Peacock Amy, Droste Nicolas, Pennay Amy, Lubman Dan I, Miller Peter, Newcombe David, Bruno Raimondo
School of Medicine (Psychology), University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tas., Australia.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2015 May;39(5):911-8. doi: 10.1111/acer.12700. Epub 2015 Apr 1.
Emerging evidence indicates that consumers of alcohol mixed with energy drink (AmED) self-report lower odds of risk-taking after consuming AmED versus alcohol alone. However, these studies have been criticized for failing to control for relative frequency of AmED versus alcohol-only consumption sessions. These studies also do not account for quantity of consumption and general alcohol-related risk-taking propensity. The aims of the present study were to (i) compare rates of risk-taking in AmED versus alcohol sessions among consumers with matched frequency of use and (ii) identify consumption and person characteristics associated with risk-taking behavior in AmED sessions.
Data were extracted from 2 Australian community samples and 1 New Zealand community sample of AmED consumers (n = 1,291). One-fifth (21%; n = 273) reported matched frequency of AmED and alcohol use.
The majority (55%) of matched-frequency participants consumed AmED and alcohol monthly or less. The matched-frequency sample reported significantly lower odds of engaging in 18 of 25 assessed risk behaviors in AmED versus alcohol sessions. Similar rates of engagement were evident across session type for the remaining behaviors, the majority of which were low prevalence (reported by <15%). Regression modeling indicated that risk-taking in AmED sessions was primarily associated with risk-taking in alcohol sessions, with increased average energy drink (ED) intake associated with certain risk behaviors (e.g., being physically hurt, not using contraception, and driving while over the legal alcohol limit).
Bivariate analyses from a matched-frequency sample align with past research showing lower odds of risk-taking behavior after AmED versus alcohol consumption for the same individuals. Multivariate analyses showed that risk-taking in alcohol sessions had the strongest association with risk-taking in AmED sessions. However, hypotheses of increased risk-taking post-AmED consumption were partly supported: Greater ED intake was associated with increased likelihood of specific behaviors, including drink-driving, sexual behavior, and aggressive behaviors in the matched-frequency sample after controlling for alcohol intake and risk-taking in alcohol sessions. These findings highlight the need to consider both personal characteristics and beverage effects in harm reduction strategies for AmED consumers.
新出现的证据表明，与仅饮用酒精饮料相比，饮用酒精与能量饮料混合饮品（AmED）的消费者自我报告的冒险行为几率更低。然而，这些研究因未控制AmED与仅饮酒消费时段的相对频率而受到批评。这些研究也未考虑消费数量和一般与酒精相关的冒险倾向。本研究的目的是：（i）比较使用频率匹配的消费者在饮用AmED与饮酒时段的冒险率；（ii）确定与饮用AmED时段冒险行为相关的消费和个人特征。
数据来自澳大利亚的2个社区样本和新西兰的1个AmED消费者社区样本（n = 1291）。五分之一（21%；n = 273）报告了AmED和酒精使用频率匹配。
大多数（55%）频率匹配的参与者每月或更少饮用AmED和酒精。频率匹配样本报告，在饮用AmED与饮酒时段，25项评估的冒险行为中有18项的冒险几率显著降低。其余行为在不同时段类型中的参与率相似大部分此类行为发生率较低（报告率<15%）。回归模型表明，饮用AmED时段的冒险行为主要与饮酒时段的冒险行为相关，能量饮料（ED）平均摄入量增加与某些冒险行为相关（例如身体受伤、未采取避孕措施以及在超过法定酒精限量的情况下驾驶）。
来自频率匹配样本的双变量分析与过去的研究一致，表明同一人群饮用AmED后冒险行为的几率低于饮用酒精饮料后。多变量分析表明，饮酒时段的冒险行为与饮用AmED时段的冒险行为关联最强。然而，饮用AmED后冒险行为增加的假设得到了部分支持：在控制酒精摄入量和饮酒时段的冒险行为后，在频率匹配样本中，更高的ED摄入量与特定行为的可能性增加相关，包括酒后驾车、性行为和攻击性行为。这些发现凸显了在针对饮用AmED消费者的减少伤害策略中考虑个人特征和饮料影响的必要性。
