International Journal of Public Health

, Volume 57, Issue 6, pp 935–944 | Cite as

A quasi-randomized group trial of a brief alcohol intervention on risky single occasion drinking among secondary school students

  • Gerhard Gmel
  • Vigeli Venzin
  • Katrin Marmet
  • George Danko
  • Florian Labhart
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

To show the effectiveness of a brief group alcohol intervention. Aims of the intervention were to reduce the frequency of heavy drinking occasions, maximum number of drinks on an occasion and overall weekly consumption.

Methods

A cluster quasi-randomized control trial (intervention n = 338; control n = 330) among 16- to 18-year-old secondary school students in the Swiss Canton of Zürich. Groups homogeneous for heavy drinking occasions (5+/4+ drinks for men/women) consisted of those having medium risk (3–4) or high risk (5+) occasions in the past 30 days. Groups of 8–10 individuals received two 45-min sessions based on motivational interviewing techniques.

Results

Borderline significant beneficial effects (p < 0.10) on heavy drinking occasions and alcohol volume were found 6 months later for the medium-risk group only, but not for the high-risk group. None of the effects remained significant after Bonferroni corrections.

Conclusions

Group intervention was ineffective for all at-risk users. The heaviest drinkers may need more intensive treatment. Alternative explanations were iatrogenic effects among the heaviest drinkers, assessment reactivity, or reduction of social desirability bias at follow-up through peer feedback.

Keywords

Group randomized trial Brief alcohol intervention Risky single occasion drinking Secondary school students 

References

  1. Babor TF, Higgins-Biddle JC (2001) Brief intervention for hazardous and harmful drinking: a manual for use in primary care. In: World Health Organization (WHO), Department of Health and Substance Department (ed) Screening and brief intervention: for alcohol problems in primary care, 2nd edn. WHO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  2. Babor TF, Caetano R, Casswell S, Edwards G, Giesbrecht N, Graham K, Grube JW, Hill L, Holder HD, Homel R, Livingston M, Österberg E, Rehm J, Room R, Ingeborg R (2010) Alcohol: no ordinary commodity: research and public policy. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bachmann K (1999) Lust oder Last—Berufszufriedenheit und Belastung im Beruf bei Lehrerinnen und Lehrern an berufsbildenden Schulen. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren GmbH, BaltmannsweilerGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertholet N, Daeppen J-B, Wietlisbach V, Fleming M, Burnand B (2005) Reduction of alcohol consumption by brief alcohol intervention in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 165(9):986–995. doi:10.1001/archinte.165.9.986 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bland JM (2000) Sample size in guidelines trials. Fam Pract 17(Suppl 1):S17–S20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradley AC, Baker A, Lewin TJ (2007) Group intervention for coexisting psychosis and substance use disorders in rural Australia: outcomes over 3 years. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 41(6):501–508. doi:10.1080/00048670701332300 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. D’Amico EJ, Osilla KC, Hunter SB (2010) Developing a group motivational interviewing intervention for adolescents at-risk for developing an alcohol or drug use disorder. Alcohol Treat Quart 28(4):417–436. doi:10.1080/07347324.2010.511076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis CG, Thake J, Vilhena N (2010) Social desirability biases in self-reported alcohol consumption and harms. Addict Behav 35(4):302–311. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.11.001 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dishion TJ, Bullock BM, Granic I (2002) Pragmatism in modeling peer influence: dynamics, outcomes, and change processes. Dev Psychopathol 14(4):969–981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Engle B, Macgowan MJ, Amrhein PC (2010) Markers of marijuana use outcomes within adolescent substance abuse group treatment. Res Soc Work Prac 20(3):271–282. doi:10.1177/1049731509347855 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ezzati M, Lopez AD, Rodgers A, Murray CJL (2004) Comparative quantification of health risks. Global and regional burden of disease attributable to selected major risk factors, vol 1 and 2. World Health Organization (WHO), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  12. Faggiano F, Vigna-Taglianti F, Burkhart G, Bohrn K, Cuomo L, Gregori D, Panella M, Scatigna M, Siliquini R, Varona L, van der Kreeft P, Vassara M, Wiborg G, Galanti MR (2010) The effectiveness of a school-based substance abuse prevention program: 18-month follow-up of the EU-Dap cluster randomized controlled trial. Drug Alcohol Depend 108(1–2):56–64. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.11.018
  13. Fields A (2006) Resolving patient ambivalence. A five session motivational interviewing intervention. Hollifield Associates, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  14. Foote J, DeLuca A, Magura S, Warner A, Grand A, Rosenblum A, Stahl S (1999) A group motivational treatment for chemical dependency. J Subst Abuse Treat 17(3):181–192 pii:S0740547299000033PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gmel G, Daeppen JB (2007) Recall bias for seven-day recall measurement of alcohol consumption among emergency department patients: implications for case-crossover designs. J Stud Alcohol Drugs 68(2):303–310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gmel G, Kuntsche E, Rehm J (2011) Risky single-occasion drinking: bingeing is not bingeing. Addiction 106(6):1037–1045. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03167.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Handmaker NS, Miller WR, Manicke M (1999) Findings of a pilot study of motivational interviewing with pregnant drinkers. J Stud Alcohol Drugs 60(2):285–287Google Scholar
  18. Hibell B, Adlaf EM, Andersson B, Bjarnason T, Delapenha C, Hasbun J, Johnston L, Sathianathan R (2003) Conducting school surveys on drug abuse. Toolkit module 3. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  19. Hingson RW, Heeren T, Winter MG, Wechsler H (2005) Magnitude of alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among U.S. college students ages 18–24: changes from 1998 to 2001. Annu Rev Public Health 26:259–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hintze JL (ed) (2008) PASS 2008 User’s Guide. NCSS, Dr. Jerry L. Hintze, Kaysville, UTGoogle Scholar
  21. Kaner EF, Beyer F, Dickinson HO, Pienaar E, Campbell F, Schlesinger C, Heather N, Saunders J, Burnand B (2007) Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD004148. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004148.pub3
  22. LaBrie JW, Pedersen ER, Lamb TF, Quinlan T (2007) A campus-based motivational enhancement group intervention reduces problematic drinking in freshmen male college students. Addict Behav 32(5):889–901. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.06.030 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. LaBrie JW, Huchting KK, Lac A, Tawalbeh S, Thompson AD, Larimer ME (2009) Preventing risky drinking in first-year college women: further validation of a female-specific motivational-enhancement group intervention. J Stud Alcohol Suppl 16:77–85Google Scholar
  24. LaChance H, Feldstein Ewing SW, Bryan AD, Hutchison KE (2009) What makes group MET work? A randomized controlled trial of college student drinkers in mandated alcohol diversion. Psychol Addict Behav 23(4):598–612. doi:10.1037/a0016633 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Larimer ME, Cronce JM, Lee CM, Kilmer JR (2004) Brief intervention in college settings. Alcohol Res Health 28(2):94–104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lumley T, Diehr P, Emerson S, Chen L (2002) The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annu Rev Public Health 23:151–169. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.23.100901.140546 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lundahl B, Burke BL (2009) The effectiveness and applicability of motivational interviewing: a practice-friendly review of four meta-analyses. J Clin Psychol 65(11):1232–1245. doi:10.1002/jclp.20638 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCambridge J, Hunt C, Jenkins RJ, Strang J (2011) Cluster randomised trial of the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for universal prevention. Drug Alcohol Depend 114(2–3):177–184. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.07.028 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Miller WR, Rollnick S (2002) Motivational interviewing: preparing people for change, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Murphy JG, Benson TA, Vuchinich RE, Deskins MM, Eakin D, Flood AM, McDevitt-Murphy ME, Torrealday O (2004) A comparison of personalized feedback for college student drinkers delivered with and without a motivational interview. J Stud Alcohol Drugs 65(2):200–203Google Scholar
  31. Nelson TF, Naimi TS, Brewer RD, Wechsler H (2005) The state sets the rate: the relationship among state-specific college binge drinking, state binge drinking rates, and selected state alcohol control policies. Am J Public Health 95(3):441–446. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.043810 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petitti DB (2000) Meta-analysis, decision analysis, and cost-effectiveness analyses. Methods for quantitative synthesis in medicine, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Rehm J, Taylor B, Room R (2006) Global burden of disease from alcohol, illicit drugs and tobacco. Drug Alcohol Rev 25(6):503–513. doi:10.1080/09595230600944453 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roberts C, Tynjälä J, Currie D, King M (2004) Annex 1. Methods. In: Currie C, Roberts C, Morgan A et al (eds) Young people’s health in context—health behaviour in school-aged children (HBSC) study: International Report from the 2001/2002 Survey. World Health Organization (WHO), Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, pp 217–227Google Scholar
  35. Ryan RM, Plant RW, O’Malley S (1995) Initial motivations for alcohol treatment: relations with patient characteristics, treatment involvement, and dropout. Addict Behav 20(3):279–297 pii:0306-4603(94)00072-7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmiege SJ, Broaddus MR, Levin M, Bryan AD (2009) Randomized trial of group interventions to reduce HIV/STD risk and change theoretical mediators among detained adolescents. J Consult Clin Psychol 77(1):38–50. doi:10.1037/a0014513 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tevyaw TO, Monti PM (2004) Motivational enhancement and other brief interventions for adolescent substance abuse: foundations, applications and evaluations. Addiction 99(Suppl 2):63–75. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00855.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Walters ST, Vader AM, Harris TR, Jouriles EN (2009) Reactivity to alcohol assessment measures: an experimental test. Addiction 104(8):1305–1310. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02632.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weiss B, Caron A, Ball S, Tapp J, Johnson M, Weisz JR (2005) Iatrogenic effects of group treatment for antisocial youths. J Consult Clin Psychol 73(6):1036–1044. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1036 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Whitlock EP, Polen MR, Green CA, Orleans T, Klein JD (2004) Behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce risky/harmful alcohol use by adults: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 140 (7):557–568. pii:140/7/557Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Swiss School of Public Health 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerhard Gmel
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Vigeli Venzin
    • 5
  • Katrin Marmet
    • 5
  • George Danko
    • 6
  • Florian Labhart
    • 1
  1. 1.Research DepartmentAddiction SwitzerlandLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Alcohol Treatment CenterLausanne University HospitalLausanneSwitzerland
  3. 3.Centre for Addiction and Mental HealthTorontoCanada
  4. 4.University of the West of New EnglandBristolUK
  5. 5.Cantonal Office for Secondary Education ZürichZurichSwitzerland
  6. 6.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of CaliforniaSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations