Does Drinking Within Low-Risk Guidelines Prevent Harm? Implications for High-Income Countries Using the International Model of Alcohol Harms and Policies

Sherk, Adam; Thomas, Gerald; Churchill, Samuel; Stockwell, Tim

doi:10.15288/jsad.2020.81.352

Cited by 26 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, even small changes in alcohol use can have an impact at the population level if they apply to many people of the population. The majority of cases of alcohol‐related diseases occur among the lesser‐drinking majority of the population [17,18]. These findings emphasize that there is good reason for an orientation on BAI activities to drinking patterns in the whole population, rather than on selected at‐risk populations only [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a brief alcohol intervention addressing the full spectrum of drinking in an adult general population sample: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims Evidence for efficacy of brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) is mainly limited to primary care and at‐risk drinkers. The aim was to test the efficacy of a BAI addressing the full spectrum of alcohol use in a general population sample and across alcohol risk groups. Design Two‐parallel‐group randomized controlled trial (allocation ratio 1:1) with post‐baseline assessments at months 3, 6 and 12. Setting One municipal registry office in Germany responsible for registration, passport and vehicle admission issues. Participants A total of 1646 proactively recruited 18–64‐year‐old adults with past year alcohol use (56% women, 66% low‐risk drinkers) were randomized to intervention (n = 815) or control (n = 831). Intervention and comparator The intervention consisted of assessment plus computer‐generated individualized feedback letters at baseline and months 3 and 6. Comparator was assessment only. Measurements Primary outcome was change in the self‐reported number of drinks/week from baseline to 12 months. Changes at 3 and 6 months were secondary outcomes. Moderator was alcohol risk group (low‐risk versus at‐risk drinking) according to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test–Consumption, with scores from 1‐3 (women) and from 1‐4 (men) indicating low‐risk drinking. Findings For the whole sample, significant group differences were observed neither at 12‐month follow‐up [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.87–1.17, Bayes factor (BE) = 0.52] nor at previous assessments (month 3: IRR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.92–1.12, BE = 0.41; month 6: IRR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.81–1.07, BE = 1.10). Moderator analyses revealed that low‐risk drinkers were more likely to benefit from BAI only at month 6 than at‐risk drinkers (IRR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.70–0.86). Conclusions In a randomized controlled trial, there was no clear evidence for efficacy of a computer‐based brief alcohol intervention in a general population sample, but there was some evidence of medium‐term benefits in the large but understudied group of low‐risk drinkers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a brief alcohol intervention addressing the full spectrum of drinking in an adult general population sample: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sacks et al (36) found that in 2010, alcohol use cost the U.S. approximately $249.0 billion; 72% of the costs were associated with reduced workplace productivity and 11% to healthcare expenses. Alcohol consumption has also been linked to negative short- and long-term health effects and effects on mortality measures, ranging from increases in alcohol-related cancers to accidental alcohol-related accidents (37).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The copyright holder for this this version posted September 23, 2020. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.20.20197608 doi: medRxiv preprint negative short-and long-term health effects and effects on mortality measures, ranging from increases in alcohol-related cancers to accidental alcohol-related accidents (37).…”

Section: Implications For Preventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

At home and online during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic and the relationship to alcohol consumption in a national sample of U.S. adults

Chartier

Guidry

Lee

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The current study seeks to understand the links between social media use and alcohol consumption during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: Data were from the national Understanding American Study, a probability-based Internet panel weighted to represent the U.S. population. Subjects (N=5874; 51% female) were adults, 18 years and older, who completed a March survey (wave 1) and a follow-up survey one month later (wave 3). Analyses assessed the relationship of social media use at wave 1 with wave 3 alcohol use, accounting for wave 1 alcohol use and the socio-demographic characteristics of the sample. We examined the effect of working or studying from home as a moderator. Results: Twitter and Instagram users, but not Facebook users, drank more frequently at wave 3 than non-users. For Instagram users, more frequent alcohol use at wave 3 was at least partially attributed to the frequency of drinking at wave 1. The interaction between Twitter use and working or studying from home was statistically significant. The combination of being on Twitter and working or studying from home was associated with drinking more days a week. Conclusions: Exposure to content about COVID-19 and increased alcohol consumption during the pandemic may contribute to more frequent alcohol use for some social media users, especially those sheltering at home. The study of public health messaging via social media to change alcohol use behaviors during traumatic events is warranted.

show abstract

“…Alcohol’s contributions to serious illnesses, injuries and premature deaths are usually contributory and often not even recorded. Sherk et al [ 25 ] estimated that over 90% of alcohol-attributable deaths in a Canadian jurisdiction were partially alcohol attributable, and less than 10% wholly or 100% attributable. A good example is alcohol-related breast cancer.…”

Section: What Are the Obstacles To Effective Policy Implementation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Government Options to Reduce the Impact of Alcohol on Human Health: Obstacles to Effective Policy Implementation

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence for effective government policies to reduce exposure to alcohol’s carcinogenic and hepatoxic effects has strengthened in recent decades. Policies with the strongest evidence involve reducing the affordability, availability and cultural acceptability of alcohol. However, policies that reduce population consumption compete with powerful commercial vested interests. This paper draws on the Canadian Alcohol Policy Evaluation (CAPE), a formal assessment of effective government action on alcohol across Canadian jurisdictions. It also draws on alcohol policy case studies elsewhere involving attempts to introduce minimum unit pricing and cancer warning labels on alcohol containers. Canadian governments collectively received a failing grade (F) for alcohol policy implementation during the most recent CAPE assessment in 2017. However, had the best practices observed in any one jurisdiction been implemented consistently, Canada would have received an A grade. Resistance to effective alcohol policies is due to (1) lack of public awareness of both need and effectiveness, (2) a lack of government regulatory mechanisms to implement effective policies, (3) alcohol industry lobbying, and (4) a failure from the public health community to promote specific and feasible actions as opposed to general principles, e.g., ‘increased prices’ or ‘reduced affordability’. There is enormous untapped potential in most countries for the implementation of proven strategies to reduce alcohol-related harm. While alcohol policies have weakened in many countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, societies may now also be more accepting of public health-inspired policies with proven effectiveness and potential economic benefits.

show abstract

Does Drinking Within Low-Risk Guidelines Prevent Harm? Implications for High-Income Countries Using the International Model of Alcohol Harms and Policies

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Effects of a brief alcohol intervention addressing the full spectrum of drinking in an adult general population sample: a randomized controlled trial

Effects of a brief alcohol intervention addressing the full spectrum of drinking in an adult general population sample: a randomized controlled trial

At home and online during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic and the relationship to alcohol consumption in a national sample of U.S. adults

Government Options to Reduce the Impact of Alcohol on Human Health: Obstacles to Effective Policy Implementation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About