Trial of the University Assistance Program for Alcohol Use Among Mandated Students

Amaro, Hortensia; Ahl, Marilyn; Matsumoto, Atsushi; Prado, Guillermo; Mulé, Christina; Kemmemer, Amaura; Larimer, Mary E.; Masi, Dale A.; Mantella, Philomena

doi:10.15288/jsads.2009.s16.45

Cited by 28 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These fi ndings are consistent with prior research identifying better outcomes among interventions with an MI component in mandated populations (LaChance et al, 2009;White et al, 2007) and potential iatrogenic effects among education-only and/ or web-only programs (Amaro et al, 2009;Doumas et al, 2011;Terlecki et al, 2010). The lack of benefi t in eBAC following the ADP condition is particularly concerning given fi ndings suggesting decreases in drinking following a sanctioning event before or independent of a clinical intervention (Barnett et al, 2006;White et al, 2008) and suggests that the immediate effects may be undermined or at least not maintained in an education-only program.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Alcohol Interventions for Mandated Students: Behavioral Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Logan¹,

Kilmer²,

King³

et al. 2015

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective: This study investigated the effectiveness of three single-session interventions with high-risk mandated students while considering the influence of motivational interviewing (MI) microskills. Method: This randomized, controlled pilot trial evaluated single-session interventions: Alcohol Skills Training Program (ASTP), Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students (BA-SICS) feedback sessions, and treatment-as-usual Alcohol Diversion Program (ADP) educational groups. Participants were 61 full-time undergraduates at a southern U.S. campus sanctioned to a clinical program following violation of an on-campus alcohol policy (M age = 19.16 years; 42.6% female). Results: Results revealed a signifi cant effect of time for reductions in estimated blood alcohol concentration (eBAC) and number of weekly drinks but not in alcohol-related consequences. Although ASTP and BASICS participants reported signifi cant decreases in eBAC over time, ADP participant levels did not change (with no intervention effects on quantity or consequences). MI microskills were not related to outcomes. Conclusions: Results from this study suggest equivalent behavioral impacts for the MI-based interventions, although individual differences in outcome trajectories suggest that research is needed to further customize mandated interventions. Given the overall decrease in eBAC following the sanction, the lack of reduction in the ADP condition warrants caution when using education-only interventions. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, 76, 31-37, 2015)

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Alcohol Interventions for Mandated Students: Behavioral Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Logan¹,

Kilmer²,

King³

et al. 2015

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Results of eight of these interventions were reported in a special issue of JSAD . Results provided support for in-person individual BMIs in a campus health setting (Schaus et al, 2009) alone and in combination with other strategies as part of a student assistance program (Amaro et al, 2009); provided preliminary support for a parent handbook in reducing drinking initiation, as well as noted growth in drinking for women across the course of the freshman year (Ichiyama et al, 2009); supported shortterm effi cacy of a group BMI for reducing alcohol use and related consequences for freshman women (LaBrie et al, 2009); suggested that reductions in perceived norms and increases in protective behavioral strategies may mediate effi cacy of peer-based alcohol prevention approaches (Cimini et al, 2009); and demonstrated reduced growth in drinking for participants in residential learning communities compared with non-residential learning community participants through 18-month follow-up (Cranford et al, 2009). Studies reported in the JSAD supplement also provided initial quasi-experimental support for two comprehensive campus-community partnerships (Saltz et al, 2009;Wood et al, 2009) and provided an update to the estimates of alcohol-related harms by Hingson and colleagues (2009).…”

Section: "A Call To Action"-the Niaaa Task Force Reportmentioning

confidence: 85%

College Student Drinking Research From the 1940s to the Future: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going

Kilmer¹,

Cronce²,

Larimer³

2014

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs Suppl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective: College student drinking is not a new phenomenon, yet the fi eld of research studying college student drinking is relatively young. In recognition of the 75th anniversary of what is now the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, this article reviews the path from the fi rst article to focus exclusively on college student drinking as the topic (published in 1945) to the current state of the science and attempts to look forward to the next steps in the fi eld's research agenda. Method: Articles were selected by consensus of the authors from incarnations of the journal and other academic journals based on their relevance to the genesis of current best practices regarding college student drinking prevention. Results: Major eras and themes include (a) early efforts to describe and understand college student drinking; (b) building foundations for prevention and intervention efforts in response to growing concerns about high-risk drinking; (c) the emergence of harm-reduction efforts, normative interventions, and efforts to document campus strategies; (d) effi cacious prevention efforts and high-risk drinking; (e) the "Call to Action" Task Force Report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; and (f) updates to the science (including emerging technology). Conclusions: Understanding the rich history of science related to college drinking prevention should prepare and guide our fi eld for the next 75 years of scientifi c advances, leading to even greater understanding of the etiology and topology of college student drinking as well as more effective methods to reduce alcoholrelated harms. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, Supplement 17, 26-35, 2014)

show abstract

“…First, several of the studies involve randomized control trials, but these were limited to interventions that involved random assignment at either the individual level (Amaro et al, 2009;Cimini et al, 2009;Ichiyama et al, 2009;Schaus et al, 2009b) or group level . Randomized control trials of institutional or community-level interventions are possible, of course, but are extremely expensive.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such studies, using growth curve modeling and other sophisticated analysis strategies (Ichiyama et al, 2009), also offer the opportunity to enhance our understanding of intra-individual variation over time; the cognitive, motivational, and behavioral changes that mediate reduced alcohol consumption; and how an intervention's effectiveness interacts with differing environmental conditions. Third, one-on-one brief motivational interviews are both labor-and time-intensive (Amaro et al, 2009;Schaus et al, 2009b). Group-level interventions are more effi cient but still require an ongoing investment of signifi cant staff resources (Cimini et al, 2009;LaBrie et al, 2009).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

NIAAA's Rapid Response to College Drinking Problems Initiative: Reinforcing the Use of Evidence-Based Approaches in College Alcohol Prevention

DeJong

Larimer

Wood

et al. 2009

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs Suppl.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective: The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) created the Rapid Response to College Drinking Problems initiative so that senior college administrators facing an alcohol-related crisis could get assistance from well-established alcohol researchers and NIAAA staff. Method: Based on a competitive grant process, NIAAA selected fi ve teams of research scientists with expertise in college drinking research. NIAAA then invited college administrators to propose interventions to address a recently experienced alcohol-re- that emerged from that research. Eight articles present evaluation fi ndings for prevention and treatment interventions, which can be grouped by the individual, group/interpersonal, institutional, and community levels of the social ecological framework. Additional studies provide further insights that can inform prevention and treatment programs designed to reduce alcohol-related problems among college students. This article provides an overview of these fi ndings, placing them in the context of the college drinking intervention literature. Conclusions: College drinking remains a daunting problem on many campuses, but evidence-based strategies-such as those described in this supplement-provide hope that more effective solutions can be found. The Rapid Response initiative has helped solidify the necessary link between research and practice in college alcohol prevention and treatment. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, Supplement No. 16: 5-11, 2009)

show abstract

Trial of the University Assistance Program for Alcohol Use Among Mandated Students

Cited by 28 publications

References 55 publications

Alcohol Interventions for Mandated Students: Behavioral Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Alcohol Interventions for Mandated Students: Behavioral Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

College Student Drinking Research From the 1940s to the Future: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going

NIAAA's Rapid Response to College Drinking Problems Initiative: Reinforcing the Use of Evidence-Based Approaches in College Alcohol Prevention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About