Problem drinkers and high risk-taking behaviors under the stay-at-home policy of the COVID-19 emergency declaration.
Alcohol abuse
Alcohol dependence
CAGE
COVID-19
Risk-taking behaviors
Stay-at-home policy
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 06 2022
13 06 2022
Historique:
received:
28
12
2021
accepted:
26
04
2022
entrez:
12
6
2022
pubmed:
13
6
2022
medline:
15
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to examine whether problem drinkers have had high risk-taking behaviors during the stay-at-home policy (e.g., dining out at a bar) under the COVID-19 emergency declaration. We investigated data from Japan COVID-19 and Society Internet Survey(JACSIS)study-a web-based nationwide survey, conducted from August to September 2020. From a total of 12,076 current drinkers, problem drinkers were detected by Cut, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye-opener (CAGE) questions. A CAGE score of 4 showed potential alcohol use disorder and scores of 2 to3 showed potential alcohol abuse; individuals with these scores were regarded as problem drinkers compared to light-or-no-risk drinkers, with a CAGE score of 0 to 1. The outcome assessed the presence of 18 behaviors against the stay-at-home policy, such as dining out at a bar, meeting people, or going to crowded places. All these behaviors were limited in Japan during the first declaration of emergency between April and May 2020. Based on the multivariable logistic regression, the participants with potential alcohol use disorder demonstrated 16 out of the 18 risk-taking behaviors, such as dining out at a bar (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.56-2.79), dining out at a restaurant (aOR: 1.79; 95% CI:1.37-2.35), visiting friends (aOR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.34-2.44), going to karaoke (1.97; 95% CI: 1.26-3.10), and riding on a crowded train (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.07-1.99), compared to light-or-no risk drinkers with a CAGE score of 0 to 1. Additionally, participants with potential alcohol abuse (CAGE score of 2 to 3) had 10 out of 18 behaviors against the stay-at-home policy: the corresponding aORs for the aforementioned behaviors were 1.45 (95% CI: 1.25-1.67), 1.27 (95% CI: 1.12-1.44), 1.17 (95% CI: 1.01-1.36), 1.49 (95% CI: 1.17-1.90), and 1.19 (95% CI: 1.03-1.38), respectively. Problem drinkers had a significant association with being men, a higher income and job position, smoking, sleep deprivation, depression, and other mental diseases. Overall, problem drinkers were more likely to have higher risk-taking behaviors against the stay-at-home policy, compared to light-or-no-risk drinkers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to examine whether problem drinkers have had high risk-taking behaviors during the stay-at-home policy (e.g., dining out at a bar) under the COVID-19 emergency declaration.
METHODS
We investigated data from Japan COVID-19 and Society Internet Survey(JACSIS)study-a web-based nationwide survey, conducted from August to September 2020. From a total of 12,076 current drinkers, problem drinkers were detected by Cut, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye-opener (CAGE) questions. A CAGE score of 4 showed potential alcohol use disorder and scores of 2 to3 showed potential alcohol abuse; individuals with these scores were regarded as problem drinkers compared to light-or-no-risk drinkers, with a CAGE score of 0 to 1. The outcome assessed the presence of 18 behaviors against the stay-at-home policy, such as dining out at a bar, meeting people, or going to crowded places. All these behaviors were limited in Japan during the first declaration of emergency between April and May 2020.
RESULTS
Based on the multivariable logistic regression, the participants with potential alcohol use disorder demonstrated 16 out of the 18 risk-taking behaviors, such as dining out at a bar (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.56-2.79), dining out at a restaurant (aOR: 1.79; 95% CI:1.37-2.35), visiting friends (aOR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.34-2.44), going to karaoke (1.97; 95% CI: 1.26-3.10), and riding on a crowded train (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.07-1.99), compared to light-or-no risk drinkers with a CAGE score of 0 to 1. Additionally, participants with potential alcohol abuse (CAGE score of 2 to 3) had 10 out of 18 behaviors against the stay-at-home policy: the corresponding aORs for the aforementioned behaviors were 1.45 (95% CI: 1.25-1.67), 1.27 (95% CI: 1.12-1.44), 1.17 (95% CI: 1.01-1.36), 1.49 (95% CI: 1.17-1.90), and 1.19 (95% CI: 1.03-1.38), respectively. Problem drinkers had a significant association with being men, a higher income and job position, smoking, sleep deprivation, depression, and other mental diseases.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, problem drinkers were more likely to have higher risk-taking behaviors against the stay-at-home policy, compared to light-or-no-risk drinkers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35692058
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13331-5
pii: 10.1186/s12889-022-13331-5
pmc: PMC9188921
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1173Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Sci Rep. 2021 Sep 23;11(1):18951
pubmed: 34556681
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Oct;107:102-109
pubmed: 28818681
J Stud Alcohol. 1992 Jan;53(1):33-9
pubmed: 1556855
Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1015-1018
pubmed: 32197103
Alcohol Res. 2016;38(1):35-45
pubmed: 27159810
Clin Invest Med. 2007;30(1):33-41
pubmed: 17716538
JAMA. 2008 Nov 5;300(17):2054-6
pubmed: 18984895
Psychol Bull. 1996 Jul;120(1):60-82
pubmed: 8711017
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2020 Aug;18(4):509-517
pubmed: 32495067
Addiction. 2012 Jan;107(1):51-9
pubmed: 22151318
BMJ Open. 2018 Aug 22;8(8):e022344
pubmed: 30135186
Alcohol Alcohol. 2016 Jul;51(4):465-73
pubmed: 26873982
J Epidemiol. 2019 Nov 5;29(11):444-450
pubmed: 30318495
Addict Behav. 2021 Feb;113:106678
pubmed: 33065446
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2010 Jul 1;110(1-2):108-16
pubmed: 20236774
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2020 Jan;30:114-147
pubmed: 29941239
Accid Anal Prev. 2001 Nov;33(6):771-82
pubmed: 11579979
Eur Addict Res. 2020;26(6):309-315
pubmed: 32961535
Alcohol Alcohol. 2020 Jun 25;55(4):344-346
pubmed: 32400858
Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Sep;26(9):
pubmed: 32521222
Am J Ind Med. 2016 Nov;59(11):919-933
pubmed: 27273383
J Public Econ. 2021 Mar;195:104367
pubmed: 33531719
Am J Public Health. 2020 Dec;110(12):1844-1849
pubmed: 33058699
Prev Med. 2019 Sep;126:105762
pubmed: 31271816
BMC Public Health. 2019 Apr 23;19(1):420
pubmed: 31014312
WMJ. 2020 Sep;119(3):171-176
pubmed: 33091284
Tohoku J Exp Med. 2018;246(3):183-189
pubmed: 30487351