Event-level analyses of energy drink consumption and alcohol intoxication in bar patrons

Department of Behavioral Science and Community Health, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32610-0175, USA.
Addictive behaviors (Impact Factor: 2.44). 11/2009; 35(4):325-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.11.004
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess event-level associations between energy drink consumption, alcohol intoxication, and intention to drive a motor vehicle in patrons exiting bars at night.
Alcohol field study. Data collected in a U.S. college bar district from 802 randomly selected and self-selected patrons. Anonymous interview and survey data were obtained as well as breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) readings.
Results from logistic regression models revealed that patrons who had consumed alcohol mixed with energy drinks were at a 3-fold increased risk of leaving a bar highly intoxicated (BrAC> or =0.08g/210L), as well as a 4-fold increased risk of intending to drive upon leaving the bar district, compared to other drinking patrons who did not consume alcoholic beverages mixed with energy drinks.
These event-level associations provide additional evidence that energy drink consumption by young adults at bars is a marker for elevated involvement in nighttime risk-taking behavior. Further field research is needed to develop sound regulatory policy on alcohol/energy drink sales practices of on-premise establishments.

Download full-text


Available from: Ryan J O'Mara, Jun 29, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Much research has documented negative associations with the consumption of alcohol mixed with energy drinks (AmED). To date, few research studies have examined the relation between AmED and sexual victimization. Furthermore, research on sexual victimization among men is less studied. The present study employed a sample of 253 men and 545 women to examine the differential associations between AmED consumption and sexual victimization as a function of gender. Results from this study suggest that AmED consumption is robustly associated with being sexually victimized among men, but not women. These results were robust while controlling for demographic factors and other substance use. Results add to the literature on sexual victimization by potentially identifying a new high-risk drinking behavior among males who have been sexually victimized.
    Addictive behaviors 10/2014; 39(1):259-264. DOI:10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.10.005 · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Recently, Marczinski and colleagues (2013) showed that energy drinks combined with alcohol augment a person's desire to drink more alcohol relative to drinking alcohol alone. The current study replicates the findings of Marczinski and colleagues (2013) using a robust measure of alcohol craving.Methods Seventy-five participants aged 18 to 30 years were assigned to an alcohol only or alcohol+energy drink condition in a double-blind randomized pre- versus posttest experiment. Participants received a cocktail containing either 60 ml of vodka and a Red Bull® Silver Edition energy drink (alcohol+energy drink condition) or 60 ml of vodka with a soda water vehicle (alcohol-only condition); both cocktails contained 200 ml of fruit drink. The primary outcome measure was the Alcohol Urge Questionnaire taken at pretest and at 20 minutes (posttest). Other measures taken at posttest were the Biphasic Alcohol Effects Questionnaire, the Drug Effects Questionnaire, and breath alcohol concentration (BAC).ResultsThe alcohol+energy drink condition showed a greater pre- versus posttest increase in urge to drink alcohol compared with the alcohol-only condition (B = 3.24, p = 0.021, d = 0.44). Participants in the alcohol+energy drink condition had significantly higher ratings on liking the cocktail and wanting to drink more of the cocktail, and lower BACs, than the alcohol-only condition. When examined at specific BACs, the effect of the energy drink on the pre- to posttest increase in urge to drink was largest and only significant at BACs of 0.04–0.05 (cf. < 0.04 g/dl).There were no significant differences in stimulation, sedation, feeling the effects of the cocktail, or feeling high.Conclusions Combining energy drinks with alcohol increased the urge to drink alcohol relative to drinking alcohol alone. More research is needed to understand what factors mediate this effect and whether it increases subsequent alcohol consumption.
    Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research 07/2014; 38(8). DOI:10.1111/acer.12498 · 3.31 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A growing trend among ethanol drinkers, especially young adults, is to combine caffeinated energy drinks with ethanol during a drinking episode. The primary active ingredient of these mixers is caffeine, which may significantly interact with ethanol. We tested the two hypotheses that caffeine would enhance ethanol-conditioned place preference and also enhance ethanol-stimulated locomotor activity. The interactive pharmacology of ethanol and caffeine was examined in C57BL/6J (B6) mice in a conditioned place preference procedure with 1.75 g/kg ethanol and 3 mg/kg caffeine. Additionally, we used B6 mice to evaluate ethanol/caffeine combinations on locomotor activity using 3 doses of ethanol (1.75, 2.5 and 3.25 g/kg) and 2 two doses of caffeine (3 and 15 mg/kg). Both ethanol and caffeine administered alone increased preference for the drug paired side, though the effect of caffeine was more modest than that of ethanol. The drug combination produced significant place preference itself, but this was not greater than that for ethanol alone. Additionally, the combination of caffeine and ethanol significantly increased locomotion compared to giving either drug alone. The effect was strongest with a stimulatory dose of ethanol (1.75 g/kg) and waned with increasing doses of ethanol. Thus, combinations of caffeine and ethanol had significant conditioned reinforcing and locomotor activating effects in mice.
    Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 07/2013; 110. DOI:10.1016/j.pbb.2013.07.008 · 2.82 Impact Factor