Dataset Information

Can brief alcohol interventions for youth also address concurrent illicit drug use? results from a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Brief interventions aimed at reducing alcohol use among youth may interrupt a possible developmental progression to more serious substance use if they can also affect the use of other illicit drugs. This meta-analysis examined the findings of recent research on the effects of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults on both alcohol and illicit drug use. Eligible studies were those using randomized or controlled quasi-experimental designs to examine the effects of brief alcohol interventions on illicit drug use outcomes among youth. A comprehensive literature search identified 30 eligible study samples that, on average, included participants age 17, with 57 % male participants and 56 % White youth. Three-level random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate mean effect sizes and explore variability in effects. Overall, brief interventions targeting both alcohol and other drugs were effective in reducing both of these substances. However, the brief interventions that targeted only alcohol had no significant secondary effects on untargeted illicit drug use. The evidence from current research, therefore, shows modest beneficial effects on outcomes that are targeted by brief interventions for youth, but does not show that those effects generalize to untargeted illicit drug use outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Tanner-Smith EE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4393344 | biostudies-other | 2015 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can brief alcohol interventions for youth also address concurrent illicit drug use? results from a meta-analysis.

Tanner-Smith Emily E EE Steinka-Fry Katarzyna T KT Hennessy Emily A EA Lipsey Mark W MW Winters Ken C KC

Journal of youth and adolescence 20150120 5

Brief interventions aimed at reducing alcohol use among youth may interrupt a possible developmental progression to more serious substance use if they can also affect the use of other illicit drugs. This meta-analysis examined the findings of recent research on the effects of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults on both alcohol and illicit drug use. Eligible studies were those using randomized or controlled quasi-experimental designs to examine the effects of brief alcoho ...[more]

PMID: 25600491

Similar Datasets

Project description:UnlabelledBackgroundProblem alcohol use is common among illicit drug users and is associated with adverse health outcomes. It is also an important factor in poor prognosis among drug users with hepatitis C virus (HCV) as it impacts progression to hepatic cirrhosis or opiate overdose in opioid users. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for problem alcohol use in adult illicit drug users with concurrent problem alcohol use (principally, problem drug users of opiates and stimulants).MethodsWe searched the following databases (November 2011): Cochrane Library, PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and reference list of articles. We also searched conference proceedings and online registers of clinical trials. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data from included randomized controlled trials.ResultsFour studies (594 participants) were included in this review. Half of the trials were rated as having a high or unclear risk of bias. The four studies considered six different psychosocial interventions grouped into four comparisons: 1) cognitive-behavioral coping skills training versus 12-step facilitation (N = 41), 2) brief intervention versus treatment as usual (N = 110), 3) hepatitis health promotion versus motivational interviewing (N = 256), and 4) brief motivational intervention versus assessment-only group (N = 187). Differences between studies precluded any pooling of data. Findings are described for each trial individually. Most findings were not statistically significant except for comparison 2: decreased alcohol use at three months (risk ratio (RR) 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.54) and nine months (RR 0.16; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.33) in the treatment-as-usual group and comparison 4: reduced alcohol use in the brief motivational intervention (RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.60).ConclusionsNo conclusion can be made because of the paucity of the data and the low quality of the retrieved studies.

Project description:Tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use contribute significantly to global rates of morbidity and mortality. Despite evidence suggesting interventions designed to increase adolescent resilience may represent a means of reducing adolescent substance use, and schools providing a key opportunity to implement such interventions, existing systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of school-based interventions targeting adolescent substance use have not examined this potential.The aim of the systematic review is to determine whether universal interventions focused on enhancing the resilience of adolescents are effective in reducing adolescent substance use. Eligible studies will: include participants 5-18?years of age; report tobacco use, alcohol consumption or illicit drug use as outcomes; and implement a school-based intervention designed to promote internal (eg, self-esteem) and external (eg, school connectedness) resilience factors. Eligible study designs include randomised controlled trials, cluster randomised controlled trials, staggered enrolment trials, stepped wedged trials, quasi-randomised trials, quasi-experimental trials, time series/interrupted time-series trials, preference trials, regression discontinuity trials and natural experiment studies with a parallel control group. A search strategy including criteria for participants, study design, outcome, setting and intervention will be implemented in various electronic databases and information sources. Two reviewers will independently screen studies to assess eligibility, as well as extract data from, and assess risk of bias of included studies. A third reviewer will resolve any discrepancies. Attempts will be made to quantify trial effects by meta-analysis. Binary outcomes will be pooled and effect size reported using ORs. For continuous data, effect size of trials will be reported using a mean difference where trial outcomes report the same outcome using a consistent measure, or standardised mean difference where trials report a comparable measure. Otherwise, trial outcomes will be described narratively.Review findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and conferences.

Project description:Research has shown that internet interventions can be effective for dependent users of various substances. However, less is known about the effects of these interventions on users of opioids, cocaine and amphetamines than for other substances. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of internet interventions in decreasing the usage of these types of substances.We conducted a systematic literature search in the databases of PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of internet interventions compared with control conditions in reducing the use of opioids, cocaine and amphetamines. No setting restrictions were applied. The risk of bias of the included studies was examined according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool. The primary outcome was substance use reduction assessed through toxicology screening, self-report or both at post-treatment and at the follow-up assessment.Seventeen studies with 2836 adult illicit substance users were included. The risk of bias varied across the included studies. Internet interventions decreased significantly opioid [four studies, n = 606, g = 0.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.20-0.53, P < 0.001] and any illicit substance use (nine studies, n = 1749, g = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.24-0.45, P < 0.001) at post-treatment. Conversely, the effect of internet intervention for stimulant users was small and non-significant (four studies, n = 481, P = 0.164). Overall, internet interventions decreased substance significantly use at post-treatment (17 studies, n = 2836, g = 0.31; 95% CI = 0.23-0.39, P < 0.001) and at the follow-up assessments (nine studies, n = 1906, g = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.07-0.37; P = 0.003).Internet interventions demonstrate small but significant effects in decreasing substance use among various target populations at post-treatment and at the follow-up assessment. However, given the small number of available studies for certain substances, the findings should be interpreted with caution.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Brief interventions have been increasingly investigated to promote early intervention in gambling problems; an accurate estimate of the impact of these interventions is required to justify their widespread implementation. The goal of the current investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of in-person brief interventions for reducing gambling behaviour and/or problems, by quantifying the aggregate effect size associated with these interventions in the published literature to date. METHODS:Randomized controlled trials including the following design features were identified via systematic review: an adult sample experiencing problems associated with gambling; an in-person individual psychosocial intervention of brief duration (≤3 sessions); a control/comparison group; and an outcome related to gambling behaviour and/or problems. RESULTS:Five records compared brief interventions to assessment only control; using a random effect model, brief interventions were associated with a small but statistically significant reduction in gambling behaviour across short-term follow-up periods versus assessment only control (g = -.19, 95% CI [-.37, -.01]). Aggregate effect sizes for gambling problems and long-term follow-up periods were not statistically significant. Five records compared brief interventions to longer active interventions; there was no significant difference between brief interventions and longer active interventions. CONCLUSIONS:Results supported the efficacy of brief interventions for problem gambling compared to inactive control in the reduction of gambling behaviour; no differences were found across brief versus longer interventions for both gambling behaviour and problems. While these findings must be interpreted in the context of the limited number of studies and small magnitude of the combined effect sizes, the current meta-analysis supports the further investigation of the public health impact of these cost-effective interventions.

Dataset Information

Can brief alcohol interventions for youth also address concurrent illicit drug use? results from a meta-analysis.

Publications

Can brief alcohol interventions for youth also address concurrent illicit drug use? results from a meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets