Refine
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Alkohol (2) (remove)
Institute
- Institut für Epidemiologie u. Sozialmedizin (2) (remove)
Background: Common to most theory-based intervention approaches is the idea of supporting intentions to increase the probability of behavior change. This principle works only if (a) intentions can be explained by the hypothesized socio-cognitive constructs, and (b) people actually do what they intend to do. The overall aim of this thesis was to test these premises using two health behavior theories applied to reducing at-risk alcohol use. Method: The three papers underlying this thesis were based on data of the randomized controlled “Trial Of Proactive Alcohol interventions among job-Seekers” (TOPAS). A total of 1243 job-seekers with at-risk alcohol use were randomized to stage tailored intervention (ST), non-stage tailored intervention (NST), or control group. The ST participants (n = 426) were analyzed in paper 1. Paper 2 was based on the baseline and 3-month data provided by the NST participants (n = 433). Paper 3 was based on baseline, 3-, 6-, and 15-month data provided by the control and ST group not intending to change alcohol use (n = 629). Latent variable modeling was used to investigate the associations of social-cognitive constructs and intentional stages (paper 1), the extent to which intentions were translated into alcohol use (paper 2), and the different trajectories of alcohol use among people not intending to change as well as the ST effect on the trajectories (paper 3). Results: Persons in different intentional stages differed in the processes of change in which they engaged, in the importance placed by them on the pros and cons of alcohol use, and in the perceived ability to quit (ps < 0.01). The association between intentions and alcohol use was weak. The magnitude of this intention-behavior gap depended on the extent to which normative expectations have changed over time (p < 0.01) and was reduced when controlling for the mediating effect of temporal stability of intentions. The gap was also present among people not intending to change: Even without intervention, 35% of the persons reduced the amount of alcohol use after 15 months (p < 0.05) and 2% achieved abstinence. Persons with heavier drinking (33%) and persons with low but frequent use (30%) did not change. Persons with frequent alcohol use seem to benefit less from ST than those with occasional use, although differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Intentions can be quite well explained by the hypothesized socio-cognitive constructs. In a sample of persons who were, as a whole, little motivated to change, the precision of how well intentions predict subsequent alcohol use was modest though. Time and socio-contextual influences should be considered.
Alcohol-related somatic disorders are highly prevalent among general hospital inpatients. Alcohol problem drinking can be differentiated into alcohol use disorders (alcohol dependence and alcohol abuse) and three subtypes of drinking above recommended levels (at-risk drinking only [AR], heavy episodic drinking only [HE], at-risk and heavy episodic drinking [ARHE]). The aims of this study were threefold. First, proportions of alcohol problem drinking among general hospital inpatients in a region of north-eastern Germany were estimated (study 1). Second, among individuals with alcohol problem drinking the association between beverage preference and alcohol-related diseases was tested (study 2). Third, subtype differences regarding demographics, alcohol-related variables, motivation to change drinking behaviors, and the risk to develop short-term alcohol dependence among the three subtypes of drinking above recommended levels were analyzed (study 3). The data presented in this dissertation are based on the randomized controlled trial “Early Intervention at General Hospitals”, which is part of the Research Collaboration Early Substance Use Intervention (EARLINT). Study 1 includes a sample of consecutively admitted general hospital inpatients between 18 and 64 years old (n = 14,332). The study adopted a two-stage-sampling approach: (a) screening and (b) ascertainment of alcohol problem drinking. Those who were identified with alcohol problem drinking were asked for written consent for further study participation. This included further baseline assessment, the consent to use routine treatment diagnoses and participation in a follow-up interview 12 months after hospitalization. For study 2, routine treatment diagnoses were provided by hospital physicians for a total of 1,011 men with problem drinking. These diagnoses were classified into three categories according to their alcohol-attributable fractions (AAF): diseases totally attributable to alcohol by definition (AAF=1), diseases partially attributable to alcohol (AAF<1) and diseases with no empirical relationship to alcohol or with a possibly protective effect associated with alcohol (AAF=0). Study 3 was restricted to study participants with drinking above recommended levels (n=425). Study 1: Among all general hospital inpatients, 8.9% were identified with current problem drinking in the following descending order: 5.3% exhibited alcohol use disorders and 3.6% drinking above recommended levels. Higher proportions of problem drinking were found at rural sites compared to urban sites (13.7 vs. 7.5%, p<.001). Study 2: Because of the low proportion of women with alcohol problem drinking the following analyses were restricted to males. Multinomial regression analyses revealed different risks for alcohol-related diseases in relation to beverage preference while controlling for alcohol-associated and demographic confounders. Compared to all other groups, spirits only drinkers had the highest risk for having a disease with AAF>0; e.g., beer only drinkers had lower odds of having a disease with AAF<1 (odds ratio, OR=0.50, 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.27-0.92). Study 3: Men with alcohol use disorder were excluded from the following analysis. At baseline, multinomial logistic regression revealed differences between individuals with AR, HE and ARHE while controlling for age. ARHE was associated with higher odds of having a more severe alcohol problem (OR=2.06, CI: 1.23-3.45), using formal help (OR=2.21, CI: 1.02-4.79), and having a disease with AAF=1 (OR=3.43, CI: 1.58-7.43), compared with AR. In addition, individuals with ARHE had higher odds of taking action to change drinking behaviors (i.e., beginning to implement change) than individuals with HE (OR=2.29, CI: 1.21-4.34) or AR (OR=2.11, CI: 1.15-3.86). At follow-up, individuals with ARHE had higher odds of having alcohol dependence according to the DSM-IV (OR=4.73, CI: 1.01–22.20) compared to individuals with AR. In addition to alcohol use disorders, drinking above recommended levels is a common problem among general hospital inpatients. Thus, the implementation of systematic alcohol screening and brief interventions should be considered. These data suggest an association between beverage preference and alcohol-related diseases. Among hospitalized problem drinkers, spirits only drinkers had the greatest risk of having diseases with AAF>0. Of the three subtypes of drinking above recommended levels, ARHE seems to be particularly problematic because there appears to be an indication of a subclinical diagnosis. To provide adequate intervention, clinical practice should distinguish between the three groups of drinking above recommended levels. Brief alcohol intervention should be tailored to the individual’s motivation to change and to the type of alcohol problem drinking. The effectiveness of such a procedure remains to be evaluated in further studies.