Search

Abstract: Research on the efficacy of computer-delivered feedback-only interventions (FOIs) for college alcohol misuse has been mixed. Limitations to these FOIs include participant engagement and variation in the use of a moderation skills component. The current investigation sought to address these limitations using a novel computer-delivered FOI, the Drinkers Assessment and Feedback Tool for College Students (DrAFT-CS). Heavy drinking college students (N =176) were randomly assigned to DrAFT-CS, DrAFT-CS plus moderation skills (DrAFT-CS+), moderation skills only (MSO), or assessment only (AO) group, and were assessed at 1-month follow-up (N =157). Participants in the DrAFT-CS and DrAFT-CS+groups reported significantly lower estimated blood alcohol concentrations (eBACs) on typical heaviest drinking day than participants in the AO group. The data also supported the incorporation of a moderation skills component within FOIs, such that participants in DrAFT-CS+group reported significantly fewer drinks per week and drinks per heaviest drinking occasion than participants in the AO group. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This study evaluated the efficacy of two brief personalized feedback interventions (PFIs) using identical feedback and motivational interviewing strategies aimed at reducing alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems to two control conditions among a sample of high-risk drinking college students. Students (N = 152) were randomly assigned to a computer-delivered PFI with a video interviewer, a face-to-face PFI with a live interviewer, a comprehensive assessment condition, or a minimal assessment-only condition. At 10 weeks posttreatment, the face-to-face PFI significantly reduced weekly drinking quantity and peak and typical blood alcohol concentration compared with the comprehensive assessment and minimal assessment-only conditions (d values ranged from 0.32 to 0.61). No significant between-group differences were evidenced for the computer-delivered PFI condition, although effect sizes were comparable to other college drinking studies using computer-delivered interventions (d values ranged from 0.20 to 0.27). Results provide further support for the use of a face-to-face PFI to help reduce college students'' alcohol consumption and suggest that a video interviewer in the context of a computer-delivered PFI is likely a helpful but not necessarily a complete substitute for a live interviewer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Personalized normative alcohol feedback (PNF) is associated with decreased alcohol use among young adults. However, limited research has examined the influence of depressive symptoms on PNF efficacy. This study examined symptoms of depression as a moderator of college student response to a computerized PNF intervention for alcohol use.Methods: College students (N = 212, 59% female) who reported drinking in a typical week completed baseline and one-month assessments as part of a previously published intervention trial. We randomized participants to alcohol PNF (n = 153) or assessment only (n = 59). We used regression models to examine the interaction between PNF and symptoms of depression on alcohol outcomes at one-month follow-up.Results: One in four participants screened positive for clinically significant symptoms of depression. Depressive symptoms did not moderate intervention effects on drinking quantity. However, PNF was only associated with reduced frequency of heavy episodic drinking and lower probability of any alcohol-related consequence in the context of mild to moderate (not minimal) symptoms of depression.Conclusions: PNF is more effective than assessment alone in reducing drinking quantity, regardless of symptoms of depression. However, it may only be more effective in decreasing frequency of heavy episodic drinking and the probability of alcohol-related consequences among those experiencing mild to moderate (as opposed to minimal) symptoms of depression. Alcohol intervention trials should assess symptoms of depression and consider them in data analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]