ABEAD 2014
GRT 5 – Recomendações para a Prevenção de Drogas no
Brasil
Ana Cecilia P. R.
Marques, Florence Kerr-Corrêa, Priscila Previato, Clarice Madruga, Cesar
Pazzinatto
Ao longo da história da Humanidade, as substâncias psicoativas e
psicotrópicas ou de abuso (SP) vem sendo utilizadas com finalidades múltiplas,
tanto como parte de cerimônias religiosas, sociais, festivas, até como
medicamento, em antigos rituais de cura. Ainda hoje, algumas são prescritas
para regular o pensamento e o comportamento. Essa sobreposição de contextos
para o uso dificulta o entendimento do processo etiopatogênico, que pode levar
de um primeiro contato com uma SP (ou “droga”, no sentido popular da palavra),
aos limites devastadores da dependência, com lesões de vários órgãos, entre os
quais, e mais importante, o cérebro.
Diversos fatores foram identificados como relevantes na determinação do
uso problemático e da dependência, entre eles, os transtornos mentais e de
comportamento, que para alguns precedem a experimentação, e na maioria dos
casos não são diagnosticados (1-10). O transtorno de atenção na infância, o
transtorno opositivo desafiador, são exemplos, pois podem desencadear
comportamentos impulsivo-agressivos na adolescência, dificuldades no
estabelecimento de relações interpessoais, e ainda mais, abuso e dependência de
SP (11-15). Assim, é muito importante definir os pressupostos filosóficos,
éticos e científicos para o desenvolvimento de intervenções preventivas. Os
mais importantes são:
·
O fenômeno do uso, abuso e
dependência de SP é composto por dimensões biológicas e psicossociais,
que lhe confere extrema complexidade, e implica em adotar modelos de abordagem
com multicomponentes (16-24).
·
Prevenir o uso precoce de SP, isto é,
de início na adolescência, é um procedimento que apresenta benefícios para a saúde,comprovadamente (25-38).
·
A dependência de SP é uma grave doença do cérebro, crônica, recidivante e fatal,
se não for tratada (39-43).
A ABEAD em 1990 elaborou um programa de
prevenção para o não uso de álcool, o PRONAL, e recomendou ao governo
brasileiro a adoção dos seguintes princípios gerais (44):
·
O impacto do consumo de bebidas
alcoólicas atinge o indivíduo e seu entorno e portanto, a prevenção deve ser
universal;
·
As ações de enfrentamento do problema
devem respeitar particularidades históricas, sociais e culturais, e envolver
toda a comunidade;
·
As políticas devem ser integradas às
demais, fundamentadas no conhecimento científico já existente sobre o tema.
Na atualidade, a partir dos resultados de estudos recentes sobre
prevenção, “novos princípios” são recomendados:
·
A prevenção deve acontecer em níveis hierárquicos de acordo com o diagnóstico
situacional (45-53).
·
O modelo preventivo moderno é aquele
que otimiza e amplia o foco da intervenção nos fatores
de proteção, e age para a diminuição dos de risco, quer seja no
indivíduo, na família, na comunidade ou na escola (54-67).
·
Para o desenvolvimento efetivo de
medidas preventivas, os pais devem
ser envolvidos, pois representam a influência mais importante no comportamento
de crianças e adolescentes (68-80).
·
A influência do grupo é
muito importante: a maioria dos adolescentes estava com amigos quando
experimentou pela primeira vez alguma SP (81-97).
·
As políticas sobre
drogas devem ser definidas levando em conta as diferenças existentes entre os
gêneros, fases do desenvolvimento humano, entre outros aspectos (98-103).
·
Sustentabilidade é um aspecto fundamental para o sucesso de qualquer programa
preventivo, pois permite supervisionar, avaliar e redirecionar as ações
aplicadas (104-112).
Para desenvolver a prevenção hoje, as seguintes estratégias são
preconizadas:
·
Educar ou persuadir as pessoas a não
usar, ou fazê-lo, quando permitido, de modo a produzir o menor risco possível
(113-117).
·
Dissuadir os comportamentos
relacionados ao uso com a ameaça de sanções (persuasão negativa)
(118-120).
·
Regulamentar e controlar a
disponibilidade das SP ou as condições de sua
utilização (121-127).
·
Agregar aos programas preventivos os
movimentos sociais ou religiosos empenhados
em evitar e reduzir o uso (128-129).
·
Tratar ou aconselhar as pessoas que já apresentam problemas relacionados ao uso
(130-140).
·
Acompanhar os resultados dos estudos sobre a estratégia de Redução de Danos, entre outras estratégias
aplicadas nos países desenvolvidos, antes de replicá-las no Brasil, e se
adotadas, utilizá-las na forma de pesquisa, aplicando os princípios éticos e
metodológicos exigidos (141-147).
·
Integrar as políticas preventivas às
assistenciais e aquelas para controle da oferta, o modelo de uma política
integral, preconizado pela Ciência(148-150).
A ABEAD endossa as recomendações advindas dos
estudos científicos, e ressalta que em função da diversidade regional do
Brasil, assim como de suas dimensões, é preciso descentralizar as políticas,
principalmente as preventivas, aculturando as ações, estruturando-as de acordo
com os recursos locais, e acima de tudo, garantindo programas permanentes e
sustentáveis.
Referências:
1. Petraitis J,
Flay BR, Miller TQ. Reviewing theories of adolescent substance use: Organizing
pieces in the puzzle. Psychol Bull 1995;117:67–86.
2. Hartel CR.,
Glantz MD. Drug abuse: Origins and interventions. American Psychological
Association; Washington, DC: 1997.
3. Langås AM, Malt
UF, Opjordsmoen S. Comorbid mental disorders in substance users from a single
catchment area – a clinical study BMC Psychiatry. 2011; 11: 25.
4. Degenhardt L,
Chiu WT, Conway K, Dierker L, Glantz M, Kalaydjian A, Merikangas K, Sampson N,
Swendsen J, Kessler RC. Does the ‘gateway’ matter? Associations between the
order of drug use initiation and the development of drug dependence in the
National Comorbidity Study Replication Psychol Med. 2009 39(1): 157–167
5. Glantz MD,
Anthony JC, Berglund PC, Degenhardt L, Dierker L, Kalaydjian A, Merikangas KR,
AM Ruscio, Swendsen J, Kessler RC. Mental disorders as risk factors for later
substance dependence: Estimates of optimal prevention and treatment benefits
Psychol Med. 2009 39(8): 1365–1377.
6. Compton
Sociodemographic and Psychopathologic Predictors of First Incidence of DSM-IV
Substance Use, Mood, and Anxiety Disorders: Results from the Wave 2 National
Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions Mol Psychiatry. 2009
14(11): 1051–1066.
7. El-Guebaly N.
Concurrent substance-related disorders and mental illness: the North American
experience World Psychiatry. 2004; 3(3): 182–187
8. Swadi H.
Individual risk factors for adolescent substance use. Drug Alcohol Depend
1999;55:209–224.
9. Bridget F.
Grant, Rise B. Goldstein, S. Patricia Chou, Boji Huang, Frederick S. Stinson,
Deborah A. Dawson, Tulshi D. Saha, Sharon M. Smith, Attila J. Pulay, Roger P.
Pickering, W. June Ruan, Wilson M.
10. Kellam SG, Werthamer-Larsson
L, Dolan LJ, Brow C. Developmental epidemiologically based preventive trials:
baseline modeling of early target behaviors and depressive symptoms. American
Journal of community Psychology. 1991;19(4):563-584
11. DeMarsh J,
Kumpfer K. Family environmental and genetic influences on children’s future
chemical dependency. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society: Advances in
Theory and Applied Research. 1985;18(1-2):49-92
12. Upadhyaya HP
Substance Use Disorders in Children and Adolescents With
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Implications for Treatment and the
Role of the Primary Care Physician Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;
10(3): 211–221.
13. Kellam SG,
Brown C, Hendricks F. Relationship of first-grade social adaptation to teenage
drinking, drug-use and smoking. Digest of Alcoholism Theory and Application.
1983;2:20-24.
14. Risë B.
Goldstein, Wilson M. Compton, Attila J. Pulay, W. June Ruan, Roger P.
Pickering, Frederick S. Stinson, Bridget F. Grant Antisocial
Behavioral Syndromes and DSM-IV Drug Use Disorders in the United States:
Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related
Conditions Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007, 8; 90(2-3): 145–158.
15. Fallu JS,
Janosz M, Brière FN, Descheneaux A, Vitaro F, Tremblay RE. Preventing
disruptive boys from becoming heavy substance users during adolescence:a
longitudinal study of familial and peer related protective factors. Addict
Behav. 2010; 35(12):1074-82
16. Kimonis ER,
Tatar JR, II, Cauffman E. Substance Related Disorders among Juvenile Offenders:
What Role Do Psychopathic Traits Play? Psychol Addict Behav 2012; 26(2):
212–225.
17. Newcomb, MD.;
Locke, T. Health, social, and psychological consequences of drug use and abuse.
In: Sloboda, Z., editor. Epidemiology of drug abuse. Springer; New York: 2005.
45-59.
18. Kandel, D.
Stages and pathways of drug involvement: Examining the gateway hypothesis.
Cambridge University Press; New York: 2002.
19. Casey BJ, Jones
RM. Neurobiology of the adolescent brain and behavior: implications for
substance use disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;
49(12):1189-201.
20. Khantzian EJ.
The self-medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: A reconsideration
and recent applications. Harv Rev Psychiatry 1997;4:231–244
21. Tarter RE,
Kirisci L, Mezzich A, Cornelius JR, Pajer K, Vanyukov M, Gardner W, Blackson T,
Clark D. Neurobehavioral disinhibition in childhood predicts early age at onset
of substance use disorder.Am J sychiatry. 2003;160(6):1078-85.
22. .Saal D, Dong
Y, Bonci A, et al. Drugs of abuse and stress trigger a common synaptic
adaptation in dopamine neurons. Neuron 2003;37:577–582.
23. Ridenour TA,
Molina MM, Compton WM, Spitznagel EL, Cottler LB. Factors associated with the
transition from abuse to dependence among substance abusers: Implications for a
measure of addictive liability Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005, 1; 80(1): 1–14.
24. Hardin MG,
Ernst M. Functional brain imaging of development-related risk and vulnerability
for substance use in adolescents. Journal of Addiction Medicine. 2009; 3(2),
47-54.
25. Perry JL,
Joseph JE, Jiang Y, Zimmerman RS, Kelly TH, Darna M, Huettl P, Dwoskin
LP, Bardo Prefrontal Cortex and Drug Abuse Vulnerability: Translation to Prevention
and Treatment Interventions. Brain Res Rev. 2011. 1; 65(2): 124–149.
26. Institute of
Medicine. Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive
intervention research. National Academy Press; Washington, DC: 1994
27. Kumpfer KL, Turner
C. The social ecology model of adolescent substance abuse: Implications for
prevention. The International Journal of the Addictions. 1990;25(4A):435-462.
28. Kumpfer KL.
Children and adolescents and drug and alcohol abuse and addiction: Review of
prevention strategies. In NS. Miller (ed.) Comprehensive Handbook of Drug and
Alcohol Addiction. New York, NY, Marcel Dekker; 1991.
29. Kumpfer KL,
Turner C, Alvarado R. A Community change model for school health promotion.
Journal of Health Education. 1991a;22(2):94-110.
30. Gottfredson DC,
Wilson DB (2003) Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse
prevention. Prev Sci 4: 27–38.
31. Cuijpers P
(2002) Effective ingredients of school-based drug prevention programs: a
systematic review. Addict Behav 27: 1009–1023.
32. Bond L, Patton
G, Glover S, Carlin JB, Butler H, et al. (2004) The Gatehouse Project: can a
multilevel school intervention affect emotional wellbeing and health risk
behaviors? J Epidemiol Community Health 58: 997–1003.
33. National
Institute on Drug Abuse. Preventing drug use among children and adolescents: a
research-based guide (NIH Publication 97-4212). Bethesda, MD: National
Institute on Drug Abuse; 1997.
34. Botvin GJ.
Preventing drug abuse in schools: Social and competence enhancement approaches
targeting individual-level etiological factors. Addict Behav 2000;25:887–897.
35. Schinke S,
Brounstein P, Gardner S. Science-Based Prevention Programs and Principles.
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration; Rockville, MD: 2002. 2002. DHHS Pub. No. (SMA) 03-3764
36. Nation M,
Crusto C, Wanderman A, Kumpfer K, Seybolt D, Morrisey E, Davino K. What works
in prevention: Principles of effective prevention programs. American
Psychologist. 2003:58.
37. Spoth R,
Trudeau L, Guyll M, Shin C, Redmond C. Universal Intervention Effects on
Substance Use Among Young Adults Mediated by Delayed Adolescent Substance
Initiation J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009 77(4): 620–632.
38. Griffin KW,
Botvin GJ. Evidence-Based Interventions for Preventing Substance Use Disorders
in Adolescents Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2010 19(3): 505–526.
39. Institute of
Medicine. Prevention and treatment of alcohol problems: research opportunities
. IOM 89-13. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1989.
40. Instititute of
Medicine. “Treating Drug Problems: A Study of the Evolution, Effectiveness, and
Financing of Public and Private Drug Treatment Systems.” Report prepared by the
Institute of Medicine, Committee for the Substance Abuse Coverage Study,
Division of Health Care Services. Washington, DC: N.1990.
41. WHO (2008)
Environmental Burden of Disease Series, World Health Organization. Access:
www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/national.
www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/national.
42. WHO (2009)
Global Burden of Disease, World Health Organization. Access:
www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates_country
www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates_country
43. National
Institute on Drug Abuse Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment: A
Research-Based Guide (Third Edition) 2012.
44. National
Institute on Drug Abuse Principles of Adolescent Substance Use Disorder
Treatment: A Research-Based Guide 2014.
45. ABEAD Proposta
para uma política nacional de prevenção do consumo do álcool, tabaco e outras
substâncias psicoativas. Brasília, 1990.
46. Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). National Registry of
Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP web site). www.nrepp.samhsa.gov
47. Dryfoos JG.
Adolecents at risk: Prevalence and prevention. New York: Oxford University
Press; 1990
48. Gorman DM
(1992) Using theory and basic research to target primary prevention programs:
recent developments and future prospects. Alcohol Alcohol 27: 583–594.
49. Coie JD, Watt
NF, West SG, Hawkins JD, Asarnow JR, et al. (1993) The science of prevention: a
conceptual framework and some directions for a national research program. Am
Psychol 48: 1013–1022.
50. Institute of
Medicine. Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive
intervention research. National Academy Press; Washington, DC: 1994.
51. Conduct
Problems Prevention Research Group Merging Universal and Indicated Prevention
Programs: The Fast Track Model Addict Behav. 2000; 25(6): 913–927
52. Nation M,
Crusto C, Wandersman A, Kumpfer KL, Seybolt D, et al. (2003) What works in
prevention: principles of effective prevention programs. Am Psychol 58:
449–456.
53. Griffin KW,
Botvin GJ, Nichols TR, Doyle MM (2003) Effectiveness of a universal drug abuse
prevention approach for youth at high risk for substance use initiation. Prev
Med 36: 1–7.
54. Lee TY.
Construction of an Integrated Positive Youth Development Conceptual Framework
for the Prevention of the Use of Psychotropic Drugs among Adolescents
ScientificWorldJournal. 2011; 11: 2403–2417
55. Neiger B.
Resilient reintegration: Use of structural equations modeling. Dissertation
submitted to the faculty of the University of Utah, Department of Health
Education; 1991.
56. Johnson CA,
Pentz MA, Weber MD, Dwyer JH, Baer N, et al. (1990) Relative effectiveness of comprehensive
community programming for drug abuse prevention with high-risk and low-risk
adolescents. J Consult Clin Psychol 58: 447–456.
57. Swadi H.
Individual risk factors for adolescent substance use. Drug Alcohol Depend
1999;55:209–224.
58. Hawkins JD,
Catalano RF, Miller JY. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug
problem in adolescence and early adulthood:
Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin.
1992; 112(1):64-105.
59. Mrazek PB,
Haggerty RJ. Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for prevent
research. Washington, DC. National Academy Press. 1994
60. Schinke S,
Brounstein P, Gardner S. Science-Based Prevention Programs and Principles.
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration; Rockville, MD: 2002. 2002. DHHS Pub. No. (SMA) 03-3764
61. Botvin GJ.
Preventing drug abuse in schools: Social and competence enhancement approaches
targeting individual-level etiological factors. Addict Behav 2000;25:887–897.
62. Clayton RR.
Transitions in drug use: risk and protective factors. In M. D. Cornstone
Consulting Group. (2002). End game: the challenge of sustainability: Cambridge,
MA, EUA.1992.
63. Botvin GJ,
Baker E, Renick NL, Filazzola AD, Botvin Foxcroft DR, Ireland D, Lister-Sharp
DJL, Breen R. (2003) Longer-term primary prevention for alcohol misuse in young
people: a systematic review. Addiction 98.
64. Jessor R. Risk
behaviour in adolescence: a psychosocial framework for understanding and
action. Dev Rev 1992: 12: 374–390.
65. Winters KC,
Fawkes T, Fahnhorst T, Botzet A, August G. A synthesis review of exemplary drug
abuse prevention programs in the United States. Journal of Subst Abuse Treat.
2007;32:371-380.
66. Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). National Registry of
Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP web site). www.nrepp.samhsa.gov
ano ?????
67. Faggiano F,
Vigna-Taglianti F, Burkhart G, Bohrn K, Cuomo L, et al. (2010) The
effectiveness of a school-based substance abuse prevention program: 18-month
follow-up of the EU-Dap cluster randomized controlled trial. Drug Alcohol
Depend 108: 56–64.
68. Kumpfer KL. The
Cinderellas of prevention want to go to the ball, too. In KH Rey CL,
Faegre, Lowery P(eds.) Prevention Research Findings; 1989.
69. Fletcher A,
Bonell C, Hargreaves J. School effects on young people’s drug use: A systematic
review of intervention and observational studies. J Adolesc Health
2008;42:209–220. [PubMed: 18295128]
70. Kellam SG,
Brown HC, Poduska J, Ialongo N, Wang W, Toyinbo P, Petras H, Ford C, Windham A,
Wilcox HC Effects of a Universal Classroom Behavior Management Program in First
and Second Grades on Young Adult Behavioral, Psychiatric, and Social Outcomes
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008. 1; 95(Suppl 1): S5–S28
71. Coombs RH,
Paulson MJ, Richardson MA. Peer vs. Parental influence in substance use in
Hispanic and Anglo children and adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescent.
1991;20(1):73-88
72. Kumpfer KL. How
to get hard-to-reach parents involved in parenting programs. In Office of
Substance Abuse Prevention: Parent Training Is Prevention: Preventing Alcohol
and Other Drug Problems Among Youth In The Family; 1991b.
73. Kumpfer KL.
Strengthening America’s families: Promising parenting and family strategies for
delinquency prevention. User’s Guide. Washington, DC. Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Juvenile Programs, US
Department of Justice; 1992.
74. Stern A. Family
influences on alcohol and other drug-taking behavior: Implications for
prevention programming. Paper prepared for the Southwest Regional Center for
Drug-free Schools and Communities, Los Angeles, CA; 1992.
75. Spoth RL,
Redmond C, Shin C (2001) Randomized trial of brief family interventions for
general populations: adolescent substance use outcomes 4 years following
baseline. J Consult Clin Psychol 69: 627–642.
76. Lochman JE, van
den Steenhoven A. Family-based approaches to substance abuse prevention. J Prim
Prev 2002;23:49–114.
77. Spoth RL,
Redmond C, Trudeau L, Shin C. Longitudinal substance initiation outcomes for a
universal preventive intervention combining family and school programs. Psychol
Addict Behav 2002, 16: 129–134.
78. Lochman JE, Van
Den Steenhoven A. Family-based approaches to substance abuse prevention. J Prim
Prev 2002;23:49–114.
79. Stanton B, Cole
M, Galbraith J, Li X, Pendleton S, et al. (2004) Randomized trial of a parent
intervention. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 158.
80. Hogue A, Liddle
HA. Family-based treatment for adolescent substance abuse: controlled trials
and new horizons in services research. Journal of Family Therapy 31(2):126–154,
2009.
81. Byrnes HF,
Miller BA, Aalborg AE, Plasencia AV, Keagy CD. Implementation fidelity in
adolescent family-based prevention programs: relationship to family engagement
Health Educ Res. 2010, 25(4): 531–541.
82. Bröning S,
Kumpfer K, Kruse K, Sack PM, Schaunig-Busch I, Ruths S, Moesgen D, Pflug E,
Klein M, Thomasius R. Selective prevention programs for children from
substance-affected families: a comprehensive systematic review Abuse Treat Prev
Policy. 2012; 7: 23.
83. Mayberry ML,
Espelage DL, Koenig B. Multilevel modeling of direct effects and interactions
of peers, parents, school, and community influences on adolescent substance
use. J Youth Adolesc 2009;38:1038–49.
84. Hays SP, Hays
CE, Mulhall PF. Community risk and protective factors and adolescent substance
use. J Prim Prev 2003;24:125–142
85. Chassin L,
Presson CC, Sherman JJ. Cigarette smoking and adolescent psychosocial
development. Basic and Applied Social Psycology. 1984;5:295-315.
86. Hahn G, Charlin
VL, Sussman S, Dent CW, Manzi J, Stacy AW. Adolescents’ first and most recent
use situations of smokeless tobacco and cigarettes: Similarities and
differences. Addictive Behaviors. 1990;15:439-448.
87. Greenfield T,
Zimmerman R. Experiences with community action projects: new research in the
prevention of alcohol and other drug problems. DHHS Publication No. (ADM)
93-1976, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Rockville, MD; 1993. .
88. Urberg KA,
Değirmencioğlu SM, Pilgrim C. Close friend and group influence on adolescent
cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Dev Psychol. 1997, 33(5):834-44.
89. Derzon JH,
Lipsey MW. Predicting tobacco use to age 18: A synthesis of longitudinal
research. Addiction. 1999;94:995-1006.
90. Alexander C,
Piazza M, Mekos D, Valente T. Peers, schools, and adolescent cigarette smoking.
J Adolesc Health. 2001;29(1):22-30
91. Kirke DM. Chain
reactions’ in adolescents cigarette, alcohol and drug use: Similarity through
peer influence or the patterning of ties’ in peer networks? Social Networks.
2004;26:3-28.
92. Thomas W.
Valente, Chich Ping Chou, Mary Ann Pentz Community Coalitions as a System:
Effects of Network Change on Adoption of Evidence-Based Substance Abuse
Prevention Am J Public Health. 2007. 97(5): 880–886.
93. Oesterle S,
Hawkins JD, Fagan AA, Abbott RD, Catalano RF. Testing the Universality of the
Effects of the Communities That Care Prevention System for Preventing
Adolescent Drug Use and Delinquency Prev Sci. 2010; 11(4): 411–423
94. Byrnes HF,.
Miller BA, Chamratrithirong A, Rhucharoenpornpanich O, Cupp PK, Atwood PK,
Fongkaew W, Rosati MJ, Chookhare W. Neighborhood Perceptions and Parent
Outcomes in Family Based Prevention Programs for Thai Adolescents: The Role of
Program EngagementJ Drug Educ. 2011; 41(2): 161–181
95. Johnston LD,
O’Malley PM, Bachman GM. Drug Use Among American High School Students, College
Students, and Young Adults: 1975-1990. Rockville, MD, National Institute on
Drug Abuse; 1991.
96. Pentz MA, Dwyer
JH, MacKinnon DP, Flay BR, Hansen WB, Wang EY, Johnson CA. A Multi-community
trial for primary prevention of adolescent drug abuse: Effects on drug use
prevalence. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1989;261:3259-66.
97. Holmila M.
Community prevention of alcohol problems. Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK; 1997.
98. Gates S,
McCambridge J, Smith LA, Foxcroft D (2006) Interventions for prevention of drug
use by young people delivered in non-school settings (Review). Cochrane
Database Syst Rev.
99. Room, R.
Alcohol and crime: behavioral aspects. In Encyclopedia of crime and
justice,Vol. 1 (ed. 5. Kadish); 1983:35-44. Free Press, New York.
100. Palinkas LA,
Atkins CJ, Miller C, Ferreira D (1996) Social skills training for drug
prevention in high-risk female adolescents. Prev Med 25: 692–701.
101. Spear LP. The
adolescent brain and age-related behavioral manifestations. Neuroscience and
Biobehavioral Reviews. 2002;24:417-463.
102. Schwinn TM,
Schinke SP, Di Noia J (2010) Preventing drug abuse among adolescent girls:
outcome data from an internet-based intervention. Prev Sci 11:24–32.
103. McBride DC,
Terry-McElrath YM, VanderWaal CJ, Chriqui JF, Myllyluoma J US Public Health
Agency Involvement in Youth-Focused Illicit Drug Policy, Planning, and
Prevention at the Local Level, 1999–2003 Am J Public Health. 2008 98(2):
270–277.
104. Eriksson C,
Geidne S, Larsson M, Pettersson C. A Research Strategy Case Study of Alcohol
and Drug Prevention by Non-Governmental Organizations in Sweden 2003-2009 Subst
Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2011; 6: 8.
105. Johnson KW,
Grube JW, Ogilvie KA, Collins D, Courser M, L. Dirks G, Ogilvie D, Driscoll D.
A Community Prevention Model to Prevent Children from Inhaling and Ingesting
Harmful Legal Products Eval Program Plann. 2012; 35(1): 113–123
106. Cornestone
Consulting Group. End game: the challenge of sustainability: Cambridge, MA,
EUA.2002.
107. Elliot DS,
Mihalic S. Issues in disseminating and explicating effective prevention
programs. Prevention Science. 2004;5:47-52.
108. Chisholm D,
Rehm J, Ommeren MV, Monteiro M. Reducing the global burden of hazardous alcohol
use: a comparative cost effectiveness analysis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol.
2004;65:782-93.
109. Rohrbach LA,
Gunning M, Sun P, Sussman S. The Project Towards No Drug Abuse (TND)
Dissemination Trial: Implementation Fidelity and Immediate Outcomes Prev Sci.
2010; 11(1): 77.
110. Brown CH,
Kellam SG, Kaupert S, Muthén BO, Wang W, Muthén LK, Chamberlain P, PoVey CL,
Cady R, Valente TW, Ogihara, M Prado GJ, Pantin HM, Gallo CG, Szapocznik J,
Czaja SJ, McManus JH. Partnerships for the Design, Conduct, and Analysis
of Effectiveness, and Implementation Research: Experiences of the Prevention
Science and Methodology Group Adm Policy Ment Health. 2012, 39(4): 301–31.
111. Max Guyll,
Richard Spoth, Marilyn Cornish Substance misuse prevention and economic
analysis: Challenges and opportunities regarding international utility Subst
Use Misuse. 2012; 47(0): 877–888.
112. Griffith KN,
Scheier LM. Did We Get Our Money’s Worth? Bridging Economic and Behavioral
Measures of Program Success in Adolescent Drug Prevention Int J Environ Res
Public Health. 2013; 10(11): 5908–5935
113. National
Institute on Drug Abuse. Preventing drug use among children and adolescents: a
research-based guide (NIH Publication 97-4212). Bethesda, MD: National
Institute on Drug Abuse; 1997.
114. White D, Pitts
M Educating young people about drugs: a systematic review. Addiction 1998, 93:
1475–1487.
115. Ellickson PL,
Collins RL, Hambarsoomians K, McCaffrey DF. Does alcohol advertising promote
adolescent drinking? Results from a longitudinal assessment. Addiction.
2005;100:235-46
116. Simão MO,
Kerr-Corrêa F, Smaira SI, Trinca LA., Floripes TMF, Dalben I, Martins RA,
Oliveira JB, Cavariani MB., Tucci AM. Prevention of “risky” drinking
among students at a Brazilian university. Alcohol & Alcoholism.
2008:43:470-6.
117. Room R.
Prevention of alcohol – related problems. In Gelder M, Andreasen NC; López-Ibor
Jr JJ, Geddes JR, editors. New Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry. 2nd ed. New York:
Oxford University Press; 2009:467-71.
118. Babor T,
Caetano R, Casswell S, Edwards G, Giestbrecht N, Graham K, Grube J, Gruenewald
P, Hill L, Holder H, Osterberg R, Rehm J, Rossow L. Alcohol: no ordinary
commodity-research and public policy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003.
119. World Health
Organization. Global status report: alcohol policy. World Health Organization,
Geneva. 2004 http://www.who.int/substanceabuse/publications/en/Alcohol%2OPolicy%2oReport.pdf.
120. Laranjeira R,
Romano M. Consenso brasileiro sobre políticas públicas do álcool. Rev. Bras
Psiquiatr. 2004;26(1):72-5.
121. Tye J, Warner
K, Glantz S. Tobacco advertising and consumption: evidence of a causal
relationship.J Public Health Policy 1987;8:492–507.
122. Wyllie A,
Zhang JF, Casswell S. Positive responses to televised beer advertisements
associated with drinking and problems reported by 18- to 29-year-olds.
Addiction. Addiction,1998:93. 749-760.
123. Villani S.
Impact of media on children and adolescents: A 10-year review of the research.
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2001;40:392–401.
124. Vendrame A,
Pinsky I, Souza e Silva R, Babor T Assessment of Self-Regulatory Code
Violations in Brazilian Television Beer Advertisements J Stud Alcohol Drugs.
2010; 71(3): 445–451.
125. Babor T,
Caetano R, Casswell S, Edwards G, Giestbrecht N, Graham K, Grube J, Gruenewald
P, Hill L, Holder H, Osterberg R, Rehm J, Rossow L. Alcohol: no ordinary
commodity-research and public policy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003.
126. Cook P. Effect
of liquor taxes on drinking, cirrhosis, and auto accidents. In Alcohol and
public policy: beyond the shadow of prohibition (eds. M.H. Moore and D.R.
Gerstein). 1981:255-85. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
127. Stockwell T,
Hawks D, Lang E, Rydon P. Unraveling the preventive paradox. Drug and Alcohol
Review. 1996;15:7-16.
128. Giesbrecht N,
Conley P, Denniston RW, Gliksman L, Holder H, Pederson A, Room R, Shain M
Research, action and the community: experiences in the prevention of alcohol
and other drug problems. DHHS Publication No. (ADM); 1990:89-165, Office of
Substance Abuse Prevention, Rockville, MD.
129. Sutton C.
Swedish alcohol discourse: constructions of a social problem. Uppsala
University Library, Studia Sociologica Upsaliensia 45, Uppsala; 1998.
130. Room R.
Voluntary organizations and the state in the prevention of alcohol problems.
Drugs & Society. 1997;11:11-23.
131. Long CG,
Williams M, Hoilin CR. Treating alcohol problems: a study of program
effectiveness and cost effectiveness according to length and delivery of treatment.
Addiction. 1998;93:561-71.
132. Babor TF,
Grant M. Randomized clinical trial of brief interventions in primary health
care: summary of a WHO project (with commentaries and a response). Addiction.
1994;89:657-78.
133. Holder HD,
Cunningham DW. Alcoholism treatment for employees and family members: its
effect on health care costs. Alcohol Health and Research World. 1992;16:149-53
134. Holder HD,
Lennox RDL, Biose JO. Economic benefits of alcoholism treatment: a summary of
twenty years of research. Journal of Employee Assistance Research.
1992;1:63-82.
135. Richmond R,
Heather N, Wodak A, Kehoe L, Webster I. Controlled evaluation of a general
practice-based brief intervention for excessive drinking. Addiction.
1995;90:119-32.
136. Roche AM,
Freeman T. Brief interventions: good in theory but weak in practice? Drug and
Alcohol Review. 2004;23:11-18.
137. Norstrom T.
Abolition of the Swedish alcohol rationing system: effects on consumption
distribution and cirrhosis mortality. British Journal of Addiction.
1987;82:633-41.
138. Holder HD,
Reynolds R. Science and alcohol policy at the local level: a respectful
partnership. Addiction. 1998;93(10):1467-73.
139. World Health
Organization. Global status report: alcohol policy. World Health Organization,
Geneva. 2004
140. WHO.
“Comparative Quantification of Health Risks – Global and regional burden of
disease attributable to selected major risk factors”, Eds. M. Ezzati et al.,
World Health Organization. Access: www.who.int/publications/cra. 2004.
141. Baggott R.
Alcohol, politics and social policy. Avebury Aldershot, UK, 1990.
142. Moore MH,
Gerstein DR. Alcohol and public policy: beyond the shadow of prohibition.
National Academy Press, Washington, DC; 1981.
143. Teasley DL. Drug
legalization and the ‘lessons’ of prohibition. Contemporary Drug Problems.
1992;19:27-52.
144. Cook PJ, Moore
MH. Violence reduction through restrictions on alcohol availability. Alcohol
Health and Research World. 1993;17:151-56.
145. Smart RG, Mann
RE. Interventions into alcohol problems: what works? Addiction. 1997;92:9-13.
146. Marlatt GA.
Harm reduction for alcohol problems; Early intervention reduces drinking risk
in college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology.
1998;66:604-15.
147. Crombie IK,
Irvine L, Eiliott L, Wallace H. How do public health policies tackle
alcohol-related harm? A review of 12 developed countries. Alcohol and
Alcoholism. 2007;42:492-99.
148. WHO
Effectiveness of sterile needle and syringe programming in reducing HIV/AIDS
among injecting drug users, Evidence for action technical papers. WHO, Genebra.
2004.
149. Werch C, Moore
MM, DiClemente CC, Owen DM, Carlson JM, et al. (2005) Single vs. multiple drug
prevention: is more always better?: A pilot study. Subst Use Misuse 40:
1085–1101.
150. Midford R Drug
prevention programmes for young people: where have we been and where should we
be going? (2009) Addiction, 105, 1688-1695. _2, 105, 1688-1695, 20099Addiction0
1688..1695
Nenhum comentário :
Postar um comentário