Home > Promising Practices > Community Trials Intervention to Reduce High-Risk Drinking

Community Trials Intervention to Reduce High-Risk Drinking

An Evidence-Based Practice

Description

Community Trials Intervention to Reduce High-Risk Drinking (RHRD) is a multicomponent, community-based program developed to alter alcohol-use patterns of people of all ages. RHRD uses five prevention components: (1) alcohol access; (2) responsible beverage service; (3) risk of drinking and driving; (4) underage alcohol access; and (5) community mobilization. RHRD addresses underage drinking, acute (binge) drinking, and drinking and driving. The program aims to help communities reduce various types of alcohol-related accidents, violence, and resulting injuries.

Goal / Mission

The goal of this program is to reduce high-risk drinking behaviors.

Impact

Studies demonstrate that the program resulted in decreases in substance use and behaviors related to risk factors. Participants had significant reductions in drinking quantities, variances in drinking quantities, rates of driving when having had too much to drink, and rates of driving over the legal limits relative to nonparticipants. There was also a significant decrease in the number of nighttime crashes per month and the monthly rates of driving under the influence (DUI) crashes.

Results / Accomplishments

The evaluation used a longitudinal, multiple-time series design across three intervention communities. The evaluation data shows decreases in substance use and behaviors related to risk factors. Individuals living in intervention sites had significant reductions in drinking quantities (p = 0.008), variances in drinking quantities (p < 0.001), rates of driving when having had too much to drink (p = 0.009), and rates of driving over the legal limit (p = 0.002) relative to individuals living in comparison sites (communities that were similar to intervention sites in sociodemographics but were not exposed to the intervention).

Furthermore, intervention sites had a significant decrease in the number of nighttime crashes per month and the monthly rates of driving under the influence (DUI) crashes relative to comparison sites. There was also a significant decline in alcohol-related assault cases and serious alcohol-related assault cases observed in emergency departments (ED) relative to comparison sites.

About this Promising Practice

Organization(s)
Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research Center
Primary Contact
Dr. Angela Gallegos-Castillo
(510) 501-7900
gallegosangela1@gmail.com
http://www.pire.org/CommunityTrials/
Topics
Health / Alcohol & Drug Use
Community / Crime & Crime Prevention
Community / Transportation
Organization(s)
Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Prevention Research Center
Source
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's Model Programs Guide (MPG)
Date of publication
2000
Date of implementation
1989
For more details
http://www.pire.org/CommunityTrials/
http://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?...

Related Promising Practices

  1. Border Binge-Drinking Reduction Program
  2. CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Reducing Alcohol-Impaired Driving: Maintaining Current Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) Laws
  3. Communities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol
  4. CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Reducing Alcohol-Impaired Driving: Sobriety Checkpoints
  5. CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Reducing Alcohol-Impaired Driving: Ignition Interlocks
  6. CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Reducing Alcohol-Impaired Driving: Lower BAC Laws for Young or Inexperienced Drivers

More

Related Content for: Community Trials Intervention to Reduce High-Risk Drinking

An Evidence-Based Practice meets the following HCI criteria:

  1. The program description includes at a minimum: the sponsoring organization, program goals, program implementation steps, and outcomes that have demonstrated program success in achieving the program goal in one or more localities.
  2. The results from an evaluation of the program include quantitative measures showing improvement in the outcome(s) of interest after the implementation of the program (i.e. increase in smoking cessation, not just the delivery of a smoking cessation program). The outcome measure(s) is/are compared at relevant time periods before and after the intervention or program implementation. Alternatively, the evaluation study compares the outcome(s) between an intervention group and an appropriate control group.
  3. The study is of peer-review quality and presents numbers in a scientific manner; measurements of precision and reliability are included (e.g. confidence intervals, standard errors), results from statistical tests show a significant difference or change in the outcome measure(s), and relevant point estimates and p-values are presented. Note: if the results from an evaluation of a program are presented in a scientific manner and the outcome measure is improved compared to the baseline measurement or the control group but the difference is not statistically significant, the practice is classified as effective and not evidence-based.
Nevada Tomorrow