Peter Miller1, Nic Droste1, Florentine de Groot1, Darren Palmer2, Jennifer Tindall3, Lucy Busija4, Shannon Hyder1, Karen Gilham3, John Wiggers3. 1. School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 2. School of Criminology, Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. 3. Wallsend Health Services, Hunter New England Population Health, Newcastle, Australia. 4. Biostatistics Unit, Office of Pro Vice-Chancellor-Health, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The study investigates the prevalence of pre-drinking culture in the night-time economy (NTE) and its impact upon intoxication and alcohol-related harm and violence experienced by patrons. DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted in and around licensed venues in Newcastle (NSW) and Geelong (Victoria) during peak trading hours (typically 9pm-1am). Participants completed a five minute structured interview which targeted: demographics, past and planned movements on the survey night, safety/experience of harm, and patron intoxication. 3949 people agreed to be interviewed, a response rate of 90.7%. Around half (54.9%) of interviewees were male and mean age was 24.4 years (SD = 5.8). RESULTS: 66.8% of participants reported pre-drinking prior to attending licensed venues. On a 1-10 scale measuring self-rated intoxication, pre-drinkers scored significantly higher compared to non pre-drinkers (P < 0.001). Compared to non-pre-drinkers, patrons who had consumed 6-10 standard pre-drinks were 1.5 times more likely to be involved in a violent incident in the past 12 months (OR = 1.50, 95%CI 1.03-2.19, P = 0.037) increasing to 1.8 times more likely for patrons who had 11-15 drinks (OR = 1.80, 95%CI 1.04-3.11 P = .036). Pre-drinking was also associated with both self-rated and observer-rated intoxication, as well as increased probability of illicit drug use. Amongst pre-drinkers, price was the most commonly reported motive for pre-drinking (51.8%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 'Pre-drinking' was normal behaviour in the current sample and contributes significantly to the burden of harm and intoxication in the NTE. Price disparity between packaged vs. venue liquor is a key motivator for pre-drinking.
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The study investigates the prevalence of pre-drinking culture in the night-time economy (NTE) and its impact upon intoxication and alcohol-related harm and violence experienced by patrons. DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted in and around licensed venues in Newcastle (NSW) and Geelong (Victoria) during peak trading hours (typically 9pm-1am). Participants completed a five minute structured interview which targeted: demographics, past and planned movements on the survey night, safety/experience of harm, and patron intoxication. 3949 people agreed to be interviewed, a response rate of 90.7%. Around half (54.9%) of interviewees were male and mean age was 24.4 years (SD = 5.8). RESULTS: 66.8% of participants reported pre-drinking prior to attending licensed venues. On a 1-10 scale measuring self-rated intoxication, pre-drinkers scored significantly higher compared to non pre-drinkers (P < 0.001). Compared to non-pre-drinkers, patrons who had consumed 6-10 standard pre-drinks were 1.5 times more likely to be involved in a violent incident in the past 12 months (OR = 1.50, 95%CI 1.03-2.19, P = 0.037) increasing to 1.8 times more likely for patrons who had 11-15 drinks (OR = 1.80, 95%CI 1.04-3.11 P = .036). Pre-drinking was also associated with both self-rated and observer-rated intoxication, as well as increased probability of illicit drug use. Amongst pre-drinkers, price was the most commonly reported motive for pre-drinking (51.8%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 'Pre-drinking' was normal behaviour in the current sample and contributes significantly to the burden of harm and intoxication in the NTE. Price disparity between packaged vs. venue liquor is a key motivator for pre-drinking.
Authors: Kerri Coomber; Richelle Mayshak; Shannon Hyder; Nicolas Droste; Ashlee Curtis; Amy Pennay; William Gilmore; Tina Lam; Tanya Chikritzhs; Peter G Miller Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Nicholas Taylor; Kerri Coomber; Richelle Mayshak; Renee Zahnow; Jason Ferris; Peter Miller Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 3.390