Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2021 Jun;45(6):1287-1297. doi: 10.1111/acer.14616. Epub 2021 Apr 30.
For decades, laboratory alcohol challenges have been the "gold standard" for measuring individual differences in alcohol's subjective effects. However, these approaches are expensive and labor-intensive, making them impractical for large-scale use. This study examined the reliability and validity of a new high-resolution EMA (HR-EMA) ambulatory approach to assessing alcohol use and subjective responses in drinkers' natural environments.
Participants were 83 young adult heavy social drinkers (58% male; mean ± SD age = 25.4 ± 2.6 years) who completed up to two smartphone-based, 3-h HR-EMA assessments of alcohol use and related subjective responses in their typical drinking environments. Reported alcohol consumption during the HR-EMA periods was used to calculate estimated blood alcohol concentration (eBAC). Subjective effects were measured using the Brief Biphasic Alcohol Effects Scale (B-BAES) and Drug Effects Questionnaire (DEQ). All participants also completed identical measures during a separate, 4 to 5-h laboratory session in which they received a 0.8 g/kg alcohol challenge.
Most natural environment drinking episodes (87%) met or exceeded the threshold for binge drinking (final mean eBAC = 0.12 g/dl). Associations between reported alcohol use and subjective responses on the B-BAES and DEQ were strongest earlier in the drinking events, with fair reliability of reported subjective effects across two HR-EMA episodes (intraclass correlation [ICC] range = 0.46-0.49). There was fair-to-good correspondence between HR-EMA- and laboratory-derived subjective responses (ICC range = 0.49-0.74), even after accounting for differences in alcohol consumption and drinking context. Reported stimulating and rewarding alcohol effects were higher in the ambulatory than laboratory setting, and vice versa for sedating effects.
This study supports the reliability and validity of smartphone-based HR-EMA to measure alcohol use and subjective responses in heavy drinkers' natural environments. These findings lend support to the use of ambulatory HR-EMA as a measure of alcohol subjective responses in risky drinkers when a laboratory protocol is not practical, feasible, or safe.
几十年来,实验室酒精挑战一直是衡量个体对酒精主观影响差异的“金标准”。然而,这些方法昂贵且劳动密集,因此在大规模使用时不切实际。本研究检验了一种新的高分辨率 EMA(HR-EMA)动态评估方法的可靠性和有效性,该方法用于评估饮酒者自然环境中的酒精使用和主观反应。
参与者为 83 名年轻的重度社交饮酒者(58%为男性;平均年龄 ± 标准差为 25.4 ± 2.6 岁),他们在典型的饮酒环境中完成了最多两次基于智能手机的 3 小时 HR-EMA 评估,以评估酒精使用和相关的主观反应。在 HR-EMA 期间报告的酒精摄入量用于计算估计的血液酒精浓度(eBAC)。主观效应使用简短双相酒精效应量表(B-BAES)和药物效应问卷(DEQ)进行测量。所有参与者还在单独的 4 到 5 小时实验室会议期间完成了相同的测量,在此期间他们接受了 0.8 g/kg 的酒精挑战。
大多数自然环境饮酒事件(87%)达到或超过了狂欢饮酒的阈值(最终平均 eBAC 为 0.12 g/dl)。在饮酒事件的早期,报告的酒精使用量与 B-BAES 和 DEQ 上的主观反应之间的关联最强,两次 HR-EMA 事件的报告主观效应具有适度的可靠性(组内相关系数 [ICC] 范围为 0.46-0.49)。HR-EMA 和实验室衍生的主观反应之间存在良好到中度的一致性(ICC 范围为 0.49-0.74),即使考虑到酒精摄入量和饮酒环境的差异也是如此。在动态环境中,报告的刺激和奖励性酒精效应高于实验室环境,而镇静作用则相反。
本研究支持使用智能手机的 HR-EMA 在重度饮酒者的自然环境中测量酒精使用和主观反应的可靠性和有效性。这些发现支持在实验室方案不切实际、不可行或不安全时,将动态 HR-EMA 用作评估风险饮酒者酒精主观反应的一种手段。