Pamela J Trangenstein, Nancy F Berglas, Meenakshi S Subbaraman, William C Kerr, Sarah Cm Roberts
{"title":"孕期酒精供应和酒驾政策与接受药物使用障碍治疗之间的关系。","authors":"Pamela J Trangenstein, Nancy F Berglas, Meenakshi S Subbaraman, William C Kerr, Sarah Cm Roberts","doi":"10.15288/jsad.23-00414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Pregnancy-specific alcohol policies are widely adopted yet have limited effectiveness and established risks. It is unknown whether general population alcohol policies are effective during pregnancy. This study investigated associations between general population policies and alcohol treatment admission rates for pregnant people specifically.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data are from the Treatment Episodes Data Set: Admissions and state-level policy data for 1992-2019 (n=1,331 state-years). The primary outcome was treatment admissions where alcohol was the primary substance, and the secondary outcome included admissions where alcohol was any substance. There were five policy predictors: 1) Government spirits monopoly, 2) Ban on Sunday sales, 3) Grocery store sales, 4) Gas station sales, and 5) Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) laws. Covariates included poverty, unemployment, per capita cigarette consumption, state and year fixed effects, and state-specific time trends.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In models with alcohol as the primary substance, prohibiting spirits sales in grocery stores (vs. allowing heavy beer and spirits) had lower treatment admission rates [<i>IRR</i>=0.88, 95% <i>CI</i>: 0.78-0.99, <i>p</i>=0.028]. States with BAC laws at 0.10% (vs. no law) had higher treatment admission rates [<i>IRR</i>=1.24, 95% <i>CI</i>: 1.08-1.43, <i>p</i>=0.003]. When alcohol was any substance, prohibiting spirits sales in grocery stores (vs. allowing heavy beer and spirits) was again associated with lower treatment admission rates [<i>IRR</i>=0.89, 95% <i>CI</i>: 0.80-0.98, <i>p</i>=0.021], but there was no association for BAC laws.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Restrictions on grocery store spirits sales and BAC laws were associated with lower and higher alcohol treatment admission rates among pregnant people, respectively, suggesting general population alcohol policies are relevant for pregnant people's treatment utilization.</p>","PeriodicalId":17159,"journal":{"name":"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The relationship between alcohol availability and drink-driving policies and admissions to substance use disorder treatment during pregnancy.\",\"authors\":\"Pamela J Trangenstein, Nancy F Berglas, Meenakshi S Subbaraman, William C Kerr, Sarah Cm Roberts\",\"doi\":\"10.15288/jsad.23-00414\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Pregnancy-specific alcohol policies are widely adopted yet have limited effectiveness and established risks. It is unknown whether general population alcohol policies are effective during pregnancy. This study investigated associations between general population policies and alcohol treatment admission rates for pregnant people specifically.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data are from the Treatment Episodes Data Set: Admissions and state-level policy data for 1992-2019 (n=1,331 state-years). The primary outcome was treatment admissions where alcohol was the primary substance, and the secondary outcome included admissions where alcohol was any substance. There were five policy predictors: 1) Government spirits monopoly, 2) Ban on Sunday sales, 3) Grocery store sales, 4) Gas station sales, and 5) Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) laws. Covariates included poverty, unemployment, per capita cigarette consumption, state and year fixed effects, and state-specific time trends.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In models with alcohol as the primary substance, prohibiting spirits sales in grocery stores (vs. allowing heavy beer and spirits) had lower treatment admission rates [<i>IRR</i>=0.88, 95% <i>CI</i>: 0.78-0.99, <i>p</i>=0.028]. States with BAC laws at 0.10% (vs. no law) had higher treatment admission rates [<i>IRR</i>=1.24, 95% <i>CI</i>: 1.08-1.43, <i>p</i>=0.003]. When alcohol was any substance, prohibiting spirits sales in grocery stores (vs. allowing heavy beer and spirits) was again associated with lower treatment admission rates [<i>IRR</i>=0.89, 95% <i>CI</i>: 0.80-0.98, <i>p</i>=0.021], but there was no association for BAC laws.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Restrictions on grocery store spirits sales and BAC laws were associated with lower and higher alcohol treatment admission rates among pregnant people, respectively, suggesting general population alcohol policies are relevant for pregnant people's treatment utilization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.23-00414\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.23-00414","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The relationship between alcohol availability and drink-driving policies and admissions to substance use disorder treatment during pregnancy.
Objective: Pregnancy-specific alcohol policies are widely adopted yet have limited effectiveness and established risks. It is unknown whether general population alcohol policies are effective during pregnancy. This study investigated associations between general population policies and alcohol treatment admission rates for pregnant people specifically.
Method: Data are from the Treatment Episodes Data Set: Admissions and state-level policy data for 1992-2019 (n=1,331 state-years). The primary outcome was treatment admissions where alcohol was the primary substance, and the secondary outcome included admissions where alcohol was any substance. There were five policy predictors: 1) Government spirits monopoly, 2) Ban on Sunday sales, 3) Grocery store sales, 4) Gas station sales, and 5) Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) laws. Covariates included poverty, unemployment, per capita cigarette consumption, state and year fixed effects, and state-specific time trends.
Results: In models with alcohol as the primary substance, prohibiting spirits sales in grocery stores (vs. allowing heavy beer and spirits) had lower treatment admission rates [IRR=0.88, 95% CI: 0.78-0.99, p=0.028]. States with BAC laws at 0.10% (vs. no law) had higher treatment admission rates [IRR=1.24, 95% CI: 1.08-1.43, p=0.003]. When alcohol was any substance, prohibiting spirits sales in grocery stores (vs. allowing heavy beer and spirits) was again associated with lower treatment admission rates [IRR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98, p=0.021], but there was no association for BAC laws.
Conclusions: Restrictions on grocery store spirits sales and BAC laws were associated with lower and higher alcohol treatment admission rates among pregnant people, respectively, suggesting general population alcohol policies are relevant for pregnant people's treatment utilization.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs began in 1940 as the Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol. It was founded by Howard W. Haggard, M.D., director of Yale University’s Laboratory of Applied Physiology. Dr. Haggard was a physiologist studying the effects of alcohol on the body, and he started the Journal as a way to publish the increasing amount of research on alcohol use, abuse, and treatment that emerged from Yale and other institutions in the years following the repeal of Prohibition in 1933. In addition to original research, the Journal also published abstracts summarizing other published documents dealing with alcohol. At Yale, Dr. Haggard built a large team of alcohol researchers within the Laboratory of Applied Physiology—including E.M. Jellinek, who became managing editor of the Journal in 1941. In 1943, to bring together the various alcohol research projects conducted by the Laboratory, Dr. Haggard formed the Section of Studies on Alcohol, which also became home to the Journal and its editorial staff. In 1950, the Section was renamed the Center of Alcohol Studies.