Confirming the Prevalence, Characteristics, and Utility of Ecological Theory in Explaining Prescription Stimulant Misuse

Abstract

To examine the prevalence, characteristics, and utility of ecological theory in explaining prescription stimulant misuse, a probability sample of 499 students from one southern California university (response rate = 94.71%) completed a 100-item paper-based survey. The illicit use of prescription stimulants (IUPS) during college was reported by approximately 21% of students, with approximately 13% of users reporting 10 or more occurrences per academic term. Characteristics of use that were examined suggest a growing trend toward recreational use. We used structural equation modeling to replicate a previously tested ecological model. The number of significant paths in this replication study (i.e., 22) was similar to the number of significant paths in the original study (i.e., 25), and 21 of the significant paths from the original study retained their significance in the replication. Results confirm prescription stimulant misuse remains prevalent, characteristics of the behavior are cause for concern, and ecological theories are a useful tool for explaining the multifaceted nature of IUPS.

Upstream Approaches to Addressing Prescription Stimulant Misuse and Diversion: Exploring Perspectives of College Students Who Misuse and Divert

“…For example, in one study with college students who have a prescription for stimulant medications, the prevalence of past-year misuse and diversion was 33% and 18%, respectively (Ramachandran et al, 2020). In a separate study including students with and without a prescription, the prevalence of having ever misused or diverted during college was approximately 21% (Bavarian et al, 2018) and 10% (Lam et al, 2020), respectively. These levels of diversion are particularly problematic because when friends and/or acquaintances serve as the primary source of prescription stimulants (Garnier-Dykstra, Caldeira, Vincent, O'Grady, & Arria, 2012), the oversight provided by health care providers is lacking, thereby increasing the chance for adverse effects (Goldsworthy, et al, 2008).…”