4.4 Article

The relationship between past-year drinking behaviors and nonmedical use of prescription drugs: Prevalence of co-occurrence in a national sample

期刊

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
卷 84, 期 3, 页码 281-288

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.03.006

关键词

epidemiology; prescription drugs; nonmedical use; alcohol use; DSM-IV alcohol abuse; DSM-IV alcohol dependence

资金

  1. NIAAA NIH HHS [U18 AA015275] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDA NIH HHS [T32 DA007267, DA07267, DA019492, R03 DA020899, DA020899, R03 DA019492, R03 DA018239] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the relationship between past-year drinking behaviors and nonmedical use of prescription drugs (NMUPD) in a nationally representative sample. Prevalence estimates in the United States were derived based on data collected from face-to-face interviews using the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) (n = 43,093 individuals aged 18 years and older). Nonmedical use of prescription opioids, stimulants, tranquilizers, and sedatives was more prevalent among individuals with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) than those without AUDs. The odds of reporting NMUPD were 18 times higher among alcohol dependent participants compared to past-year abstainers (OR = 18.2, 95% CI = 13.9-23.8). Although individuals with AUDs constituted less than 9% of the total sample, those with AUDs accounted for more than one in every three nonmedical users of prescription drugs. The past-year co-occurrence of AUDs and NMUPD was more prevalent among young adults 18-24 years of age than individuals 25 years and older. More than one in every four young adults aged 18-24 years who met the criteria for past-year DSM-IV alcohol dependence also reported past-year NMUPD. These findings suggest that the treatment for AUDs should include a thorough assessment of NMUPD, especially among young adults. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据