Search

Background: Pre-drinking is often defined as an economically-minded set of drinking practices engaged in prior to attending public entertainment areas, such as licensed venues. This paper explores motivations and practical considerations that a sample of teenagers describes as significant to 'pre-drinking', despite not attending licensed premises during their most recent risky drinking session.Methods: Data were derived from the mixed-methods Young Australians Alcohol Reporting System (YAARS) project. 16 participants aged 16-19 were identified as pre-drinking on their most recent risky drinking session, followed by subsequent alcohol consumption in non-licensed venues. 4 members of this subsample also undertook qualitative interviews.Results: These data expand on existing understandings of pre-drinking by emphasising the breadth of motivations and practical considerations understood to shape both pre-drinking practices, and subsequent drinking in other public entertainment areas. These primarily included desires for personal enhancement and experiencing freedom over restriction, the dynamics of accessing alcohol and private space, the necessity of opportunism, and concerns regarding parents and other authority figures.Conclusions: Analyses of groups obscured by dominant definitions of what constitutes 'pre-drinking' illuminate a broader range of motivations and concerns facing young people who drink. Such findings enhance our understanding of young people's drinking practices, the terminology used to describe them, and the development of relevant policies and interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Price-based policies are effective alcohol harm minimisation policy options. This paper examines public support for price-based policies based on patterns of consumption and expenditure, to determine if the extent to which an individual may be affected by a policy influences their support.Methods: The current study included 1,684 Australian residents (59.8% male, Mage 43.8 [SD=16.7]). Respondents who purchased and consumed alcohol in the past six months were asked about their support for potential changes in a series of price-based policies.Results: Increasing price was less likely to be supported than either implementing a minimum price or a tax-increase earmarked to pay for alcohol harms. Increasing price and taxing drinkers were more likely to be supported by older people and women. We found no relationship between income or perceived impact of price increases on purchasing and level of support.Conclusion: Contrary to the idea that public support might be partly influenced by ability to pay for alcohol, support for a minimum unit price was not related to price paid per drink or income, only amount consumed. Thus, heavier drinkers may be inherently unlikely to support price-based policies even when these policies would have little impact on their actual purchasing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors present their thoughts on the study "The Effect of Alcohol Outlets, Sales and Trading Hours on Alcohol-Related Injuries Presenting at Emergency Departments in Perth, Australia From 2002 to 2010" by M. Hobday et al. from the issue. They suggest that the paper's findings are symptomatic of ongoing problems in alcohol policy analysis.

Abstract: Aims: To determine (i) whether the strength of Australian alcohol control policy in three domains (youth access, trading hours and drink driving) changed during the 2000s; and (ii) estimate associations between these policies and adolescent drinking after adjusting for television alcohol advertising exposures, alcohol outlet density, alcohol price changes, exposure to negative articles about alcohol in daily newspapers and adult drinking prevalence. Design: Repeated cross‐sectional surveys conducted triennially from 2002 to 2011. Multi‐level modelling examined the association between alcohol control policies and drinking prevalence after adjusting for covariates. Setting: Four Australian capital cities between 2002 and 2011. Participants: Students aged 12–17 years participating in a triennial national representative school‐based survey (sample size range/survey: 9805–13 119). Measurements: Outcome measures were: past month drinking and risky drinking (5+ drinks on a day) in the past 7 days. Policy strength in each of three domains (youth access, trading hours, drink‐driving) were the key predictor variables. Covariates included: past 3‐month television alcohol and alcohol‐control advertising, alcohol outlet density, alcohol price change, negatively framed newspaper alcohol articles, adult drinking prevalence and student demographic characteristics. Findings: During the study period, the strength of youth access policies increased by 10%, trading hours policies by 14% and drink‐driving policies by 58%. Past‐month and risky drinking prevalence decreased (e.g. past‐month: 2002: 47.4% to 2011: 26.3%). Multivariable analyses that included all policy variables and adjusted for year, student and other covariates showed past‐month drinking to be associated inversely with stronger trading hours policies [odds ratio (OR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.69, 0.94], but not youth access (OR = 0.92 95% CI = 0.81, 1.04) or drink‐driving (OR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.93, 1.09). Risky drinking was associated inversely with stronger youth access policies (OR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.69, 0.98), but not trading hours (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66, 1.09) or drink‐driving (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.90, 1.14) policies. Conclusions: Population‐directed policies designed to reduce alcohol availability and promotion may reduce adolescents’ alcohol use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and Aims: To delineate what type and how much alcohol is purchased from different types of off-licence premises and how this varies across demographic sub-groups, as a basis for public debate and decisions on pricing and planning policies to reduce alcohol-related harm in Australia.Design and Methods: The data on alcohol purchasing from off-licence premises are taken from the Australian Alcohol Consumption and Purchasing survey-a nationally representative landline and mobile telephone survey in 2013 on the experiences with alcohol consumption and purchasing of 2020 Australians aged 16+. The present analysis uses data from 1730 respondents who purchased alcohol from off-licence premises in the previous 6 months.Results: The majority (54%) of alcohol purchased from off-licence premises was sold from liquor barns (large warehouse-style alcohol stores), with bottle shops (31%) the second most common outlet. Cask wine was the cheapest alcohol available at off-licence premises in Australia. Respondents in higher alcohol purchasing quintiles and with those with lower income purchased a higher percentage of cheaper alcohol in their total volume of purchasing than lower purchasing quintiles and those with middle and higher income, and younger respondents purchased more expensive alcohol than older age groups.Discussion and Conclusions: A minimum unit price or increasing alcohol taxes may effectively reduce alcohol purchasing for lower income heavy alcohol purchasers and older age groups from off-licence premise sources, and may be less effective on younger age groups. [Jiang H, Callinan S, Livingston M, Room R. Off-premise alcohol purchasing in Australia: Variations by age group, income level and annual amount purchased. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;36:210-219]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims While recent evidence suggests that higher alcohol outlet density is associated with greater alcohol use among adolescents, influence of the four main outlet types on youth drinking within urban and regional communities is unknown. This study provides the first investigation of this relationship. Design Repeated cross-sectional surveys with random samples of secondary students clustered by school. Mixed-effects logistic regression analyses examined the association between each outlet type and the drinking outcomes, with interaction terms used to test urban/regional differences. Setting Australia, 2002-11. Participants Respondents participating in a triennial survey (aged 12-17 years); 44 897 from urban settings, 23 311 from regional settings. Measurements The key outcome measures were past month alcohol use, risky drinking among all students and risky drinking among past week drinkers. For each survey year, students were assigned a postcode-level outlet density (number of licences per 1000 population) for each outlet type (general, on-premise, off-premise, clubs). Findings Interaction terms revealed a significant association between off-premises outlet density and risky drinking among all adolescents in urban (odds ratio = 1.36, 95% confidence interval CI = 1.05-1.75, P < 0.05) but not regional areas. Similarly, club density was associated with the drinking outcomes in urban communities only. General and on-premises density was associated with alcohol use and risky drinking among all adolescents. Conclusions Higher densities of general, on- and off-premises outlets in an adolescent's immediate neighbourhood are related to increased likelihood of alcohol consumption among all adolescents. The density of licensed clubs is associated more strongly with drinking for urban than for regional adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol policy priorities in Australia have been set by the National Preventative Health Task Force, yet significant reform has not occurred. News media coverage of these priorities has not reported public health experts as in agreement and Government has not acted upon the legislative recommendations made. We investigate policy experts' views on alcohol policy priorities with a view to establishing levels of accord and providing suggestions for future advocates. Methods: We conducted semi-structured in depth interviews with alcohol policy experts and advocates around Australia. Open-ended questions examined participants' thoughts on existing policy recommendations, obvious policy priorities and specifically, the future of national reforms to price and promotions policies. All transcripts were analysed for major themes and points of agreement or disagreement. Results: Twenty one alcohol policy experts agreed that pricing policies are a top national priority and most agreed that "something should be done" about alcohol advertising. Volumetric taxation and minimum pricing were regarded as the most important price policies, yet differences emerged in defining the exact form of a proposed volumetric tax. Important differences in perspective emerged regarding alcohol promotions, with lack of agreement about the preferred form regulations should take, where to start and who the policy should be directed at. Very few discussed online advertising and social networks. Conclusions: Despite existing policy collaborations, a clear 'cut through' message is yet to be endorsed by all alcohol control advocates. There is a need to articulate and promote in greater detail the specifics of policy reforms to minimum pricing, volumetric taxation and restrictions on alcohol advertising, particularly regarding sporting sponsorships and new media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and Aims Increasing the price of alcohol is consistently shown to reduce the average level of consumption. However, the evidence for the effect of increasing the price on high-intensity drinking is both limited and equivocal. The aim of this analysis is to estimate the effect of changes in price on patterns of consumption. Design and Methods Self-reported patterns of alcohol consumption and demographic data were obtained from the Australian National Drug Strategy Household Surveys, conducted in 2001, 2004 and 2007. A pooled three-stage least-squares estimator was used to simultaneously model the impact of the price on the frequency (measured in days) of consuming no, low, moderate and high quantities of alcohol. Results A 1% increase in the price of alcohol was associated with a statistically significant increase of 6.41 days per year on which no alcohol is consumed ( P ≤ 0.049), and a statistically significant decrease of 7.30 days on which 1-4 standard drinks are consumed ( P ≤ 0.021). There was no statistically significant change for high or moderate-intensity drinking. Conclusions For Australia, and countries with a similar pattern of predominant high-intensity drinking, taxation policies that increase the price of alcohol and are very efficient at decreasing harms associated with reduced average consumption may be relatively inefficient at decreasing alcohol harms associated with high-intensity drinking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and Aims: Survey data remain a crucial means for monitoring alcohol consumption, but there has been limited work done to ensure that surveys adequately capture changes in per-capita consumption in Australia. In this study, we explore how trends in consumption from two major Australian surveys compare with an official measure of per-capita consumption between 2001 and 2014 and examine age-specific trends in drinking.Design and Methods: Data were from five waves of the cross-sectional National Health Survey (total n = 113 279) and 12 waves of the longitudinal Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Study (average n = 12 347). Overall and age-specific estimates of annual alcohol consumption were derived and compared with official per-capita consumption and previous analyses of the National Drug Strategy Household Survey.Results: In terms of overall consumption, both surveys broadly reflected trends in per-capita consumption, especially the decline that has been observed since 2007/2008. Age-specific trends were broadly similar, with the recent decline in consumption clearly concentrated among teenagers and young adults.Discussion and Conclusions: The main Australian monitoring surveys remain useful monitoring tools for alcohol consumption in Australia. There is consistent evidence that the recent declines in Australian per-capita consumption have been driven by sharp falls in drinking among young people, a trend that requires further study. [Livingston M, Callinan S, Raninen J, Pennay A, Dietze PM. Alcohol consumption trends in Australia: Comparing surveys and sales-based measures. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;00:000-000]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]