1. UCD-Don’t Turn a
Night Out into a
Nightmare
Kim Petersen RN,
BSN

2. The Problem
O Binge drinking is a pattern of drinking to
intoxication
O It rapidly raises the BAC to >.08 g/dL (less
than 2 hours)
O In 2000, UC Davis senior David Thornton
drank himself to death by drinking 21
celebratory drinks during a night of
partying
O College students are more likely to binge
drink (Hingson, 2010)

3. Social Assessment
O Positive relationship between heavy alcohol
use & negative consequences
O Consequences for college students each
year include
1,825 deaths
599,000 injuries
696,000 assaults
400,000 had unprotected IC
97,000 sexual assaults
100,000 too intoxicated to recall consent
(Hingson et al., 2009)

4. Social Assessment
O Almost 30% of UCD students report binge
drinking in the last 2 weeks (American
College Health Association, 2013).
O Studies show 69% of individuals who are
alcohol dependence were dependent
before the age of 25 (Hingson et al., 2006)
O Reducing the incidence of binge drinking
among UCD students will improve health
and safety in the UCD community.

5. Summary
O Drinking is a college rite of
passage
O Binge drinking leads to
impaired decision making,
getting into car with
impaired driver, falling form
balconies, roof tops and
fences, STDs,
hospitalization & death
O Goal is to educate, screen,
social norm & enforce laws
to reduce alcohol
consumption and negative
consequence among
college students

6. Work with the following community
partners to reduce binge drinking at
UCD
O ASUCD President- Armando Figuero
O Director of Student Health- Michelle Famula
O Police Chiefs- Landy Black & Mathew
Carmichael
O Davis Chamber of Commerce- Jennifer
Nitzkows
O Greek Life- Richard Ronquil
O Director of Student Housing- Emily Galindo
O UCD Chancellor- Linda Katehi

7. Social Determinants of Health
O Peers-if peers drink more likely to drink as it is
more acceptable & expected
O Family-strong family bonds less likely to drink
O Gender-males drink more than females
O Housing-drink more in the dorms
O Laws- enforcement reduces drinking
O Age- younger people drink more
O Affiliation- athletes and Greek affiliates more
likely to drink
O (Wechsler, Dowdall, Davenport, & Castro,
1995)

8. Special Population Needs
O Hearing impaired-provide sign language
interpreters, real-time captioning
O Vision impaired–provide materials in
braille; large print or audio tape
O ESL-language materials printed in top 10
languages in California
O Review materials/presentations with UCD
Cross Cultural Center and UCD Disability
Center

9. Proposed Solutions
Individual Level
O Mandatory on-line alcohol education
module for all incoming students
O Mandatory alcohol screening for incoming
students
O Individuals at risk for alcohol abuse
referred to primary care for intervention

10. Proposed Solutions
Community Level
O Education on Binge Drinking outreach
events
O Accurate Social Norming-How much are
UCD students drinking and social market
the norms
O Enforcement of current alcohol laws

11. Proposed Solutions
Policies/Legislation
O Laws exist not always enforced ambivalence
O On campus -all state and federal laws
regarding alcohol apply
O California law- the legal age for alcohol
possession and distribution is 21 years old
O Students who are intoxicated or not in control
of their behavior so as to be disruptive or
destructive to the community, the facility, or
themselves, subject to disciplinary action,
criminal prosecution, and/or referral to
treatment/intervention programs
O SJA has jurisdiction over students on/off
campus

12. Evidence Plan Will Work
Education
O Education about Binge Drinking works as
part of a health promotion program
O Incorporate education to raise awareness
of problem (Mallett et al., 2010)
O Provide accurate culturally sensitive
information so that students can make
informed, responsible, healthy choices

13. Education

14. Evidence Plan Will Work
Social Norming
O Provide students with accurate
information on drinking patterns
O Students often overestimate how much
their peers drink
O Correct misperception & alcohol
consumption decreases (Gomberg,
Schneider, & DeJong 2001)

15. Evidence Plan will Work

16. Evidence Plan Will Work
Mandatory Screening
O Early identification risky drinking practices
O Refer students for appropriate help
O Brief interventions with high-risk college
students has been successful in reducing
alcohol consumption and/or related
consequences.
O (Werner, Walker & Greene, 1996; Larimer,
Cronce, Lee, & Kilmer, 2004)

17. Evidence Plan Will Work
Enforcement
O Enforce regulations (Wagenaar &
Wolfson, 1994)
O Reduces access to alcohol
(Weitzman, Folkman, Folkman, &
Wechsler, 2003))
O Deter harmful alcohol use (Thombs,
et al., 2009; Baldwin, Stogner, &
Miller, 2014)

18. Ethics
O Binge drinking is associated with
considerable harm
O Acceptable in some cultures (Kuntsche,
Rehm, & Gmel, 2004)
O Considered a college rite of passage
O The ethical principle of autonomy leaves the
decision to drink is to the individual
O Respect autonomy & provide student with
information to make informed choice
O The ethical principles beneficence “to do
good” and promote well being & non-
maleficence “to do no harm” requires
intervention to protect the individual and the
community
O "health promotion" versus "health czar”

19. Summary
O College drinking remains a daunting
problem
O Harm reduction requires a multifaceted
approach
O Target individual drinkers and the
environment.
O Create an environment that facilitates
healthy drinking choices
O Enforce current drinking laws
O Improved the UCD community’s quality
of life