Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction: a feasibility randomized trial

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction: a feasibility randomized trial. / Field, M; Puddephatt, JA; Goodwin, L et al.
In: Pilot and Feasibility Studies, Vol. 6, 9, 31.01.2020.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Field, M, Puddephatt, JA, Goodwin, L, Owens, L, Reaves, D & Holmes, J 2020, 'Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction: a feasibility randomized trial', Pilot and Feasibility Studies, vol. 6, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-0554-y

APA

Field, M., Puddephatt, JA., Goodwin, L., Owens, L., Reaves, D., & Holmes, J. (2020). Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction: a feasibility randomized trial. Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 6, Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-0554-y

Vancouver

Field M, Puddephatt JA, Goodwin L, Owens L, Reaves D, Holmes J. Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction: a feasibility randomized trial. Pilot and Feasibility Studies. 2020 Jan 31;6:9. doi: 10.1186/s40814-020-0554-y

Author

Field, M ; Puddephatt, JA ; Goodwin, L et al. / Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction : a feasibility randomized trial. In: Pilot and Feasibility Studies. 2020 ; Vol. 6.

Bibtex

@article{d432ca53d119419eb0d7cc5a6ec7f659,
title = "Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction: a feasibility randomized trial",
abstract = "BackgroundParticipation in temporary alcohol abstinence campaigns such as {\textquoteleft}Dry January{\textquoteright} may prompt enduring reductions in alcohol consumption. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required to establish any long-term benefits or negative consequences of temporary abstinence. In the present study, we randomized heavy drinkers to complete or intermittent alcohol abstinence for 4 weeks, in order to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a large-scale RCT.MethodsThis was a mixed methods feasibility study in which we explored recruitment and retention to a randomized trial, compliance with alcohol abstinence instructions and barriers to compliance, and acceptability of study procedures (primary feasibility outcomes). A community sample of women aged between 40 and 60 who drank in excess of 28 alcohol units per week were randomized to abstain from alcohol for 4 weeks either completely or intermittently (at least four abstinent days per week). To monitor compliance, both groups provided regular breath samples on a cellular breathalyser. A subsample completed a semi-structured interview that probed barriers to compliance with abstinence instructions and acceptability of study procedures.ResultsWithin 5 months, we recruited, screened and randomized 25 participants (20% of participants who responded to advertisements: 14 in the complete abstinence group, 11 in the intermittent abstinence group), 24 of whom were retained throughout the 28-day intervention period. Participants in both groups tended to comply with the instructions: the median number of breathalyser-verified abstinent days was 24 (IQR = 15.5–25.0; 86% of target) in the complete abstinence group versus 12 (IQR = 10–15; 75% of target) in the intermittent abstinence group. Semi-structured interviews identified some barriers to compliance and methodological issues that should be considered in future research. No adverse events were reported.ConclusionsIt is feasible to recruit heavy drinking women from community settings and randomize them to either complete or intermittent abstinence from alcohol for 4 weeks. The majority of participants were retained in the study and compliance with the abstinence instructions was good, albeit imperfect. A comprehensive RCT to compare temporary alcohol abstinence with other alcohol reduction strategies on long-term alcohol consumption is feasible. Findings from such a trial would inform implementation of alcohol campaigns and interventions.",
author = "M Field and JA Puddephatt and L Goodwin and L Owens and D Reaves and J Holmes",
year = "2020",
month = jan,
day = "31",
doi = "10.1186/s40814-020-0554-y",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
journal = "Pilot and Feasibility Studies",
issn = "2055-5784",
publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Benefits of temporary alcohol restriction

T2 - a feasibility randomized trial

AU - Field, M

AU - Puddephatt, JA

AU - Goodwin, L

AU - Owens, L

AU - Reaves, D

AU - Holmes, J

PY - 2020/1/31

Y1 - 2020/1/31

N2 - BackgroundParticipation in temporary alcohol abstinence campaigns such as ‘Dry January’ may prompt enduring reductions in alcohol consumption. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required to establish any long-term benefits or negative consequences of temporary abstinence. In the present study, we randomized heavy drinkers to complete or intermittent alcohol abstinence for 4 weeks, in order to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a large-scale RCT.MethodsThis was a mixed methods feasibility study in which we explored recruitment and retention to a randomized trial, compliance with alcohol abstinence instructions and barriers to compliance, and acceptability of study procedures (primary feasibility outcomes). A community sample of women aged between 40 and 60 who drank in excess of 28 alcohol units per week were randomized to abstain from alcohol for 4 weeks either completely or intermittently (at least four abstinent days per week). To monitor compliance, both groups provided regular breath samples on a cellular breathalyser. A subsample completed a semi-structured interview that probed barriers to compliance with abstinence instructions and acceptability of study procedures.ResultsWithin 5 months, we recruited, screened and randomized 25 participants (20% of participants who responded to advertisements: 14 in the complete abstinence group, 11 in the intermittent abstinence group), 24 of whom were retained throughout the 28-day intervention period. Participants in both groups tended to comply with the instructions: the median number of breathalyser-verified abstinent days was 24 (IQR = 15.5–25.0; 86% of target) in the complete abstinence group versus 12 (IQR = 10–15; 75% of target) in the intermittent abstinence group. Semi-structured interviews identified some barriers to compliance and methodological issues that should be considered in future research. No adverse events were reported.ConclusionsIt is feasible to recruit heavy drinking women from community settings and randomize them to either complete or intermittent abstinence from alcohol for 4 weeks. The majority of participants were retained in the study and compliance with the abstinence instructions was good, albeit imperfect. A comprehensive RCT to compare temporary alcohol abstinence with other alcohol reduction strategies on long-term alcohol consumption is feasible. Findings from such a trial would inform implementation of alcohol campaigns and interventions.

AB - BackgroundParticipation in temporary alcohol abstinence campaigns such as ‘Dry January’ may prompt enduring reductions in alcohol consumption. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required to establish any long-term benefits or negative consequences of temporary abstinence. In the present study, we randomized heavy drinkers to complete or intermittent alcohol abstinence for 4 weeks, in order to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a large-scale RCT.MethodsThis was a mixed methods feasibility study in which we explored recruitment and retention to a randomized trial, compliance with alcohol abstinence instructions and barriers to compliance, and acceptability of study procedures (primary feasibility outcomes). A community sample of women aged between 40 and 60 who drank in excess of 28 alcohol units per week were randomized to abstain from alcohol for 4 weeks either completely or intermittently (at least four abstinent days per week). To monitor compliance, both groups provided regular breath samples on a cellular breathalyser. A subsample completed a semi-structured interview that probed barriers to compliance with abstinence instructions and acceptability of study procedures.ResultsWithin 5 months, we recruited, screened and randomized 25 participants (20% of participants who responded to advertisements: 14 in the complete abstinence group, 11 in the intermittent abstinence group), 24 of whom were retained throughout the 28-day intervention period. Participants in both groups tended to comply with the instructions: the median number of breathalyser-verified abstinent days was 24 (IQR = 15.5–25.0; 86% of target) in the complete abstinence group versus 12 (IQR = 10–15; 75% of target) in the intermittent abstinence group. Semi-structured interviews identified some barriers to compliance and methodological issues that should be considered in future research. No adverse events were reported.ConclusionsIt is feasible to recruit heavy drinking women from community settings and randomize them to either complete or intermittent abstinence from alcohol for 4 weeks. The majority of participants were retained in the study and compliance with the abstinence instructions was good, albeit imperfect. A comprehensive RCT to compare temporary alcohol abstinence with other alcohol reduction strategies on long-term alcohol consumption is feasible. Findings from such a trial would inform implementation of alcohol campaigns and interventions.

U2 - 10.1186/s40814-020-0554-y

DO - 10.1186/s40814-020-0554-y

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 32021698

VL - 6

JO - Pilot and Feasibility Studies

JF - Pilot and Feasibility Studies

SN - 2055-5784

M1 - 9

ER -