James G Linakis1,2, Julie R Bromberg1,2, T Charles Casper3, Thomas H Chun1,2, Michael J Mello1,2, Rachel Richards3, Colette C Mull4,5, Rohit P Shenoi6, Cheryl Vance7, Fahd Ahmad8, Lalit Bajaj9, Kathleen M Brown10, Lauren S Chernick11, Daniel M Cohen12, Joel Fein13, Timothy Horeczko14, Michael N Levas15, Brett McAninch16, Michael C Monuteaux17, Jackie Grupp-Phelan18, Elizabeth C Powell19, Alexander Rogers20, Brian Suffoletto16, J Michael Dean3, Anthony Spirito1. 1. The Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 2. Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island. 3. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 4. Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, Delaware. 5. Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 6. Texas Children's Hospital and College of Medicine, Baylor University, Houston, Texas. 7. University of California, Davis, Davis, California. 8. St Louis Children's Hospital and School of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri. 9. Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado. 10. Children's National Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia. 11. Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York City, New York. 12. Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio. 13. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 14. Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute, Torrance, California. 15. Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 16. University of Pittsburg Medical Center Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh and School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 17. Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 18. Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. 19. Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; and. 20. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) 2-question screen is a valid adolescent alcohol screening tool. No studies have examined if this tool predicts future alcohol problems. We conducted a study at 16 pediatric emergency departments to determine the tool's predictive validity for alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorders (AUDs). METHODS: Participants (N = 4834) completed a baseline assessment battery. A subsample of participants completed the battery at 1, 2, and 3 years follow up. RESULTS: Of the 2209 participants assigned to follow-up, 1611 (73%) completed a 1-year follow-up, 1591 (72%) completed a 2-year follow-up, and 1377 (62%) completed a 3-year follow-up. The differences in AUDs between baseline NIAAA screen nondrinkers and lower-risk drinkers were statistically significant at 1 year (P = .0002), 2 years (P <.0001), and 3 years (P = .0005), as were the differences between moderate- and highest-risk drinkers at 1 and 2 years (P < .0001 and P = .0088, respectively) but not at 3 years (P = .0758). The best combined score for sensitivity (86.2% at 1 year, 75.6% at 2 years, and 60.0% at 3 years) and specificity (78.1% at 1 year, 79.2% at 2 years, and 80.0% at 3 years) was achieved by using "lower risk" and higher as a cutoff for the prediction of a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The NIAAA 2-question screen can accurately characterize adolescent risk for future AUDs. Future studies are needed to determine optimaluse of the screen.
BACKGROUND: The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) 2-question screen is a valid adolescent alcohol screening tool. No studies have examined if this tool predicts future alcohol problems. We conducted a study at 16 pediatric emergency departments to determine the tool's predictive validity for alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorders (AUDs). METHODS:Participants (N = 4834) completed a baseline assessment battery. A subsample of participants completed the battery at 1, 2, and 3 years follow up. RESULTS: Of the 2209 participants assigned to follow-up, 1611 (73%) completed a 1-year follow-up, 1591 (72%) completed a 2-year follow-up, and 1377 (62%) completed a 3-year follow-up. The differences in AUDs between baseline NIAAA screen nondrinkers and lower-risk drinkers were statistically significant at 1 year (P = .0002), 2 years (P <.0001), and 3 years (P = .0005), as were the differences between moderate- and highest-risk drinkers at 1 and 2 years (P < .0001 and P = .0088, respectively) but not at 3 years (P = .0758). The best combined score for sensitivity (86.2% at 1 year, 75.6% at 2 years, and 60.0% at 3 years) and specificity (78.1% at 1 year, 79.2% at 2 years, and 80.0% at 3 years) was achieved by using "lower risk" and higher as a cutoff for the prediction of a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The NIAAA 2-question screen can accurately characterize adolescent risk for future AUDs. Future studies are needed to determine optimaluse of the screen.
Authors: Rohit P Shenoi; James G Linakis; Julie R Bromberg; T Charles Casper; Rachel Richards; Michael J Mello; Thomas H Chun; Anthony Spirito Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jonathan G Tubman; Alan Meca; Seth J Schwartz; Maria Rosa Velazquez; Andrew W Egbert; Mary H Soares; Timothy Regan Journal: J Sch Nurs Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 2.835
Authors: James G Linakis; Sarah A Thomas; Julie R Bromberg; T Charles Casper; Thomas H Chun; Michael J Mello; Rachel Richards; Fahd Ahmad; Lalit Bajaj; Kathleen M Brown; Lauren S Chernick; Daniel M Cohen; J Michael Dean; Joel Fein; Timothy Horeczko; Michael N Levas; B McAninch; Michael C Monuteaux; Colette C Mull; Jackie Grupp-Phelan; Elizabeth C Powell; Alexander Rogers; Rohit P Shenoi; Brian Suffoletto; Cheryl Vance; Anthony Spirito Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 3.716