BACKGROUND: There is consistent evidence that the binge drinking standard of 5+ drinks per drinking occasion for men (4+ for women) is associated with risk for negative consequences. Yet, many have questioned the adequacy of this measure as an index of intoxication (e.g., a blood alcohol concentration [BAC] of 0.08 g%). In response to these concerns, a National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism task force recommended adding a time qualifier of 2 hours to this criterion. Although conceptually appealing, there has been little effort to determine whether this new measure better captures drinking that leads to negative consequences. METHODS: This study examined the new binge standard (2-hour period) and old binge standard (no time qualifier) in relation to frequency of drinking to an estimated BAC of 0.08 g% and the experience of negative drinking consequences. These relations were examined within both a social drinking sample of adults (N = 200) and a sample of heavy-drinking young adults (N = 168) participating in a randomized clinical trial for drinking reduction. RESULTS: Contrary to the purpose of adding a time qualifier, the new binge measure was not more strongly correlated with drinking to an estimated BAC of 0.08 g% relative to the old binge measure. In addition, when both measures were entered simultaneously into a regression model, only the old binge measure accounted for significant variance in negative drinking consequences. CONCLUSIONS: These empirically based results suggest that the original binge standard without a time qualifier may be preferable to the 2-hour standard as a marker for risk. The findings also suggest that further efforts are needed to identify a brief measure that effectively captures drinking to intoxication and related risk for negative consequences.
BACKGROUND: There is consistent evidence that the binge drinking standard of 5+ drinks per drinking occasion for men (4+ for women) is associated with risk for negative consequences. Yet, many have questioned the adequacy of this measure as an index of intoxication (e.g., a blood alcohol concentration [BAC] of 0.08 g%). In response to these concerns, a National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism task force recommended adding a time qualifier of 2 hours to this criterion. Although conceptually appealing, there has been little effort to determine whether this new measure better captures drinking that leads to negative consequences. METHODS: This study examined the new binge standard (2-hour period) and old binge standard (no time qualifier) in relation to frequency of drinking to an estimated BAC of 0.08 g% and the experience of negative drinking consequences. These relations were examined within both a social drinking sample of adults (N = 200) and a sample of heavy-drinking young adults (N = 168) participating in a randomized clinical trial for drinking reduction. RESULTS: Contrary to the purpose of adding a time qualifier, the new binge measure was not more strongly correlated with drinking to an estimated BAC of 0.08 g% relative to the old binge measure. In addition, when both measures were entered simultaneously into a regression model, only the old binge measure accounted for significant variance in negative drinking consequences. CONCLUSIONS: These empirically based results suggest that the original binge standard without a time qualifier may be preferable to the 2-hour standard as a marker for risk. The findings also suggest that further efforts are needed to identify a brief measure that effectively captures drinking to intoxication and related risk for negative consequences.
Authors: Sarah S Dermody; Jennifer W Tidey; Rachel L Denlinger; Lauren R Pacek; Mustafa al'Absi; David J Drobes; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Ryan Vandrey; Eric C Donny Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Paul A Gilbert; Lauren E Pass; Alex S Keuroghlian; Tom K Greenfield; Sari L Reisner Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-03-10 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Sandra A Springer; Angela Di Paola; Marwan M Azar; Russell Barbour; Archana Krishnan; Frederick L Altice Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Garrett I Ash; Ralitza Gueorguieva; Nancy P Barnett; Wuyi Wang; David S Robledo; Kelly S DeMartini; Brian Pittman; Nancy S Redeker; Stephanie S O'Malley; Lisa M Fucito Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2022-05-14 Impact factor: 3.928
Authors: Clark H Denny; Daniel W Hungerford; Lela R McKnight-Eily; Patricia P Green; Elizabeth P Dang; Michael J Cannon; Nancy E Cheal; Joseph E Sniezek Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Kathleen A Garrison; Kelly S DeMartini; Philip R Corlett; Patrick D Worhunsky; John H Krystal; Stephanie S O'Malley Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 4.280