A meta-analysis of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults: variability in effects across alcohol measures

Abstract

Background Brief alcohol interventions are one approach for reducing drinking among youth, but may vary in effectiveness depending on the type of alcohol assessments used to measure effects. Objectives To conduct a meta-analysis that examined the effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults, with particular emphasis on exploring variability in effects across outcome measurement characteristics. Method Eligible studies were those using an experimental or quasi-experimental design to examine the effects of a brief alcohol intervention on a post-intervention alcohol use measure for youth ages 11–30. A comprehensive literature review identified 190 unique samples that were included in the meta-analysis. Taking a Bayesian approach, we used random-effects multilevel models to estimate the average effect and model variability across outcome measurement types. Results Brief alcohol interventions led to significant reductions in self-reported alcohol use among adolescents ( trueg¯ = 0.25, 95% CrI [0.13, 0.37]) and young adults ( trueg¯ = 0.15, 95% CrI [0.12, 0.18]). These results were consistent across outcomes with varying reference periods, but varied across outcome construct type and assessment instruments. Among adolescents, effects were larger when measured using the Timeline Followback; among young adults, effects were smaller when measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Conclusion The strength of the beneficial effects of brief alcohol interventions on youth’s alcohol use may vary depending upon the outcome measure utilized. Nevertheless, significant effects were observed across measures. Although effects were modest in size, they were clinically significant and show promise for interrupting problematic alcohol use trajectories among youth.

Manifesto for a European research network into Problematic Usage of the Internet

“…Early identification of individuals at risk of developing different types of PUI, with a view to early intervention strategies, could in the future reduce the burden of disease and help to prevent untoward functional consequences. This suggestion draws parallels from positive findings in other related areas of mental health, such as early intervention for substance addictions, to mitigate suffering and public health burden (Tanner-Smith and Risser, 2016). In a systematic review of the available literature, only five data papers were identified that described and assessed preventative interventions for PUI (Vondrackova and Gabrhelik, 2016).…”

Advances in the science and treatment of alcohol use disorder

“…As noted above, most behavioral and psychological treatments are equally effective with small effect size differences [Cohen’s d = 2.0 to 0.3 ( 20 )] between active treatments ( 84 – 88 ). Behavioral interventions have also been shown to be as effective as pharmacotherapy options, with a 16-week cognitive behavioral intervention shown to be statistically equivalent to naltrexone in reducing heavy drinking days in a large randomized trial ( 27 ).…”

Retrospective analysis of alcohol testing in trauma team activation patients at a Canadian tertiary trauma centre

“… 8 A survey of ED directors at level I and II trauma centres found only 15% had formal SBI policies. 9 Alcohol SBI in EDs or trauma centres is effective at reducing alcohol consumption, 10 11 impaired driving, 12 13 and injury recidivism. 14 Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) levels can be readily obtained at presentation or admission when blood is drawn for other diagnostic tests, 8 or for assessment of alcohol and its effect on the patient’s presenting condition and injuries (eg, altered level of consciousness, hypotension).…”