Cited by 139Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesBehavioral Health and InterventionsAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Can motivational interviewing in emergency care reduce alcohol consumption in young people? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Kohler, Stefan, Hofmann, Anjuna·2015·Alcohol and Alcoholism

Abstract

AIMS: We investigate the effect of motivational interviewing (MI), delivered in a brief intervention during an emergency care contact, on the alcohol consumption of young people who screen positively for present or previous risky alcohol consumption. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials with adolescents or young adults that compared MI in an emergency care setting to control conditions and measured drinking outcomes. RESULTS: Six trials with 1433 participants, aged 13-25 years, were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. MI was never less efficacious than a control intervention. Two trials found significantly more reduction in one or more measures of alcohol consumption in the MI intervention group. One trial indicated that MI may be used most effectively in young people with high-volume alcohol consumption. Separate random effects meta-analyses were performed based on the highest impact that MI added on reducing the drinking frequency and the drinking quantity at any point in time during the different study periods. Their results were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs). The frequency of drinking alcohol decreased significantly more after MI than after control interventions (SMD ≤ -0.17, P ≤ 0.03). In addition, MI reduced the drinking quantity further than control interventions in a meta-analysis of the subset of trials that were implemented in the USA (SMD = -0.12, P = 0.04). Meta-analyses of the smallest mean differences between MI and control groups detected no differences in alcohol use (SMD ≤ 0.02, P ≥ 0.38). CONCLUSION: MI appears at least as effective and may possibly be more effective than other brief interventions in emergency care to reduce alcohol consumption in young people.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/alcalc/agu098

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kohler, S., & Hofmann, A.
Affiliations
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • Health Innovation University of Applied Sciences (DE)
Corresponding author
Kohler, Stefan
Venue
Alcohol and Alcoholism
Published
2015-01-06
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
107-117
ISSN
  • 0735-0414 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3502
OpenAlex
W2152000331
Cited by
139
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Alcohol and Alcoholism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
motivational interviewing, brief intervention, emergency care, alcohol consumption, youth, adolescents, young adults, hazardous drinking, drinking frequency, drinking quantity, alcohol screening
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Emergency Service, Hospital, Humans, Young Adult, Motivational Interviewing, Binge Drinking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review