Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026
A Prediction Error-driven Retrieval Procedure for Destabilizing and Rewriting Maladaptive Reward Memories in Hazardous Drinkers
Published on: January 5, 2018
Feasibility and acceptability of a pediatric emergency department alcohol prevention intervention for young
James G Linakis1, Julie Bromberg, Janette Baird
1From the *Injury Prevention Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Rhode Island, Hospital/Alpert Medical School of Brown University, †Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, and ‡Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.
Objective:
The objective of this study was to determine feasibility and acceptability of a brief pediatric emergency department (PED) prevention intervention to delay/prevent initiation of alcohol use in 12-to 14-year-olds.
Methods:
Medically stable 12- to 14-year-olds presenting to the PED who were accompanied by a parent and who had not initiated alcohol use were eligible. Adolescent-parent dyads completed a computerized assessment and were randomized to either brief targeted prevention intervention (BPI) or enhanced standard care (ESC). Families randomized to BPI participated in a PED-based motivational interviewing and skill building-based session with a trained counselor. Parents randomized to BPI had telephone boosters at 1 and 3 months. Families randomized to ESC received standard care and adolescent substance use pamphlets. All dyads completed 6-month follow-up assessments to assess alcohol use-related outcomes.
Results:
Two hundred twenty-eight families were approached: 122 were eligible and 104 were enrolled (85%). Mean youth age was 13 (SD, 0.83) years, 51% were female, and 90% of parents were females. Of the 104 enrolled, 5 withdrew; 99 (94%) completed the assessment battery in the PED in less than 30 minutes. All BPI dyads completed the counseling session in the PED. However, only 53% of BPI parents completed the booster telephone sessions. Brief targeted prevention intervention acceptability items were rated favorably (82%-100%) by both parents and adolescents. There were no differences between BPI and ESC on substance-related outcomes, although the study was not adequately powered for this purpose because it was designed as a feasibility study.
Conclusions:
A BPI in the PED is both feasible and acceptable, but phone boosters proved less feasible. Larger samples and further study are needed to identify efficacy of the BPI in delaying onset of alcohol use in teens.
