• Rebecca Kate Hodder, Megan Freund, Jenny Bowman, Luke Wolfenden, Elizabeth Campbell, Julia Dray, Christophe Lecathelinais, Christopher Oldmeadow, John Attia, and John Wiggers.
• Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, New South Wales, Australia.
• BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 18; 7 (8): e016060.

ObjectivesInitiation of tobacco, alcohol and illicit substance use typically occurs during adolescence, with the school setting recommended to reduce adolescent substance use. Strengthening individual (eg, problem solving) and environmental (eg, caring relationships at school) resilience protective factors of adolescents has been suggested as a strategy for reducing substance use by adolescents; however, few studies have examined this potential. A study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of a pragmatic school-based universal 'resilience' intervention in reducing the prevalence of tobacco, alcohol and illicit substance use, and increasing the individual and environmental protective factors of students.DesignA cluster-randomised controlled trial.SettingThirty-two Australian secondary schools (20 intervention; 12 control).ParticipantsCohort of grade 7 students followed-up in grade 10 (2014; aged 15-16 years).InterventionA pragmatic intervention involving school staff selection and implementation of available programmes and resources targeting individual and environmental 'resilience' protective factors for all grade 7-10 students was implemented in schools (2012-2014). School staff were provided implementation support.MeasurementsAn online survey collected baseline and follow-up data for primary outcomes: tobacco (ever, recent) and alcohol (ever, recent, 'risk') use, and secondary outcomes: marijuana and other illicit substance use, and individual (six-factor subscales, aggregate) and environmental (three-factor subscales, aggregate) protective factor scores. Generalised and linear mixed models examined follow-up differences between groups.ResultsFollow-up data from 2105 students (intervention=1261; control=844; 69% of baseline cohort) were analysed. No significant differences were found between intervention and control students for any primary (ever tobacco: OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.68, p=0.14; recent tobacco: OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.31, p=0.19; recent ever alcohol: OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.48, p=0.46; alcohol: OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.62, p=0.51; 'risk' alcohol: OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36, p=0.89) or secondary outcomes (marijuana: OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.68, p=0.57; other illicit substance: OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.10, p=0.54; individual protective factors: MD=0, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.06, p=0.89; environmental protective factors: MD: -0.02, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.06, p=0.65).ConclusionsThe universally implemented pragmatic school-based intervention was not effective in reducing the prevalence of tobacco, alcohol or illicit substance use, or in increasing the protective factors of students.Trial RegistrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register reference: ACTRN12611000606987.© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

34 keywords...

hide…