Deborah A Dawson1, Wilson M Compton, Bridget F Grant. 1. Laboratory of Epidemiology and Biometry, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5635 Fishers Lane, MSC 9304, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-9304, USA. ddawson@mail.nih.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test the ability of a question on frequency of drinking 5+ (for men) or 4+ (for women) drinks to screen for drug use and drug-use disorders (DUDs) in a general population sample. METHOD: Using data collected in 2001-2002 from a representative U.S. adult population sample (N= 43,093), including a subsample of those with past-year emergency-department use (n = 8,525), past-year frequency of drinking 5+/4+ drinks was evaluated as a screener for drug use and DUDs for four categories of illicit drugs. RESULTS: Sensitivities and specificities of the 5+/4+ drinks screener were 72.4% and 76.6% for any drug dependence, 71.9% and 77.3% for any DUD, and 63.3% and 78.9% for any drug use in the general population. Sensitivities and specificities were higher for marijuana and cocaine/crack and lowest for illicit prescription drugs. Optimal screening cut-points were once a month or more for cocaine/crack dependence, either once or more a month or seven or more times a year for cocaine/crack DUDs, seven or more times a year for cocaine/crack use, and once or more a year for the other drug use and DUD measures. Sensitivity and specificity were similar among adults who had visited an emergency department in the past year, and the optimal screening cutpoints were identical. CONCLUSIONS: Past-year frequency of drinking 5+/4+ drinks was quite accurate as a screener for past-year marijuana and cocaine/crack use and DUDs, but it was less accurate for illicit prescription drug use and DUDs. Its drug-screening potential can be thought of as "added value" from an item already likely to be asked in the interest of detecting problem drinking. Future work may consider using the alcohol consumption screener as a starting point, with follow-up questions to assess illicit drug use among those who screen positive.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test the ability of a question on frequency of drinking 5+ (for men) or 4+ (for women) drinks to screen for drug use and drug-use disorders (DUDs) in a general population sample. METHOD: Using data collected in 2001-2002 from a representative U.S. adult population sample (N= 43,093), including a subsample of those with past-year emergency-department use (n = 8,525), past-year frequency of drinking 5+/4+ drinks was evaluated as a screener for drug use and DUDs for four categories of illicit drugs. RESULTS: Sensitivities and specificities of the 5+/4+ drinks screener were 72.4% and 76.6% for any drug dependence, 71.9% and 77.3% for any DUD, and 63.3% and 78.9% for any drug use in the general population. Sensitivities and specificities were higher for marijuana and cocaine/crack and lowest for illicit prescription drugs. Optimal screening cut-points were once a month or more for cocaine/crack dependence, either once or more a month or seven or more times a year for cocaine/crack DUDs, seven or more times a year for cocaine/crack use, and once or more a year for the other drug use and DUD measures. Sensitivity and specificity were similar among adults who had visited an emergency department in the past year, and the optimal screening cutpoints were identical. CONCLUSIONS: Past-year frequency of drinking 5+/4+ drinks was quite accurate as a screener for past-year marijuana and cocaine/crack use and DUDs, but it was less accurate for illicit prescription drug use and DUDs. Its drug-screening potential can be thought of as "added value" from an item already likely to be asked in the interest of detecting problem drinking. Future work may consider using the alcohol consumption screener as a starting point, with follow-up questions to assess illicit drug use among those who screen positive.
Authors: Jennifer S Rose; Debra S Herman; Claire Hagerty; Maureen G Phipps; Jeffrey F Peipert; Michael D Stein Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-03-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Leanne Hides; Sue M Cotton; Gregor Berger; John Gleeson; Colin O'Donnell; Tina Proffitt; Patrick D McGorry; Dan I Lubman Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2009-03-06 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Rajeev Ramchand; Grant N Marshall; Terry L Schell; Lisa H Jaycox; Katrin Hambarsoomians; Vivek Shetty; Gudata S Hinika; H Gill Cryer; Peter Meade; Howard Belzberg Journal: J Trauma Date: 2009-05
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; Frederick S Stinson; Patricia S Chou; Ward Kay; Roger Pickering Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2003-07-20 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Peter C Smith; Debbie M Cheng; Donald Allensworth-Davies; Michael R Winter; Richard Saitz Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-04-05 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Richard Saitz; Debbie M Cheng; Donald Allensworth-Davies; Michael R Winter; Peter C Smith Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 2.582