|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
|
|
Interventions for prevention of drug use by young people delivered in non-school settingsGates S, McCambridge J, Smith LA, Foxcroft D SummaryInterventions delivered to young people in non-school settings for the prevention of drug useDrug use is widespread among young people including those still at school.Taking drugs is not a medical problem in itself but can affect physical andmental health and social functioning. People may become dependent on drugs, and use of low risk illicit drugs can escalate into use of higher risk
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010 Issue 1, Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
January 25. 2006 AbstractBackgroundInterventions intended to prevent or reduce use of drugs by young people may be delivered in schools or in other settings. This review aims to summarise the current literature about the effectiveness of interventions delivered in non schools settings. Objectives(1) - To summarise the current evidence about the effectiveness of interventions delivered in non-school settings intended to prevent or reduce drug use by young people under 25; Search strategyWe searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (1966-2004), EMBASE (1980-2004), PsycInfo (1972-2004), SIGLE (1980-2004), CINAHL (1982-2004) and ASSIA (1987-2004). We searched also reference lists of review articles and retrieved studies. Selection criteriaRandomised trials that evaluated an intervention targeting drug use by young people under 25 years of age, delivered in a non-school setting, compared with no intervention or another intervention, that reported substantive outcomes relevant to the review. Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Results were tabulated, as studies were considered too dissimilar to combine using meta-analysis. Main resultsSeventeen studies, 9 cluster randomised studies, with 253 clusters, 8 individually randomised studies with 1230 participants, evaluating four types of intervention: motivational interviewing or brief intervention, education or skills training, family interventions and multi-component community interventions. Many studies had methodological drawbacks, especially high levels of loss to follow-up. There were too few studies for firm conclusions. One study of motivational interviewing suggested that this intervention was beneficial on cannabis use. Three family interventions (Focus on Families, Iowa Strengthening Families Program and Preparing for the Drug-Free Years), each evaluated in only one study, suggested that they may be beneficial in preventing cannabis use. The studies of multi component community interventions did not find any strong effects on drug use outcomes, and the two studies of education and skills training did not find any differences between the intervention and control groups. Authors' conclusionsThere is a lack of evidence of effectiveness of the included interventions. Motivational interviewing and some family interventions may have some benefit. Cost-effectiveness has not yet been addressed in any studies, and further research is needed to determine whether any of these interventions can be recommended. |