|
Citation
|
Penning R, McKinney A, Bus LD, Olivier B, Slot K, Verster JC. Psychopharmacology 2013; 225(4): 803-810. |
|
Affiliation
|
Division of Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 99, 3584CG Utrecht, The Netherlands. |
|
Abstract
|
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a new alcohol hangover symptom severity scale and compare its effectiveness with the Hangover Symptoms Scale (HSS), the Acute Hangover Scale (AHS), and a one-item hangover score.
METHODS: Data from 1,410 Dutch students (Penning et al., Alcohol Alcohol 47:248-252, 2012) on the severity of 47 hangover symptoms were re-analyzed to develop the Alcohol Hangover Severity Scale (AHSS). The psychometric properties of the AHSS were compared with those of the HSS and the AHS. A survey among 1,000 students compared the AHSS and HSS with a one-item hangover severity score. The AHSS was further tested in a naturalistic hangover experiment.
RESULTS: The 12 items of the AHSS were fatigue, clumsiness, dizziness, apathy, sweating, shivering, nausea, heart pounding, confusion, stomach pain, concentration problems, and thirst. The Penning et al. (Alcohol Alcohol 47:248-252, 2012) data revealed that the predictive validity of the AHSS (92.4 %) for the overall hangover score was significantly higher than that of the HSS (81.5 %) and the AHS (71.0 %). The survey data (N = 966) showed that scores on the AHSS (39.7 %) and the HSS (47.6 %) only moderately predicted the one-item hangover score. A total of 119 subjects completed the naturalistic study. On average, they consumed 9.7 alcoholic consumptions, yielding a mean estimated blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.16 %. During hangover, the AHSS score correlated significantly with the number of alcoholic consumptions (r = 0.38, p < 0.0001) and estimated BAC (r = 0.40, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The AHS, HSS, and AHSS all seem appropriate for application in hangover research. The use of a one-item hangover scale is not recommended.
Language: en |