Consumption Patterns of Alcohol and Alcohol mixed with Energy Drinks in Australian Students and Non-Students

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Studies assessing alcohol mixed with energy drink (AMED) use and drinking behaviors have been largely restricted to student-only cohorts. Thus, it is not known whether evidence from these studies is applicable to non-student populations. This study examined alcohol consumption and involvement in negative alcohol-related consequences among AMED and alcohol-only (AO) users, with the aim of determining whether drinking behaviors differ according to student status. An online survey was conducted in Australia to assess alcohol consumption and alcohol-related consequences following AMED and AO consumption, according to student status. The final sample consisted of 1369 participants. Between-subjects analyses comparing AMED and AO users, confirmed previous findings in that, compared with AO users, AMED users consumed significantly more alcohol, consumed alcohol more frequently and were involved in a greater number of alcohol-related consequences. Within-subjects analyses of AMED users comparing AMED and AO drinking occasions revealed that significantly less alcohol was consumed and involvement in negative alcohol-related consequences was lower during AMED compared with AO drinking occasions. Regardless of drink type, compared with students, non-students consumed more alcohol, consumed alcohol more frequently and were involved in a greater number of negative alcohol-related consequences. These findings provide further evidence that AMED use is one manifestation of a risk-taking personality and suggest that non-students drink more alcohol, drink more frequently and are involved in a greater number of negative alcohol-related consequences than students.

Related collections

Most cited references 31

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Caffeinated cocktails: energy drink consumption, high-risk drinking, and alcohol-related consequences among college students.

Patricia O'Brien, Xian M. O’Brien, Mark Wolfson … (2008)

The consumption of alcohol mixed with energy drinks (AmED) is popular on college campuses in the United States. Limited research suggests that energy drink consumption lessens subjective intoxication in persons who also have consumed alcohol. This study examines the relationship between energy drink use, high-risk drinking behavior, and alcohol-related consequences. In Fall 2006, a Web-based survey was conducted in a stratified random sample of 4,271 college students from 10 universities in North Carolina. A total of 697 students (24% of past 30-day drinkers) reported consuming AmED in the past 30 days. Students who were male, white, intramural athletes, fraternity or sorority members or pledges, and younger were significantly more likely to consume AmED. In multivariable analyses, consumption of AmED was associated with increased heavy episodic drinking (6.4 days vs. 3.4 days on average; p < 0.001) and twice as many episodes of weekly drunkenness (1.4 days/week vs. 0.73 days/week; p < 0.001). Students who reported consuming AmED had significantly higher prevalence of alcohol-related consequences, including being taken advantage of sexually, taking advantage of another sexually, riding with an intoxicated driver, being physically hurt or injured, and requiring medical treatment (p < 0.05). The effect of consuming AmED on driving while intoxicated depended on a student's reported typical alcohol consumption (interaction p = 0.027). Almost one-quarter of college student current drinkers reported mixing alcohol with energy drinks. These students are at increased risk for alcohol-related consequences, even after adjusting for the amount of alcohol consumed. Further research is necessary to understand this association and to develop targeted interventions to reduce risk.

0 comments Cited 96 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Accuracy of self-reported drinking: observational verification of 'last occasion' drink estimates of young adults.

Jeremy Northcote, Michael Livingston (2016)

As a formative step towards determining the accuracy of self-reported drinking levels commonly used for estimating population alcohol use, the validity of a 'last occasion' self-reporting approach is tested with corresponding field observations of participants' drinking quantity. This study is the first known attempt to validate the accuracy of self-reported alcohol consumption using data from a natural setting. A total of 81 young adults (aged 18-25 years) were purposively selected in Perth, Western Australia. Participants were asked to report the number of alcoholic drinks consumed at nightlife venues 1-2 days after being observed by peer-based researchers on 239 occasions. Complete observation data and self-report estimates were available for 129 sessions, which were fitted with multi-level models assessing the relationship between observed and reported consumption. Participants accurately estimated their consumption when engaging in light to moderate drinking (eight or fewer drinks in a single session), with no significant difference between the mean reported consumption and the mean observed consumption. In contrast, participants underestimated their own consumption by increasing amounts when engaging in heavy drinking of more than eight drinks. It is suggested that recent recall methods in self-report surveys are potentially reasonably accurate measures of actual drinking levels for light to moderate drinkers, but that underestimating of alcohol consumption increases with heavy consumption. Some of the possible reasons for underestimation of heavy drinking are discussed, with both cognitive and socio-cultural factors considered.

0 comments Cited 60 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Comparison of a quick drinking screen with the timeline followback for individuals with alcohol problems.

Nancy Young, Sangeeta Agrawal, Mark Sobell … (2003)

Two major strategies have typically been used to assess recent drinking: (1) Daily Estimation (DE) measures such as the Timeline Followback (TLFB) and (2) Quantity-Frequency (QF) summary measures. Although QF measures provide a quick and easy measure of consumption, they have been criticized as not being able to capture sporadic and unpatterned drinking (e.g., days that reflect important social and/or health risks). The TLFB, a psychometrically sound drinking assessment method, is able to capture all drinking, including sporadic heavy days and unpatterned drinking. In some situations, however, recall of daily drinking may not be possible or practical (e.g., limited time; no resources). This article compares results obtained by using a QF measure and a DE measure to assess problem drinkers' pretreatment drinking. The current study, part of a large community mail intervention with 825 alcohol abusers, compared results from two drinking measures covering the same time interval that were administered on two different occasions approximately 2.5 weeks apart. Both measures, the Quick Drinking Screen (QDS; a QF summary measure that collected data by telephone) and the TLFB (a self-administered daily estimation measure), collected drinking data for the year prior to the interview. Although the QDS and the TLFB are very different drinking measures, remarkably similar aggregate drinking data were obtained for five drinking variables. When it is not necessary or possible to gather detailed drinking data, the QDS produces reliable brief summary measures of drinking, at least for not severely alcohol dependent individuals. Also, respondents do not appear to use a repetitive response pattern when completing the TLFB.

0 comments Cited 49 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Nutrients

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Nutrients

Journal ID (publisher-id): nutrients

Title: Nutrients

Publisher: MDPI

ISSN (Electronic): 2072-6643

Publication date (Electronic): 05 January 2020

Publication date Collection: January 2020

Volume: 12

Issue: 1

Electronic Location Identifier: 149

Affiliations

[1 ]Centre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia

[2 ]Division of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands

Author notes

[* ]Correspondence: andrew@ 123456scholeylab.com ; Tel.: +61-3-9214-8932

Author information

Sarah Benson https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8626-0521

Joris C. Verster https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6455-2096

Andrew Scholey https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4484-5462

Article

Publisher ID: nutrients-12-00149

DOI: 10.3390/nu12010149

PMC ID: 7019232

PubMed ID: 31948025

SO-VID: b2bf6bf8-9d95-4fc4-aaa8-8180ed0a1ff0

License:

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Consumption Patterns of Alcohol and Alcohol mixed with Energy Drinks in Australian Students and Non-Students

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Karger: Nutrition and Dietetics

Most cited references 31

Caffeinated cocktails: energy drink consumption, high-risk drinking, and alcohol-related consequences among college students.

Accuracy of self-reported drinking: observational verification of 'last occasion' drink estimates of young adults.

Comparison of a quick drinking screen with the timeline followback for individuals with alcohol problems.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 69

Cited by 7

Most referenced authors 200