Effective Intervention Reduce Alcohol Consumption In College Students Nursing Essay

utile Intervention Reduce intoxicant Consumption In College Students Nursing seeHeavy intoxicant habit among college students remains a concern across colleges and universities in the United States. Approximately 80% of either college students drink, including nearly 60% of students ages 18 to 20 (Johnston, OMalley, Bachman, Schulenberg, 2008). Even to a greater extent troubling, 40.1% of full- duration college students underage for sound insobriety engage in gormandise alcohol addiction and 16.6% of students engage in surd inebriety (National Survey on Drug Use and health NSDUH, 2006). Binge imbibition is defined as consuming five or practically drinks on the same occasion on at least 1 day in the past 30 days, bringing a persons blood alcohol concentration (BAC) to 0.08 or above (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism NIAAA, 2004NSDUH, 2006). Consuming five or more drinks on the same occasion on each of 5 or more days in the past 30 days is considered h eavy drinking (NSDUH, 2006). All heavy alcohol users be also orgy alcohol users.Many colleges and universities go through implemented numerous initiatives ranging from enhanced enforcement to deferred community-wide celebratory events, but with little or no success (Turner, Perkins, Bauerle, 2008). College directions and health culture centers know been the main source of counseling for students who consume alcohol. Students gift the opportunity to meet with counselors to discuss their alcohol use and their interest in talk over alcohol consumption and receive personalized normative feedback, advice, and behavioral strategies for avoiding alcohol-related ill-treat (Barnett, Murphy, Colby, Monti, 2007). Although this traditional mode is still used by counselors, advances in technology argon allowing counselors to use new and innovative methods to educate students on the dangers of unreason fit alcohol consumption. Key programs include radio set devices, e-interpositio ns, and cybercounseling.Wireless devices go out counselors with an interactional method of reducing drinking and alcohol consequences in college students. They range from sprightly devices much(prenominal) as cell phones and handheld computers to audience repartee technology, or clickers (Bernhardt et al., 2009 Killos, Hancock, Wattenmaker McGann, Keller, 2010 Labrie, Hummer, Huchting, Neighbors, 2009 LeGreco, Hess, Lederman, Schuwerk, LaValley, 2010 Turner et al., 2008). Comp bed to one-on-one counseling sessions, piano ingressibility and the ability to pass judgment a group of students during one session be advantages of using this interposition model. The use of much(prenominal) technology varies, but the put outcome is the same- providing fast and right judgements about college students get drinking habits and the drinking habits of their peers (Bernhardt et al., 2009 Killos et al., 2010 Labrie et al., 2009 LeGreco et al., 2010 Turner et al., 2008).Mobile devi ces would exempt the take in for pen and paper assessments. The Handheld Assisted Network daybook (HAND) is an effective and valid method of evaluating daily drinking among college students (Bernhardt et al., 2009). Rather than counselors expecting a student to love a daily assessment and have them buy the farm it to them after 30 days, counselors can have students record this same entropy on mobile devices. Although more students are likely to complete a pen and paper assessment than HAND, Bernhardt et al. (2009) found no significant unlikeness amid the two methods when students recorded their total drinks, subdue of drinking days, and drinks per drinking day. This suggests that those students who did complete HAND were comfortable with using the device and brookd accurate instruction similar to those who completed pen and paper assessments. The difference in extremity rates between the two methods is due to the design of HAND students have a grouchy time-frame to co mplete the days assessment and are locked out of their devices at a predetermined time. This inhibits students from completing missed assessments. The disadvantage of students self-reporting data in the HAND should non diminish its advantage of being able to be completed daily with little deviation from a students energetic lifestyle (Bernhardt et al., 2009). Although HAND may sound promising, it should be noned that Bernhardt et al. authentic this program and any of their published turn outs may be biased.Audience response technology, commonly known as clickers, is a second pillowcase of wireless device used by counselors and health educators. Clickers are used in group synergetic-feedback alcohol education sessions to decrease students perceived norms of how much divergent students drink (Killos et al., 2010 Labrie et al., 2009). During these sessions, a counselor or health educator would call for a group of students a series of multiple choice questions pertaining to their own drinking habits and their perception of their peers drinking habits. Students can then simultaneously oppose and have their answers recorded and displayed to the group in graphical form. Killos et al. (2010) found that students who count at least one of these sessions are more likely to turn over that the typical student drinks less alcoholic beverages than perceived those who do not attend such(prenominal) sessions are more likely to over-perceive the amount of alcohol a typical student consumes. This demonstrates that group clicker sessions are effective in positively influencing students beliefs about their peers drinking behaviors (Killos et al., 2010).Clicker sessions are practical because they can be designed for any variety of student groups including resident assistants, freshmen orientation groups, and tough drinkers such as Greeks and athletes (Killos et al., 2010). Labrie et al. (2009) encounterd the effectiveness of one type of group intervention, outline live interactive normative group intervention (BLING), on collegiate athletes. During a one-month fulfil after the clicker session, athletes showed evidence of changes in perceived norms, jumper cable to changes in their own drinking habits no kick upstairs changes were seen at a two-month follow-up (Labrie et al., 2009). This suggests that clicker sessions are a fast and effective model for educating students.Clicker sessions have expanded to include two-way communication models promoting health and encouraging dialogue, quite an than the original one-way communication from facilitator to student. Lets Talk About It, for example, is a disguise game engaging students about decision-making and drinking on a college campus (LeGreco et al., 2010). It was created to generate, identify, and gainsay the social norms that students utilize to construct and reconstruct reality through record sharing, facilitated learning, and inter-student dialogue. A scenario prompt about going to a party with a friend was given to a group of students and they were asked what they would do in a particular situation (e.g. your drunk best friend is about to forswear with a boy she just met). LeGreco et al. (2010) concluded that facilitators can encourage students to complete the story of a shadow of drinking, filling the gaps with personal experiences, choices, and narrative enlarge by utilizing incomplete scenarios. The advantage of using programs like this is that simulations can provide a safe place for individuals to critically examine their more spoiled behaviors and experiment with different possibilities for healthy changes (LeGreco et al., 2010).Wireless devices are mean to expose the truth about perceived norms of college drinking. Although the studies mentioned above have shown the effectiveness of these devices, particular point of accumulations cannot go unnoted. The major concern is that these programs only evaluated the short-term effects of the devices, wh ether it was 30 days or 2 months. More research is needed to examine any maintained changes and long-term effects of using wireless devices as an alcohol intervention in college students. Another concern is attendance and lodge rates. During the clicker sessions, the response results that are presented back to the students could be mis tracking if a fistful of students do not respond to any of the questions. Since this is a device that is intended for rapid responses, facilitators would be spending unnecessary time trying to range of a function out which clickers did not answer any of the questions.E-interventionsComputer programs are ever-changing the way college students are learning about the dangers of heavy drinking. Aside from changing perceived norms, these programs are increasing students readiness to change their drinking behaviors (Chiauzzi, Green, Lord, Thum, Goldstein, 2005 Moore, Soderquist, Werch, 2005 Murphy, Dennhardt, Skidmore, Martens, McDevitt-Murphy, 2010 Walters, Miller, Chiauzzi, 2005). electronic interventions, or e-interventions, are directing students away from face-to-face counseling sessions and more towards self-education with personalized feedback and clogging interventions (Chiauzzi et al., 2005 Doumas Andersen, 2009 Murphy et al., 2010).Counselors may be watchful about assessing students drinking behaviors outside of a traditional office visit. Moore et al. (2005) turn to this as they studied the feasibility and efficacy of a binge drinking obstruction intervention for college students via the internet. Students were sent either tetrad email-based newssheets or four identical print-based newsletters in the mail. In each web newsletter, there was a link to a short process-evaluation survey. Mail newsletters had a hard counterpart of the survey that would be mailed back. A greater percentage of students receiving the email-based newsletter completed the process-evaluation surveys than did the students receiving the print-based newsletter (Moore et al., 2005). This could be explained by many reasons, including easy accessibility and convenience. Students who are receiving the newsletter via email are already online and can obviously click on the links the other students would have to take the time to complete the surveys and mail them back. Interestingly, Moore et al. (2005) observed that the greatest results in decreasing the number of drinks per occasion and the number of occasions feeling drunk were seen in binge drinkers. Students and counselors alike would benefit from using an email-based intervention. Students are comfortable with internet communications and it is fast and convenient for counselors, the intervention is cheaper than printing materials, assessment results are easy to enter, and there is a higher response rate from students (Moore et al., 2005).E-interventions are different from all other types of interventions because they apace give students personalized feedback (Bersa min, Paschall, Fearnow-Kenney, Wyrick, 2007 Chiauzzi et al., 2005 Doumas Haustveit, 2008 Doumas Andersen, 2009 Murphy et al., 2010 Thombs et al., 2007 Walters et al., 2005). These programs provide students with personalized information as part of the intervention or the intervention itself. Most programs rely heavily on educational content, providing text information about the physical, social, and behavioral effects of alcohol in the form of interactive games and quizzes (Walters et al., 2005).Electronic Checkup to Go (e-CHUG) is a 15-minute intervention designed to shorten high-risk drinking by providing personalized feedback and normative data regarding drinking and its consequences. High-risk students who had access to e-CHUG reduced their weekly drinking quantity by approximately 30% compared to a 14% increase in students who did not have access to e-CHUG (Doumas Andersen, 2009). There was also a 30% drop-off in reported alcohol-related problems for high-risk students in the e-CHUG group in resemblance with an 84% increase in reported alcohol-related problems for high-risk students in the experience group (Doumas Andersen, 2009).MyStudentBody (MSB) provides students with tailored motivational feedback about high-risk drinking jibe to gender (Chiauzzi et al., 2005). Both students having access to MSB and those who did not have access were asked to complete 4 weekly 20-minute sessions. The respective websites was available for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, so students had flexible access. Chiauzzi et al. (2005) saw a significant decrease in the number of binge episodes in a typical week among all participants and a rapid decrease in the average consumption among persistent heavy drinkers who had access to MSB.Thombs et al. (2007) were the first to get hold of normative feedback on the basis of a known blood-alcohol concentration. At night in the residence halls, freshmens BAC would be measured and recorded. The next day, these students were dire cted to a website where they found their BAC measure from the night before, the average BAC of the residence hall, and interactive activities. The results, however, were unexpected. BAC take aims were tear down in the residence hall that just had access to their own BAC level (Thombs et al., 2007). This could have been due to a number of reasons. The most practical reason, though, is that around students may have either increased their drinking on both(prenominal) nights or avoided providing data on nights they did not drink (Thombs et al., 2007).These automated interventions glisten the contributions of mailed self-help and in-person approaches. However, the advantage of the computer is the ability to provide much more information upon demand (Walters et al., 2005). As new programs are being developed, some questions remain unanswered. Although there is no can relationship between the length of the intervention and its effectiveness (Walters et al., 2005), it is still unclear as to what type of information makes a difference and which approach is most relevant to college students.E-interventions have given counselors and students much to enjoy, but there is evidence that computer-based interventions are not as effective as in-person interventions with a counselor (Barnett et al., 2007 Carey, Henson, Carey, Maisto, 2009 Croom et al., 2009). These studies compared Alcohol 101 Plus with traditional brief motivational interventions (BMI). Students participating in the BMI were found to reduce drinking and related consequences (Carey et al., 2009). Similarly, at a 12-month follow-up from the initial intervention, students using a computer-delivered intervention were consuming a greater number of drinks per occasion than at baseline (Barnett et al., 2007).E-interventions focus on preventative measures and providing personalized feedback. Throughout the literature on these programs, researchers have noted a few limitations. The most commonly noted limitation is the inability to infer the effectiveness of e-interventions. The students that are more likely to use such programs are those who report binge drinking and heavy drinking. Also, some students may observe this type of intervention adequate, piece others would prefer meeting with a counselor and work collaboratively on how to reduce their drinking habits. A second limitation is similar to that of the wireless devices. These studies on e-interventions only examined immediate and short-term effects of the program on alcohol reduction. Research with longer follow-ups would be prototype to examine the consistency of the students changed behaviors. Third, consideration should be given to the willingness of the university to invest in these computer programs. Lastly, concern arises with the possibility of computers and the programs either malfunctioning or crashing. This could result in delayed feedback for students and loss of data for counselors.CybercounselingLittle, if any, resea rch has examined the use of cybercounseling in reducing college drinking. Cybercounseling is the practice of providing professional counseling and information to clients when both are in separate or remote locations and they utilize electronic content to communicate over the Internet (Maples Han, 2008). E-mail, electronic bulletin boards, and chat board are all forms of cybercounseling.Counselors and students alike see the disadvantages of cybercounseling as outweighing the advantages. Maples Hans (2008) make it clear that communication by e-mail could pose a number of latent ethical concerns regarding the protection of students privacy. For instance, email accounts are prone to being hacked and the information between counselor and student could be compromised. Also, the absence of verbal and communicative cues in cybercounseling makes miscommunication between counselor and students more common (Maples Han, 2008). Proper assessment and interventions become non-existent when there is uncertainty about what is being said. This is especially accepted for counselors. Counselors are prone to use informal language while split second messaging with students students are more likely to decrease their perceptions of the counselor as an expert and trustworthy (Haberstroh, 2010). Lastly, instant messaging is time consuming, especially if the student, the counselor, or both are slow typers (Haberstroh, Parr, Bradley, Morgan-Fleming, Gee, 2008). This creates a time-lag between responses that can lead to being distracted and slowing the pace of the session.SummaryExcessive college drinking remains a national concern across all college and universities. engine room has made it possible for counselors to expand on the models of interventions used to educate college students and prevent heavy drinking. A few of these new interventions include wireless devices such as cell phones, smart phones, and handheld computers, clickers, and computer programs. Each method pro vides a unique, interactive experience for both the counselor and the student. Wireless devices are typically used to expose the truth about perceived norms of college drinking, while e-interventions are more focused on preventative measures and providing personalized feedback. With all technology, there exist flaws. One such flaw is seen in cybercounseling. alike many potential problems exist that the disadvantages of cybercounseling outweigh the advantages.ConclusionTechnology is rapidly advancing and colleges are trying to keep up with it so that it may provide fresh solutions to existing problems such as alcohol consumption among college students. The programs that are available today vary in their purpose and their efficacy. Counselors need to consider what they want to use the intervention model for and then further research how they can get the most out of that particular intervention. E-interventions are the most popular alcohol prevention interventions thousands of college s and universities have implemented such programs among freshmen orientation groups and collegiate athletes. The reason for its popularity is that it is inexpensive, fast, and easy to use. Since an array of computer programs and packet already exist, researchers today should be focusing on how to use these programs in the most efficient way possible. This includes studying the required length of the intervention to be effective and when the best time would be to use such programs.