Energy Drink Use Patterns Among Young Adults: Associations with Drunk Driving

Arria, Amelia M.; Caldeira, Kimberly M.; Bugbee, Brittany A.; Vincent, Kathryn B.; O’Grady, Kevin E.

doi:10.1111/acer.13229

Cited by 29 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Internal consistency among this sample was acceptable for all five scale scores ( α s>.75). Convergent validity in relation to substance use and other problem behaviors has been demonstrated previously (Arria et al, 2015, 2016; Arria et al, 2013a; Arria et al., 2013b; Arria et al, 2013c). …”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 58%

Risk factors for gambling and substance use among recent college students

Caldeira

Arria

O’Grady

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background While it is well known that substance use and gambling overlap, the degree to which this overlap can be explained by shared risk factors has not been fully explored. This study aimed to identify common and unique risk factors for gambling and substance use among young adults. Methods Young adults (n=1,019) in a longitudinal study since college entry were interviewed annually. Past-year frequency of seven gambling activities was assessed once (Year 5). Structural equation models evaluated suspected risk factors in two models, one for gambling with substance use as an intermediary variable, and one for substance use with gambling as the intermediary variable. Results Sixty percent gambled; 6% gambled weekly or more. Examination of the two structural models supported the existence of significant paths (a) from two of the five substance use variables (alcohol, drugs) to gambling frequency, and (b) from gambling frequency to all five substance use variables. Every risk factor associated with gambling was also associated with one or more substance use variables. Risk factors common to gambling and substance use were sex, race/ethnicity, extracurricular involvement (fraternity/sorority, athletics), impulsive sensation-seeking, and behavioral dysregulation. Risk factors unique to substance use were conduct problems, anxiety, and parent’s history of alcohol and mental health problems. Conclusions Gambling and substance use are interrelated, but with incomplete overlap in their respective risk factors. Results underscore the need for longitudinal research to elucidate their distinct etiologies.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 58%

Risk factors for gambling and substance use among recent college students

Caldeira

Arria

O’Grady

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies however, have not found significant associations between AMED consumption and problematic behaviors including binge drinking (Flotta et al, ), higher intoxication levels (Droste, Miller, Pennay, Zinkiewicz, & Lubman, ; Rossheim and Thombs, ), increased levels of sensation seeking (Snipes et al, ), being male (Malinauskas et al, ; Reid et al, ), younger age (Flotta et al, ), having a lower grade point average (Azagba et al, ; Patrick et al, ), school type (Martz et al, ), education level (Pennay et al, ), income (Pennay et al, ), general health (Pennay et al, ), sleep problems (Bonar et al, ), smoking (Pennay et al, ), and nonmedical use of opioids and anxiolytics (Khan et al, ). Further studies have also reported no significant associations between AMED consumption and drunk driving (Arria et al, ; Berger et al, ; Curtis et al, ; Flotta et al, ), wearing a seatbelt when riding in a car driven by someone else (Flotta et al, ), being hurt or injured (Berger et al, ), race or ethnic group (Patrick et al, ; Wells et al, ), sexual identity (Wells et al, ), participation in unprotected sex (Miller, ), unwanted sexual contact (Berger et al, ), and sexual victimization in women (Snipes et al, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Significant associations have been reported between AMED consumption and binge drinking (Gonzales et al, 2015;Emond et al, 2014;Martz et al, 2015;Patrick et al, 2016;Pennay et al, 2015;Reid et al, 2015), drunkenness (Kristjansson, Mann, Sigfusdottir, & James, 2015), increased alcohol intake, higher blood alcohol concentrations (BACs; Arria, Caldeira, Bugbee, Vincent, & O'Grady, 2016;Azagba et al, 2013;Bonar, Green, & Asfrafioun, 2017;Brache & Stockwell, 2011;Cheng et al, 2012;O'Brien et al, 2008;Pennay et al, 2014;Woolsey, Waigandt, & Beck, 2010), hazardous drinking (Bonar et al, 2015;Eckschmidt et al, 2013), risk of alcohol use disorder (Emond et al, 2014), risk for alcohol dependence (Cheng et al, 2012;Droste et al, 2014;Snipes et al, 2015), and gambling .…”

Section: Associations With Amed Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED): A critical review and meta‐analysis

Verster

Benson

Johnson

et al. 2018

Human Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to critically review the (1) prevalence of alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED) consumption, (2) motives for AMED consumption, (3) correlates of AMED consumption, and (4) whether AMED consumption has an impact on (a) alcohol consumption, (b) subjective intoxication, and (c) risk‐taking behavior.Overall a minority of the population consumes AMED, typically infrequently. Motives for AMED consumption are predominantly hedonistic and social. Meta‐analyses revealed that AMED consumers drink significantly more alcohol than alcohol‐only (AO) consumers. Within‐subject comparisons restricted to AMED consumers revealed that alcohol consumption does not significantly differ between typical AMED and AO occasions. On past month heaviest drinking occasions, AMED users consume significantly less alcohol on AMED occasions when compared to AO occasions. AMED consumers experience significantly fewer negative consequences and risk‐taking behavior on AMED occasions compared with AO occasions. Meta‐analyses of subjective intoxication studies suggest that AMED consumption does not differentially affect subjective intoxication when compared to AO consumption. In conclusion, when compared to AO consumption, mixing alcohol with energy drink does not affect subjective intoxication and seems unlikely to increase total alcohol consumption, associated risk‐taking behavior, nor other negative alcohol‐related consequences. Further research may be necessary to fully reveal the effects of AMED.

show abstract

“…Almost one-quarter of college students have mixed an ED with alcohol (O’Brien et al, 2008), and cross-sectional evidence links this behavior to increased risk for alcohol-related problems such as alcohol dose escalation and heavy drinking patterns, subjective increases in alcohol desires and expectancies, injuries, and sexual consequences (Arria et al, 2010; Ferré and O’Brien, 2011; Ferreira et al, 2013; Mallett et al, 2014; Marczinski et al, 2013; Miller, 2012; O’Brien et al, 2013; O’Brien et al, 2008). We previously reported that ED consumption is associated with an increased risk for alcohol dependence and more frequent drunk driving, even after adjustment for family history, conduct disorder, other caffeine consumption, and sensation-seeking (Arria et al, 2016b; Arria et al, 2011a). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Trajectories of energy drink consumption and subsequent drug use during young adulthood

Arria

Caldeira

Bugbee

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Highly caffeinated energy drinks (EDs) are popular with adolescents and young adults, but longitudinal consumption patterns are poorly understood especially in relation to other substance use. Methods ED and other substance use were assessed annually (modal ages 21–25) among a sample (n=1099) who were originally recruited as first-year college students (modal age 18). Trajectory groups were derived based on probability of past-year use during ages 21–24, and compared for possible differences in substance use outcomes at age 25, holding constant demographics, sensation-seeking, other caffeine consumption, and age 21 substance use. Results From age 21 to 25, ED consumption declined in both annual prevalence [62.5%wt to 49.1%wt (wt=weighted)] and frequency of use among consumers (35.2 to 26.3 days/year). Yet individuals exhibiting a Persistent trajectory (51.4%) of consumption outnumbered those with Non-Use (20.6%), Intermediate (17.4%), or Desisting (10.6%) trajectories. Age 25 cocaine use, nonmedical use of prescription stimulants (NPS), and alcohol use disorder (AUD) risk were significantly associated with trajectory group membership, with Persistent and Intermediate groups exhibiting the highest risk for such outcomes, even accounting for prior substance use and other risk factors. Neither marijuana nor tobacco use were associated with group membership. Conclusions The typical pattern of ED consumption among this sample was sustained use throughout young adulthood. Such individuals appear to be at high risk for adverse substance use outcomes, and results suggest possible specificity regarding cocaine use and NPS, and AUD risk. More research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying the connection between ED and substance use.

show abstract

Energy Drink Use Patterns Among Young Adults: Associations with Drunk Driving

Cited by 29 publications

References 51 publications

Risk factors for gambling and substance use among recent college students

Risk factors for gambling and substance use among recent college students

Alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED): A critical review and meta‐analysis

Trajectories of energy drink consumption and subsequent drug use during young adulthood

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About