Acute and Residual Effects of Caffeinated Beer
Status: | Completed |
---|---|
Conditions: | Psychiatric |
Therapuetic Areas: | Psychiatry / Psychology |
Healthy: | No |
Age Range: | 21 - 30 |
Updated: | 7/22/2016 |
Start Date: | October 2006 |
End Date: | October 2009 |
Acute and Residual Effects of Beer VS. Caffeinated Beer On Simulated Driving
The aim of this study is to develop information about the acute and residual effects of a
new product being targeted to young adults. Using a double placebo-controlled 2 X 2
factorial model study design, we will compare the acute and residual effects on driving
impairment of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol, caffeinated placebo, and
non-caffeinated placebo. Under the alcohol conditions, participants will receive sufficient
alcoholic beverage to attain a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .12 g%. Participants
will be 144 undergraduate and graduate students, and recent college graduates.
new product being targeted to young adults. Using a double placebo-controlled 2 X 2
factorial model study design, we will compare the acute and residual effects on driving
impairment of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol, caffeinated placebo, and
non-caffeinated placebo. Under the alcohol conditions, participants will receive sufficient
alcoholic beverage to attain a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .12 g%. Participants
will be 144 undergraduate and graduate students, and recent college graduates.
Caffeinated alcoholic beverages target young adults with the promise that the caffeine will
counteract the sedating effects of alcohol and thus let the consumer remain alert and active
longer, while continuing to drink. It is likely that in the minds of some young people, this
promise also translates into the idea that mixing caffeine with alcohol allows one to drive
more safely than would be possible after having consumed an equivalent amount of
non-caffeinated alcoholic beverage. These are dangerous assumptions because (1) alertness
may not indicate the absence of impairment under intoxication and (2) next-day impairment
from the residual effects of heavy drinking may be exacerbated by mixing caffeine and
alcohol. We will compare the acute and residual effects of caffeinated and non-caffeinated
beer in terms of a highly relevant outcome - the ability to drive safely.
The long-term objectives of this program of research are to investigate factors that predict
or contribute to performance decrements after alcohol ingestion, with a focus on behaviors
most relevant to public health, such as driving. The primary specific aims of the proposed
work are:
AIM 1: To compare the acute effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on driving-related impairment, as measured
by performance on a driving simulator and the Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT), a test of
sustained attention/reaction time. We hypothesize that caffeinated beverage will result in
less impaired simulated driving ability and better PVT performance acutely, compared to
non-caffeinated beverage, but that performance on these measures following both caffeinated
and non-caffeinated beverage be impaired relative to placebo beverages.
AIM 2: To compare the residual effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on next-day driving-related impairment, as
measured by a driving simulator and the PVT. We hypothesize that caffeinated beverage will
result in greater impairment in next-day simulated driving and attention/reaction time,
relative to non-caffeinated beverage, and that performance following both caffeinated and
non-caffeinated alcoholic beverages will be impaired relative to corresponding placebo
beverages.
AIM 3: To compare the acute effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on self-rated ability to drive, as measured
by a self assessment of ability-to-drive questionnaire, and estimate of blood alcohol
concentration (BAC). We hypothesize that caffeinated alcoholic beverages will result in
greater confidence in ability to drive and lower estimates of BAC, compared to
non-caffeinated alcoholic beverages, but that for both alcoholic beverages, confidence in
driving ability will be lower and estimates of BAC will be greater, relative to placebos.
AIM 4: To compare the residual effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on self-rated ability to drive. We
hypothesize that caffeinated alcoholic beverage will result in lower confidence in ability
to drive and higher estimates of BAC, compared to non-caffeinated alcoholic beverage, but
that for both alcoholic beverages, confidence in driving ability will be lower and estimates
of BAC will be greater, relative to placebo.
counteract the sedating effects of alcohol and thus let the consumer remain alert and active
longer, while continuing to drink. It is likely that in the minds of some young people, this
promise also translates into the idea that mixing caffeine with alcohol allows one to drive
more safely than would be possible after having consumed an equivalent amount of
non-caffeinated alcoholic beverage. These are dangerous assumptions because (1) alertness
may not indicate the absence of impairment under intoxication and (2) next-day impairment
from the residual effects of heavy drinking may be exacerbated by mixing caffeine and
alcohol. We will compare the acute and residual effects of caffeinated and non-caffeinated
beer in terms of a highly relevant outcome - the ability to drive safely.
The long-term objectives of this program of research are to investigate factors that predict
or contribute to performance decrements after alcohol ingestion, with a focus on behaviors
most relevant to public health, such as driving. The primary specific aims of the proposed
work are:
AIM 1: To compare the acute effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on driving-related impairment, as measured
by performance on a driving simulator and the Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT), a test of
sustained attention/reaction time. We hypothesize that caffeinated beverage will result in
less impaired simulated driving ability and better PVT performance acutely, compared to
non-caffeinated beverage, but that performance on these measures following both caffeinated
and non-caffeinated beverage be impaired relative to placebo beverages.
AIM 2: To compare the residual effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on next-day driving-related impairment, as
measured by a driving simulator and the PVT. We hypothesize that caffeinated beverage will
result in greater impairment in next-day simulated driving and attention/reaction time,
relative to non-caffeinated beverage, and that performance following both caffeinated and
non-caffeinated alcoholic beverages will be impaired relative to corresponding placebo
beverages.
AIM 3: To compare the acute effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on self-rated ability to drive, as measured
by a self assessment of ability-to-drive questionnaire, and estimate of blood alcohol
concentration (BAC). We hypothesize that caffeinated alcoholic beverages will result in
greater confidence in ability to drive and lower estimates of BAC, compared to
non-caffeinated alcoholic beverages, but that for both alcoholic beverages, confidence in
driving ability will be lower and estimates of BAC will be greater, relative to placebos.
AIM 4: To compare the residual effects of caffeinated alcohol, non-caffeinated alcohol,
caffeinated placebo, and non-caffeinated placebo on self-rated ability to drive. We
hypothesize that caffeinated alcoholic beverage will result in lower confidence in ability
to drive and higher estimates of BAC, compared to non-caffeinated alcoholic beverage, but
that for both alcoholic beverages, confidence in driving ability will be lower and estimates
of BAC will be greater, relative to placebo.
Inclusion Criteria:
- College students, graduate students, or recent graduates
- Between the ages of 21 and 30 years inclusive (as verified by valid drivers license)
- Who, if a student, reports good academic standing
- Have not been diagnosed with a sleep disorder
- Are not daily smokers
- At least occasionally in the past month, consume five drinks (for men) or more (four
or more if female [based on Flannery et al 2002]) during a single drinking episode
- Have a valid drivers license, so as to include only people who know how to drive.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Scores of 5 or more on a screening measure for alcoholism (the short version of the
Michigan Alcohol Screening Test [SMAST])
- A history of counseling or treatment for chronic substance abuse by self-report
- Daily smoker (to mitigate confounding of caffeine by nicotine withdrawal, or acute
nicotine administration, smokers will be excluded from participation)
- Current use of medications that affect the sleep/wake cycle or daytime alertness or
that are contraindicated for alcohol
- Presence of a health condition that contraindicates alcohol
- Diagnosis of a sleep disorder (sleep apnea, narcolepsy, periodic limb movement,
restless legs syndrome, circadian rhythm disorder, and insomnia)
- Use of recreational drugs (e.g., marijuana) while participating in the study
- Working overnight shifts
- Female and pregnant, nursing, or not using reliable birth control
- Participants who have traveled across two or more time zones in the last month will
be rescheduled for later participation (minimum of 1 month from time-zone travel)
- On average consume greater than 4 cups of coffee per day (>400 mg/day)
- Participants who report ever getting motion sick during screening or become motion
sick after practicing on the driving simulator during Session 1.
- Weigh more than 230 Lbs.
We found this trial at
1
site
Click here to add this to my saved trials