Holland Michael G, Ferner Robin E
a Department of Emergency Medicine, Division of Medical Toxicology , SUNY Upstate Medical University and the Upstate New York Poison Center , Syracuse , NY , USA.
b Glens Falls Hospital Center for Occupational Health , Glens Falls , NY , USA.
Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2017 Jul;55(6):545-556. doi: 10.1080/15563650.2017.1296576. Epub 2017 Mar 9.
To review the evidence for "the Mellanby effect", that is, whether the response to a given blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is more marked when BAC is rising than at the same concentration when BAC is falling.
We systematically searched the databases EMBASE, Medline, and Scopus up to and including December 2016 using text words "tolerance", "ascending", "descending" or "Mellanby" with Medline term "exp *alcohol/" or "exp *drinking behavior/" or equivalent. Articles were identified for further examination by title or abstract; full text articles were retained for analysis if they dealt with acute (within dose) alcohol tolerance in human subjects and provided quantitative data on both the ascending and descending parts of the BAC-time curve. Reference lists of identified works were scanned for other potentially relevant material. We extracted and analyzed data on the subjective and objective assessment of alcohol effects.
We identified and screened 386 unique articles, of which 127 full-text articles were assessed; one provided no qualitative results, 62 involved no human study, 25 did not consider acute tolerance within dose, and 13 failed to provide data on both ascending and descending BAC. We extracted data from the 26 remaining articles. The studies were highly heterogeneous. Most were small, examining a total of 770 subjects, of whom 564 received alcohol and were analyzed in groups of median size 10 (range 5-38), sometimes subdivided on the basis of drinking or family history. Subjects were often young white men. Doses of alcohol and rates of administration differed. Performance was assessed by at least 26 different methods, some of which measured many variables. We examined only results of studies which compared results for a given alcohol concentration (C) measured on the ascending limb (C) and the descending limb (C) of the BAC-time curve, whether in paired or parallel-group studies. When subjects were given alcohol in more than one session, we considered results from the first session only. Rating at C was better than at C for some measures, as expected if the Mellanby effect were operating. For example, subjects rated themselves less intoxicated on the descending limb than at the same concentration on the ascending limb in 12/13 trials including 229 subjects that gave statistically significant results. In 9 trials with a total of 139 subjects, mean difference could be calculated; weighted for study size, it was 29% [range 24-74%]. Willingness to drive was significantly greater in 4 of 6 studies including a total of 105 subjects; weighted mean difference increased by 207% [range 79-300%]. By contrast, measure of driving ability in three groups of a total of 200 trials in 57 subjects showed worse performance by a weighted mean of 96% [range 3-566%]. In three trials that tested inhibitory control (cued go or no-go response times), weighted mean performance was 30% [range 14-65%] worse on the descending limb.
The "Mellanby effect" has been demonstrated for subjective intoxication and willingness to drive, both of which are more affected at a stated ethanol concentration when BAC is rising than at the same concentration when BAC is falling. By contrast, objective measures of skills necessary for safe driving, such as response to inhibitory cues and skills measured on driving simulators, were generally worse on the descending part of the BAC-time curve for the same BAC.
回顾关于“梅兰比效应”的证据,即当血液酒精浓度(BAC)上升时,对给定BAC的反应是否比BAC下降时处于相同浓度时更为显著。
我们系统检索了截至2016年12月的EMBASE、Medline和Scopus数据库,使用文本词“耐受性”“上升”“下降”或“梅兰比”以及Medline术语“exp *酒精/”或“exp *饮酒行为/”或等同术语。通过标题或摘要确定文章以供进一步审查;如果全文文章涉及人类受试者的急性(剂量内)酒精耐受性,并提供了BAC - 时间曲线上升和下降部分的定量数据,则予以保留进行分析。对已识别作品的参考文献列表进行扫描以查找其他潜在相关材料。我们提取并分析了关于酒精效应主观和客观评估的数据。
我们识别并筛选了386篇独特文章,其中127篇全文文章进行了评估;1篇未提供定性结果,62篇未涉及人体研究,25篇未考虑剂量内的急性耐受性,13篇未提供上升和下降BAC的数据。我们从其余26篇文章中提取了数据。这些研究具有高度异质性。大多数研究规模较小,总共研究了770名受试者,其中564名接受了酒精并按中位数规模为10(范围5 - 38)的组进行分析,有时根据饮酒或家族史进一步细分。受试者通常为年轻白人男性。酒精剂量和给药速率各不相同。通过至少26种不同方法评估表现,其中一些方法测量了许多变量。我们仅检查了在BAC - 时间曲线的上升支(C)和下降支(C)上针对给定酒精浓度(C)进行比较的研究结果,无论是配对研究还是平行组研究。当受试者在多个时段接受酒精时,我们仅考虑第一个时段的结果。对于某些测量指标,在C时的评分优于在C时,正如如果存在梅兰比效应所预期的那样。例如,在包括229名受试者的13项试验中的12项中,受试者在下降支上给自己的醉酒评分低于上升支上相同浓度时的评分,这些试验给出了具有统计学意义的结果。在总共139名受试者的9项试验中,可以计算平均差异;根据研究规模加权后,为29%[范围24 - 74%]。在总共105名受试者的6项研究中的4项中,驾驶意愿显著更高;加权平均差异增加了207%[范围79 - 300%]。相比之下,在57名受试者的三组共200次试验中,驾驶能力测量结果显示下降支上的表现加权平均值差96%[范围3 - 566%]。在测试抑制控制(提示性的执行或不执行反应时间)的三项试验中,下降支上的加权平均表现差30%[范围14 - 65%]。
已证实主观醉酒和驾驶意愿存在“梅兰比效应”,即在规定乙醇浓度下,当BAC上升时比BAC下降时受到的影响更大。相比之下,对于安全驾驶所需技能的客观测量指标,如对抑制性提示的反应和在驾驶模拟器上测量的技能,在相同BAC的BAC - 时间曲线下降部分通常更差。