Jeroen Lammers1, Ferry Goossens1, Patricia Conrod2, Rutger Engels1,3, Reinout W Wiers4, Marloes Kleinjan3. 1. Trimbos Institute (Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction), Utrecht, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Psychological Medicine and Psychiatry, Section of Addiction, Kings College London, University of London, UK. 3. Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, The Netherlands. 4. Addiction, Development and Psychopathology (ADAPT) Laboratory, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
AIM: The effectiveness of Preventure was tested on drinking behaviour of young adolescents in secondary education in the Netherlands. DESIGN: A cluster randomized controlled trial was carried out, with participants assigned randomly to a two-session coping skills intervention or a control no-intervention condition. SETTING:Fifteen secondary schools throughout the Netherlands; seven schools in the intervention and eight schools in the control condition. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 699 adolescents aged 13-15 years participated, 343 allocated to the intervention and 356 to the control condition, with drinking experience and elevated scores in either negative thinking, anxiety sensitivity, impulsivity or sensation-seeking. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Preventure is a selective school-based alcohol prevention programme targeting personality risk factors. The comparator was a no-intervention control. MEASUREMENTS: The effects of the intervention on the primary outcome past-month binge drinking, and the secondary outcomes binge drinking frequency, alcohol use, alcohol frequency and problem drinking, were examined. The primary analyses of interest were intervention main effects at 12 months post-intervention. In addition, intervention effects on the linear development of binge drinking using a latent-growth curve approach were examined. FINDINGS:Binge drinking rates were not significantly different between the intervention (42.9%) and control group (49.2%) at 12 months follow-up [odds ratio (OR) = 1.05, confidence interval (CI) = 0.99, 1.11]. Intention-to-treat analyses revealed no significant intervention effects on alcohol use (53.9 versus 61.5%; OR = 0.99, CI = 0.86, 1.14) and problem drinking (37.0 versus 44.7%; OR = 1.03, CI = 0.92, 1.10) at 12 months follow-up. The post-hoc latent-growth analyses revealed significant effects on the development of binge drinking (β = -0.16, P = 0.05), and binge drinking frequency (β = -0.14, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: The alcohol prevention programme, Preventure, appears to have little or no effect on overall prevalence of binge drinking in adolescents in the Netherlands but may reduce the development of binge drinking over time.
RCT Entities:
AIM: The effectiveness of Preventure was tested on drinking behaviour of young adolescents in secondary education in the Netherlands. DESIGN: A cluster randomized controlled trial was carried out, with participants assigned randomly to a two-session coping skills intervention or a control no-intervention condition. SETTING: Fifteen secondary schools throughout the Netherlands; seven schools in the intervention and eight schools in the control condition. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 699 adolescents aged 13-15 years participated, 343 allocated to the intervention and 356 to the control condition, with drinking experience and elevated scores in either negative thinking, anxiety sensitivity, impulsivity or sensation-seeking. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Preventure is a selective school-based alcohol prevention programme targeting personality risk factors. The comparator was a no-intervention control. MEASUREMENTS: The effects of the intervention on the primary outcome past-month binge drinking, and the secondary outcomes binge drinking frequency, alcohol use, alcohol frequency and problem drinking, were examined. The primary analyses of interest were intervention main effects at 12 months post-intervention. In addition, intervention effects on the linear development of binge drinking using a latent-growth curve approach were examined. FINDINGS: Binge drinking rates were not significantly different between the intervention (42.9%) and control group (49.2%) at 12 months follow-up [odds ratio (OR) = 1.05, confidence interval (CI) = 0.99, 1.11]. Intention-to-treat analyses revealed no significant intervention effects on alcohol use (53.9 versus 61.5%; OR = 0.99, CI = 0.86, 1.14) and problem drinking (37.0 versus 44.7%; OR = 1.03, CI = 0.92, 1.10) at 12 months follow-up. The post-hoc latent-growth analyses revealed significant effects on the development of binge drinking (β = -0.16, P = 0.05), and binge drinking frequency (β = -0.14, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: The alcohol prevention programme, Preventure, appears to have little or no effect on overall prevalence of binge drinking in adolescents in the Netherlands but may reduce the development of binge drinking over time.
Authors: Ferry X Goossens; J Lammers; S A Onrust; P J Conrod; B Orobio de Castro; K Monshouwer Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2015-10-12 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Kevin M King; Madison C Feil; Max A Halvorson; Rick Kosterman; Jennifer A Bailey; J David Hawkins Journal: Psychol Addict Behav Date: 2020-05-11
Authors: Morgane Guillou-Landreat; Elkhan Tahmazov; Schreck Benoit; Marie Grall-Bronnec; Patricia Conrod; Audrey Livet; Emmanuel Nowak; Jean -Yves Le Reste Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Esmée P Schijven; Daan H G Hulsmans; Joanneke E L VanDerNagel; Jeroen Lammers; Roy Otten; Evelien A P Poelen Journal: Addiction Date: 2020-09-21 Impact factor: 6.526