviors (n = 476) were randomized to brief intervention (BIG), contact control (CCG), or no-contact control (NCG) groups. The BIG (n = 150) received a 20-minute assessment and two 20-minute interventions. The CCG (n = 162) received a 20-minute assessment at baseline and no intervention. The NCG (n = 164) were asked for contact information at baseline and had no assessment or intervention. Outcomes at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were self-reported driving behaviors and alcohol consumption.Outcomes were significantly lower in BIG compared with CCG through 6 or 9 months, but not at 12 months: Safety belt use at 3 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08 to 0.65); 6 months (AOR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.42); and 9 months (AOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.56); binge drinking at 3 months (adjusted rate ratio [ARR] 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97) and 6 months (ARR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.97); and ?5 standard drinks/d at 3 months (AOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.91) and 6 months (AOR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.98). No substantial differences were observed between BIG and NCG at 12 months.Our findings indicate that SBIRT reduced risky driving and hazardous drinking in young adults, but its effects did not persist after 9 months. Future research should explore methods for extending the intervention effect.