Brief Intervention for Underage Drinking
Palo Alto (17 mi)Age: < 18
Sex: Any
Travel: May be covered
Time Reimbursement: Varies
Trial Phase: N/A
Recruiting
Sponsor: RAND
No Placebo Group
Approved in 1 jurisdiction
Trial Summary
What is the purpose of this trial?Brief motivational interviewing intervention to address alcohol use among diverse teens 12-17.
Is the treatment Chat a promising treatment for underage drinking?Yes, the treatment Chat, which uses motivational interviewing, shows promise for underage drinking. Studies indicate that it can help reduce substance use, prevent future negative consequences, and improve satisfaction among teens. It has been effective in various settings, including schools and medical facilities, and has shown positive outcomes in reducing drinking and related problems.13567
Do I need to stop my current medications to join the trial?The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications.
What safety data exists for Brief Intervention for Underage Drinking?The studies reviewed do not explicitly mention safety data for the Brief Intervention for Underage Drinking, but they do provide evidence of its efficacy and feasibility. Motivational Interviewing (MI), a component of the intervention, has been shown to reduce alcohol consumption and related behaviors in adolescents across various demographics, including Hispanic and American Indian youth. The interventions were implemented with adequate fidelity and were associated with positive behavioral outcomes, suggesting they are safe and effective in reducing underage drinking.13678
What data supports the idea that Brief Intervention for Underage Drinking is an effective treatment?The available research shows that Brief Intervention for Underage Drinking, also known as Motivational Interviewing, can be effective. In a pilot study, many teens reduced their substance use and risky behaviors like driving after drinking within three months. A review of 39 studies found that 67% reported improved outcomes for substance use. Another study with teens who had a first-time alcohol or drug offense showed that those who participated in group sessions reported higher satisfaction and quality ratings. Although both the group intervention and usual care reduced substance use and delinquency, the group intervention had slightly better long-term outcomes. These findings suggest that this treatment can help reduce underage drinking and related issues.12345
Eligibility Criteria
This trial is for diverse teens aged 12-17 who are at risk for alcohol or cannabis use, as indicated by the CRAFFT screening tool. Participants must receive health care from one of two specific health systems to join.Inclusion Criteria
I am between 12 and 17 years old.
Treatment Details
The study is testing a brief motivational interviewing intervention called Chat against an Enhanced Usual Care approach to see if it can effectively address underage drinking and cannabis use among young people.
2Treatment groups
Experimental Treatment
Active Control
Group I: Chat InterventionExperimental Treatment1 Intervention
When the online consent/assent form is completed, the teen will be sent a personalized link to complete their baseline survey. Upon survey completion, the teen will receive a link that has their electronic gift card payment, and the case manager will be notified that a particular ID has completed the survey. The case manager will be informed by study staff whether to schedule that ID for enhanced usual care (EUC) or the Chat Intervention. If they are randomized as Chat Intervention, Chat will take place either via a virtual or in-person visit. Whether the teen completes EUC or Chat, every teen will be followed by the RAND Survey Research Group to complete their paid follow-up web-based surveys based on timing of completion of their baseline survey.
Group II: Enhanced Usual CareActive Control1 Intervention
When the online consent/assent form is completed, the teen will be sent a personalized link to complete their baseline survey. Upon survey completion, the teen will receive a link that has their electronic gift card payment, and the case manager will be notified that a particular ID has completed the survey. The case manager will be informed by study staff whether to schedule that ID for enhanced usual care (EUC) or the Chat intervention. If they are randomized as EUC, the informational brochure for the EUC will be handed to the teen during the visit or securely emailed to them. Whether the teen completes EUC or Chat, every teen will be followed by the RAND Survey Research Group to complete their paid follow-up web-based surveys based on timing of completion of their baseline survey.
Chat is already approved in United States for the following indications:
🇺🇸 Approved in United States as CHAT for:
- Alcohol use disorder prevention in adolescents
Find a clinic near you
Research locations nearbySelect from list below to view details:
AltaMed Health ServicesCommerce, CA
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Children's HospitalPittsburgh, PA
Loading ...
Who is running the clinical trial?
RANDLead Sponsor
University of Pittsburgh Medical CenterCollaborator
AltaMed Health Services CorporationCollaborator
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteCollaborator
References
Motivational interviewing for adolescent substance use: a pilot study. [2009]We developed and pilot tested a 2-session motivational interviewing intervention for substance use among 14- to 18-year-old medical patients. Recruitment and retention were more challenging than anticipated. A substantial number of completers reduced their use of substances and risk of driving after drinking during the 3-month follow-up period.
Developing a Group Motivational Interviewing Intervention for Adolescents At-Risk for Developing an Alcohol or Drug use Disorder. [2021]This study examined how teens who had committed a first-time alcohol or other drug (AOD) offense responded to a motivational interviewing (MI) group intervention. Participants were 101 first-time AOD adolescent offenders (M=15.88; 63% male, 54% Hispanic). We developed and tested a six-session curriculum called Free Talk and solicited feedback from different teens after each session. Groups were recorded and transcribed. Feedback was categorized using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity scale (MITI 3.0). Feedback indicated high levels of evocation, collaboration, autonomy/support, and empathy. The current study highlights that utilizing group MI can be an acceptable approach for at-risk youth.
Boosting a teen substance use prevention program with motivational interviewing. [2021]A brief motivational interviewing (MI) intervention may be a viable adjunct to school-based substance abuse prevention programs. This article describes the development and implementation of a brief MI intervention with 573 adolescents (mean age 16.8; 40.3% female, 68% Latino) enrolled in eight continuation high schools in Southern California. Study participants were assigned to the MI condition in a randomized controlled trial of Project Toward No Drug Abuse. Data are provided on dosage, topics discussed, and quality of MI determined with the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code (MISC). Results suggest that the protocol was feasible and implemented with adequate fidelity. The study's limitations are noted.
Motivational Interviewing for adolescent substance use: a review of the literature. [2021]Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a widely-used approach for addressing adolescent substance use. Recent meta-analytic findings show small but consistent effect sizes. However, differences in intervention format and intervention design, as well as possible mediators of change, have never been reviewed. This review of the literature summarizes the most up-to-date MI interventions with adolescents, looks at differences between intervention format and design, and discusses possible theory-based mechanisms of change. Of the 39 studies included in this review, 67% reported statistically significant improved substance use outcomes. Chi square results show no significant difference between interventions using feedback or not, or interventions combined with other treatment versus MI alone. The need for systematic investigation in theory-based mechanisms of change is presented.
A randomized controlled trial of a group motivational interviewing intervention for adolescents with a first time alcohol or drug offense. [2022]Group motivational interviewing (MI) interventions that target youth at-risk for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use may prevent future negative consequences. Youth in a teen court setting [n=193; 67% male, 45% Hispanic; mean age 16.6 (SD=1.05)] were randomized to receive either a group MI intervention, Free Talk, or usual care (UC). We examined client acceptance, and intervention feasibility and conducted a preliminary outcome evaluation. Free Talk teens reported higher quality and satisfaction ratings, and MI integrity scores were higher for Free Talk groups. AOD use and delinquency decreased for both groups at 3 months, and 12-month recidivism rates were lower but not significantly different for the Free Talk group compared to UC. Results contribute to emerging literature on MI in a group setting. A longer term follow-up is warranted.
Can motivational interviewing in emergency care reduce alcohol consumption in young people? A systematic review and meta-analysis. [2018]We investigate the effect of motivational interviewing (MI), delivered in a brief intervention during an emergency care contact, on the alcohol consumption of young people who screen positively for present or previous risky alcohol consumption.
A pilot randomized trial of Motivational Interviewing compared to Psycho-Education for reducing and preventing underage drinking in American Indian adolescents. [2018]Underage drinking is an important public health issue for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) adolescents, as it is for U. S. teens of all ethnicities. One of the demonstrated risk factors for the development of alcohol use disorders in AI/AN is early age of initiation of drinking. To address this issue a randomized trial to assess the efficacy of Motivational Interviewing (MI) compared to Psycho-Education (PE) to reduce and prevent underage drinking in AI/AN youth was developed and implemented. Sixty-nine youth received MI or PE and 87% were assessed at follow-up. For teens who were already drinking, participating in the intervention (MI or PE) was associated, at follow-up, with lower quantity×frequency (q×f) of drinking (p=0.011), fewer maximum drinks per drinking occasion (p=0.004), and fewer problem behaviors (p=0.009). The MI intervention resulted in male drinkers reporting a lower q×f of drinking (p=0.048) and female drinkers reporting less depression (p=0.011). In teens who had not started drinking prior to the intervention, 17% had initiated drinking at follow-up. As a group they reported increased quantity×frequency of drinking (p=0.008) and maximum drinks (p=0.047), but no change in problem behaviors. These results suggest that intervening against underage drinking using either MI or PE in AI/AN youth can result in reduced drinking, prevention of initiation of drinking, and other positive behavioral outcomes. Brief interventions that enhance motivation to change as well as Psycho-Education may provide a successful approach to reducing the potential morbidity of underage drinking in this high-risk group.
Long-Term RCT outcomes for adolescent alcohol and cannabis use within a predominantly Hispanic sample. [2023]Because adolescents are unlikely to seek, receive, or complete treatment for alcohol and/or cannabis misuse, it is important to enhance the lasting impact of clinical contacts when they do occur. Adolescents (N = 506; 72.5% Hispanic) were randomized to motivational interviewing (MI) versus alcohol and cannabis education (ACE). Latent growth models estimated change over time. Significant reductions in alcohol use were observed, with slightly greater reductions by 12-month follow-up for MI. Both interventions significantly reduced cannabis use, with no treatment group differences. When outcomes were examined comparing Hispanic to non-Hispanic participants, there were no significant differences in intervention efficacy by group. MI's inherently client-centered and culturally adaptive approach may contribute to its equitable degree of behavior change for youth across race/ethnic backgrounds.