N. Newton, L. Stapinski, M. Teesson, T. Slade, K. Champion, E. Barrett, L. Birrell, E. Kelly, Marius Mather, P. Conrod
{"title":"评估社会影响和以个性为目标的酒精预防对高危青少年心理健康结果的不同效果:一项新的聚类随机对照析因设计试验","authors":"N. Newton, L. Stapinski, M. Teesson, T. Slade, K. Champion, E. Barrett, L. Birrell, E. Kelly, Marius Mather, P. Conrod","doi":"10.1177/0004867419877948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study examined the secondary mental health outcomes of two contrasting alcohol prevention approaches, whereby one intervention targets common underlying personality risk for alcohol use and mental health problems (Preventure) and the other targets alcohol- and drug-related behaviours and cognitions (Climate Schools). Methods: A 2 × 2 cluster randomised controlled factorial design trial was conducted in 26 Australian schools randomised to the following 4 conditions: Climate Schools (n = 6), Preventure (n = 7), combined Climate Schools and Preventure (CAP; n = 6) or treatment as usual (TAU; n = 7). Participants completed questionnaires at baseline, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-baseline including the Brief Symptom Inventory anxiety and depression scales and hyperactivity and conduct scales of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Analyses focused on students who were at high-risk based on personality traits (n = 947; Mage = 13.3). The effectiveness of each approach in reducing symptoms of internalising and externalising problems was assessed using multi-level mixed effects analysis. Results: Main effects for each intervention relative to not receiving that intervention revealed significant main effects of Preventure in reducing anxiety symptoms (d = −0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−0.53, −0.01], p < 0.05) and a marginal effect in reducing depressive symptoms (d = −0.24, 95% CI = [−0.49, 0.01], p = 0.06) over 3 years. Interaction effects revealed that when delivered alone, Preventure significantly reduced conduct problems (d = −0.45, 95% CI = [−0.78, −0.11], p < 0.05) and hyperactivity symptoms (d = −0.38, 95% CI = [−0.70,−0.07], p < 0.05) compared to TAU. Conclusion: This study is the first to report the effectiveness of personality-targeted alcohol prevention in reducing internalising and externalising symptoms relative to an active control, providing evidence in favour of its specificity in preventing concurrent substance use and mental health problems among high-risk youth.","PeriodicalId":8576,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"14 1","pages":"259 - 271"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the differential effectiveness of social influence and personality-targeted alcohol prevention on mental health outcomes among high-risk youth: A novel cluster randomised controlled factorial design trial\",\"authors\":\"N. Newton, L. Stapinski, M. Teesson, T. Slade, K. Champion, E. Barrett, L. Birrell, E. Kelly, Marius Mather, P. Conrod\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0004867419877948\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: This study examined the secondary mental health outcomes of two contrasting alcohol prevention approaches, whereby one intervention targets common underlying personality risk for alcohol use and mental health problems (Preventure) and the other targets alcohol- and drug-related behaviours and cognitions (Climate Schools). Methods: A 2 × 2 cluster randomised controlled factorial design trial was conducted in 26 Australian schools randomised to the following 4 conditions: Climate Schools (n = 6), Preventure (n = 7), combined Climate Schools and Preventure (CAP; n = 6) or treatment as usual (TAU; n = 7). Participants completed questionnaires at baseline, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-baseline including the Brief Symptom Inventory anxiety and depression scales and hyperactivity and conduct scales of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Analyses focused on students who were at high-risk based on personality traits (n = 947; Mage = 13.3). The effectiveness of each approach in reducing symptoms of internalising and externalising problems was assessed using multi-level mixed effects analysis. Results: Main effects for each intervention relative to not receiving that intervention revealed significant main effects of Preventure in reducing anxiety symptoms (d = −0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−0.53, −0.01], p < 0.05) and a marginal effect in reducing depressive symptoms (d = −0.24, 95% CI = [−0.49, 0.01], p = 0.06) over 3 years. Interaction effects revealed that when delivered alone, Preventure significantly reduced conduct problems (d = −0.45, 95% CI = [−0.78, −0.11], p < 0.05) and hyperactivity symptoms (d = −0.38, 95% CI = [−0.70,−0.07], p < 0.05) compared to TAU. Conclusion: This study is the first to report the effectiveness of personality-targeted alcohol prevention in reducing internalising and externalising symptoms relative to an active control, providing evidence in favour of its specificity in preventing concurrent substance use and mental health problems among high-risk youth.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8576,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"259 - 271\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867419877948\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867419877948","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
摘要
目的:本研究检查了两种不同的酒精预防方法的二级心理健康结果,其中一种干预措施针对酒精使用和心理健康问题的共同潜在人格风险(Preventure),另一种干预措施针对酒精和药物相关行为和认知(Climate Schools)。方法:对26所澳大利亚学校进行2 × 2聚类随机对照析因设计试验,随机分为以下4种情况:气候学校(n = 6)、Preventure (n = 7)、气候学校和Preventure (CAP;n = 6)或照常治疗(TAU;n = 7)。参与者分别在基线、6、12、24和36个月后完成问卷调查,包括焦虑和抑郁简短症状量表、多动和行为量表的优势和困难问卷。分析的重点是基于人格特征的高风险学生(n = 947;法师= 13.3)。采用多级混合效应分析评估了每种方法在减少内化和外化问题症状方面的有效性。结果:与未接受干预相比,每项干预的主要效果显示,在3年内,Preventure在减轻焦虑症状方面有显著的主要效果(d = - 0.27, 95%可信区间[CI] = [- 0.53, - 0.01], p < 0.05),在减轻抑郁症状方面有边际效果(d = - 0.24, 95% CI = [- 0.49, 0.01], p = 0.06)。相互作用效应显示,与TAU相比,单独给药时,Preventure显著减少行为问题(d = - 0.45, 95% CI = [- 0.78, - 0.11], p < 0.05)和多动症状(d = - 0.38, 95% CI = [- 0.70, - 0.07], p < 0.05)。结论:本研究首次报道了针对个性的酒精预防在减少内化和外化症状方面相对于主动控制的有效性,为其在预防高危青少年同时使用物质和精神健康问题方面的特异性提供了证据。
Evaluating the differential effectiveness of social influence and personality-targeted alcohol prevention on mental health outcomes among high-risk youth: A novel cluster randomised controlled factorial design trial
Objective: This study examined the secondary mental health outcomes of two contrasting alcohol prevention approaches, whereby one intervention targets common underlying personality risk for alcohol use and mental health problems (Preventure) and the other targets alcohol- and drug-related behaviours and cognitions (Climate Schools). Methods: A 2 × 2 cluster randomised controlled factorial design trial was conducted in 26 Australian schools randomised to the following 4 conditions: Climate Schools (n = 6), Preventure (n = 7), combined Climate Schools and Preventure (CAP; n = 6) or treatment as usual (TAU; n = 7). Participants completed questionnaires at baseline, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post-baseline including the Brief Symptom Inventory anxiety and depression scales and hyperactivity and conduct scales of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Analyses focused on students who were at high-risk based on personality traits (n = 947; Mage = 13.3). The effectiveness of each approach in reducing symptoms of internalising and externalising problems was assessed using multi-level mixed effects analysis. Results: Main effects for each intervention relative to not receiving that intervention revealed significant main effects of Preventure in reducing anxiety symptoms (d = −0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−0.53, −0.01], p < 0.05) and a marginal effect in reducing depressive symptoms (d = −0.24, 95% CI = [−0.49, 0.01], p = 0.06) over 3 years. Interaction effects revealed that when delivered alone, Preventure significantly reduced conduct problems (d = −0.45, 95% CI = [−0.78, −0.11], p < 0.05) and hyperactivity symptoms (d = −0.38, 95% CI = [−0.70,−0.07], p < 0.05) compared to TAU. Conclusion: This study is the first to report the effectiveness of personality-targeted alcohol prevention in reducing internalising and externalising symptoms relative to an active control, providing evidence in favour of its specificity in preventing concurrent substance use and mental health problems among high-risk youth.