Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Addiction. 2020 Aug;115(8):1472-1481. doi: 10.1111/add.14979. Epub 2020 Feb 15.
Nearly all the research conducted on high-intensity drinking has focused on college and school-based samples, with recent calls for research to understand this risky drinking pattern in non-school-based samples and across time. This study aimed to characterize predictors and consequences of non-binge drinking, age- and gender-adjusted binge drinking (level I) and drinking at levels representing two or more times (level II) and three or more times the level I binge threshold (level III) in a clinical sample of adolescents followed into young adulthood.
Cross-sectional associations between non-binge drinking, binge levels, and negative alcohol-related consequences were examined during adolescence; prospective analyses tested whether adolescent non-binge drinking and binge levels predicted alcohol use disorder (AUD) symptoms in young adulthood and whether changes in drinking motives over time were associated with binge levels in young adulthood.
US clinical settings.
A total of 432 adolescents (aged 12-18 years) with alcohol-related problems followed into young adulthood (aged 19-25 years).
Life-time drinking history, Structured Clinical Interview for DSM AUDs, and Inventory of Drinking Situations.
Results were generally consistent with a distinction between binge level I versus levels II-III on various negative alcohol-related consequences in adolescence (Ps < 0.05) that were maintained in young adulthood (Ps < 0.01). The maintenance of relatively high endorsement of enhancement and social motives over time was associated with binge levels II-III in young adulthood (Ps < 0.001); decreases in coping motives were associated with less risky drinking in adulthood (P = 0.003).
Among US adolescents with alcohol-related problems who were followed-up in young adulthood (aged 19-25 years), standard threshold binge drinking (five or more drinks per occasion; level I) was generally associated with fewer alcohol-related consequences and problem behaviors than binge drinking at two or more times (level II) or three or more times (level III) the standard binge threshold.
几乎所有关于高强度饮酒的研究都集中在大学生和学校样本上，最近有人呼吁研究在非学校样本和跨时间范围内了解这种危险的饮酒模式。本研究旨在描述青少年临床样本中调整年龄和性别后的非狂饮、一级狂饮（水平 I）和饮酒水平代表一级狂饮阈值的两倍或更多倍（水平 II）和三倍或更多倍（水平 III）的预测因素和后果。
在青少年时期，检查非狂饮、狂饮水平与负性酒精相关后果之间的横断面关联；前瞻性分析测试了青少年非狂饮和狂饮水平是否预测青年期的酒精使用障碍（AUD）症状，以及随着时间的推移饮酒动机的变化是否与青年期的狂饮水平相关。
美国临床环境。
共 432 名有酒精相关问题的青少年（年龄 12-18 岁），随访至青年期（年龄 19-25 岁）。
终生饮酒史、DSM 酒精使用障碍结构化临床访谈和饮酒情境清单。
结果总体上与青少年时期各种负性酒精相关后果中一级狂饮水平与二级-三级狂饮水平之间的区别一致（P < 0.05），这些区别在青年期得以维持（P < 0.01）。随着时间的推移，相对较高的增强和社交动机的维持与青年期的二级-三级狂饮水平相关（P < 0.001）；应对动机的减少与成年期风险较低的饮酒有关（P = 0.003）。
在随访至青年期（19-25 岁）的美国有酒精相关问题的青少年中，标准阈值狂饮（每次饮酒五杯或更多；一级）与较少的酒精相关后果和问题行为相关比二级（两次或更多次）或三级（三次或更多次）的狂饮水平更相关。
