Christoff Adriana de Oliveira, Boerngen-Lacerda Roseli
Department of Pharmacology, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Jardim das Américas, Curitiba, Paraná 81531-990, Brazil.
Addict Behav. 2015 Jun;45:164-71. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.01.019. Epub 2015 Jan 21.
The prevalence of alcohol and other drug use is high among college students. Reducing their consumption will likely be beneficial for society as a whole. Computer and web-based interventions are promising for providing behaviorally based information. The present study compared the efficacy of three interventions (computerized screening and motivational intervention [ASSIST/MBIc], non-computerized screening and motivational intervention [ASSIST/MBIi], and screening only [control]) in college students in Curitiba, Brazil. A convenience sample of 458 students scored moderate and high risk on the ASSIST. They were then randomized into the three arms of the randomized controlled trial (ASSIST/MBIc, ASSIST/MBIi [interview], and assessment-only [control]) and assessed at baseline and 3 months later. The ASSIST involvement scores decreased at follow-up compared with baseline in the three groups, suggesting that any intervention is better than no intervention. For alcohol, the specific involvement scores decreased to a low level of risk in the three groups and the MBIc group showed a positive outcome compared with control, and the scores for each question were reduced in the two intervention groups compared to baseline. For tobacco, involvement scores decreased in the three groups, but they maintained moderate risk. For marijuana, a small positive effect was observed in the ASSIST/MBIi and control groups. The ASSIST/MBIc may be a good alternative to interview interventions because it is easy to administer, students frequently use such computer-based technologies, and individually tailored content can be delivered in the absence of a counselor.
大学生中酒精和其他药物使用的流行率很高。减少他们的消费量可能对整个社会有益。基于计算机和网络的干预措施有望提供基于行为的信息。本研究比较了三种干预措施(计算机化筛查和动机干预[ASSIST/MBIc]、非计算机化筛查和动机干预[ASSIST/MBIi]以及仅筛查[对照组])在巴西库里蒂巴大学生中的效果。一个由458名学生组成的便利样本在ASSIST上的得分处于中度和高风险。然后他们被随机分为随机对照试验的三个组(ASSIST/MBIc、ASSIST/MBIi[访谈]和仅评估[对照组]),并在基线时和3个月后进行评估。与基线相比,三组在随访时ASSIST参与得分均下降,这表明任何干预都比不干预要好。对于酒精,三组的特定参与得分均降至低风险水平,与对照组相比,MBIc组显示出积极结果,与基线相比,两个干预组每个问题的得分均有所降低。对于烟草,三组的参与得分均下降,但仍维持在中度风险。对于大麻,在ASSIST/MBIi组和对照组中观察到了较小的积极效果。ASSIST/MBIc可能是访谈干预的一个很好的替代方案,因为它易于实施,学生经常使用此类基于计算机的技术,并且在没有咨询师的情况下可以提供个性化定制的内容。