» Articles » PMID: 33592624

Do Brief Alcohol Interventions Reduce Driving After Drinking Among College Students? A Two-step Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data

Overview
Journal Alcohol Alcohol
Specialty Psychiatry
Date 2021 Feb 16
PMID 33592624
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aims: College students who drink are at an increased risk of driving after drinking and alcohol-involved traffic accidents and deaths. Furthermore, the persistence of driving after drinking over time underscores a need for effective interventions to prevent future drunk driving in adulthood. The present study examined whether brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) for college students reduce driving after drinking.

Methods: A two-step meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) was conducted using a combined sample of 6801 college students from 15 randomized controlled trials (38% male, 72% White and 58% first-year students). BAIs included individually delivered Motivational Interviewing with Personalized Feedback (MI + PF), Group Motivational Interviewing (GMI), and stand-alone Personalized Feedback (PF) interventions. Two outcome variables, driving after two+/three+ drinks and driving after four+/five+ drinks, were checked, harmonized and analyzed separately for each study and then combined for meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.

Results: BAIs lowered the risk of driving after four+/five+ drinks (19% difference in the odds of driving after drinking favoring BAIs vs. control), but not the risk of driving after two+/three+ drinks (9% difference). Subsequent subgroup analysis indicated that the MI + PF intervention was comparatively better than PF or GMI.

Conclusions: BAIs provide a harm reduction approach to college drinking. Hence, it is encouraging that BAIs reduce the risk of driving after heavy drinking among college students. However, there may be opportunities to enhance the intervention content and timing to be more relevant for driving after drinking and improve the outcome assessment and reporting to demonstrate its effect.

Citing Articles

Young adult impaired driving behaviors and perceived norms of driving under the influence of simultaneous alcohol and cannabis use.

Hultgren B, Delawalla M, Szydlowski V, Guttmannova K, Cadigan J, Kilmer J Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2024; 48(12):2319-2330.

PMID: 39616528 PMC: 11631637. DOI: 10.1111/acer.15459.


The selection of statistical models for reporting count outcomes and intervention effects in brief alcohol intervention trials: A review and recommendations.

Tan L, Luningham J, Huh D, Zhou Z, Tanner-Smith E, Baldwin S Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2023; 48(1):16-28.

PMID: 38054529 PMC: 10841606. DOI: 10.1111/acer.15232.


Injunctive Norms and Driving Under the Influence and Riding With an Impaired Driver Among Young Adults in Washington State.

Hultgren B, Guttmannova K, Cadigan J, Kilmer J, Delawalla M, Lee C J Adolesc Health. 2023; 73(5):852-858.

PMID: 37530684 PMC: 11837866. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2023.06.010.


Do brief motivational interventions increase motivation for change in drinking among college students? A two-step meta-analysis of individual participant data.

Tan Z, Tanner-Smith E, Walters S, Tan L, Huh D, Zhou Z Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2023; 47(8):1433-1446.

PMID: 37526588 PMC: 10692312. DOI: 10.1111/acer.15126.


Using mobile technology to influence alcohol-impaired driving risk perceptions and decisions.

Haney A, Warner O, McMullin S, Motschman C, Trull T, McCarthy D Psychol Addict Behav. 2023; 38(1):47-55.

PMID: 37141035 PMC: 10624646. DOI: 10.1037/adb0000929.


References
1.
LaBrie J, Hummer J, Neighbors C, Pedersen E . Live interactive group-specific normative feedback reduces misperceptions and drinking in college students: a randomized cluster trial. Psychol Addict Behav. 2008; 22(1):141-8. PMC: 4221269. DOI: 10.1037/0893-164X.22.1.141. View

2.
Steinka-Fry K, Tanner-Smith E, Hennessy E . Effects of Brief Alcohol Interventions on Drinking and Driving among Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Addict Prev. 2015; 3(1). PMC: 4515415. DOI: 10.13188/2330-2178.1000016. View

3.
Patrick M, Terry-McElrath Y, Lanza S, Jager J, Schulenberg J, OMalley P . Shifting Age of Peak Binge Drinking Prevalence: Historical Changes in Normative Trajectories Among Young Adults Aged 18 to 30. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2019; 43(2):287-298. PMC: 6432634. DOI: 10.1111/acer.13933. View

4.
Sutton A, Higgins J . Recent developments in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2007; 27(5):625-50. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2934. View

5.
Walters S, Vader A, Harris T, Field C, Jouriles E . Dismantling motivational interviewing and feedback for college drinkers: a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009; 77(1):64-73. PMC: 2704891. DOI: 10.1037/a0014472. View