» Articles » PMID: 30396098

Testing a Brief Motivational-interviewing Educational Commitment Module for At-risk College Drinkers: A Randomized Trial

Overview
Journal Addict Behav
Date 2018 Nov 6
PMID 30396098
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The goal of the present study was to test the drink and harm reduction effects of a novel educational commitment (EC) module as a complement to a standard brief MI protocol (i.e., the Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students; BASICS, Dimeff, Baer, Kivlahan, & Marlatt, 1999).

Methods: Using a randomized trial design, 180 university students were assigned to one of three conditions: Information, BASICS, or BASICS+EC. Participants completed an alcohol consumption interview and measures of alcohol-related problems, partying decision-making, subjective student role investment, and self-control-related traits at baseline and at two- and nine-month follow-ups.

Results: Linear models showed significant condition effects for two-month and nine-month drink quantity, but not for alcohol problems/consequences. Secondary outcome analyses showed significant condition effects for two-month high-risk high-reward partying decision-making and nine-month conscientiousness. Somewhat larger-sized decreases in consumption were observed at two months for the BASICS+EC condition compared to the BASICS condition, although these differences were not present at nine months.

Conclusions: The differential efficacy between the BASICS and BASICS+EC conditions compared to the Information condition reinforces the utility of in-person feedback modalities as more intensive indicated prevention strategies for at-risk college drinkers. The limited differential efficacy for BASICS+EC compared to BASICS suggests a brief MI module for the academic/vocational aspects of the student role is not associated with greater long-term drink and harm reduction. Future research should examine more intensive educational commitment modalities, the utility of on-going academic goal and action feedback, and mechanisms of differential efficacy across intervention groups.

Citing Articles

A sex- and gender-based analysis of alcohol treatment intervention research involving youth: A methodological systematic review.

Lowik A, Mniszak C, Pang M, Ziafat K, Karamouzian M, Knight R PLoS Med. 2024; 21(6):e1004413.

PMID: 38829916 PMC: 11182506. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004413.

References
1.
Huh D, Mun E, Larimer M, White H, Ray A, Rhew I . Brief motivational interventions for college student drinking may not be as powerful as we think: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2015; 39(5):919-31. PMC: 4502982. DOI: 10.1111/acer.12714. View

2.
Nelson T, Toomey T, Lenk K, Erickson D, Winters K . Implementation of NIAAA College Drinking Task Force recommendations: how are colleges doing 6 years later?. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2010; 34(10):1687-93. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2010.01268.x. View

3.
Read J, Kahler C, Strong D, Colder C . Development and preliminary validation of the young adult alcohol consequences questionnaire. J Stud Alcohol. 2006; 67(1):169-77. DOI: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.169. View

4.
Terlecki M, Buckner J, Larimer M, Copeland A . Randomized controlled trial of brief alcohol screening and intervention for college students for heavy-drinking mandated and volunteer undergraduates: 12-month outcomes. Psychol Addict Behav. 2015; 29(1):2-16. PMC: 4388044. DOI: 10.1037/adb0000056. View

5.
Mastroleo N, Murphy J, Colby S, Monti P, Barnett N . Incident-specific and individual-level moderators of brief intervention effects with mandated college students. Psychol Addict Behav. 2011; 25(4):616-24. PMC: 3676278. DOI: 10.1037/a0024508. View