| | Body modification and substance use in adolescents: is there a link?Presented in part at the annual meeting of the Ambulatory Pediatrics Association, May 16, 2000, Boston, Massachusetts. Accepted 15 July 2002. Abstract PurposeTo describe the characteristics of body modification among adolescents and to determine whether adolescents who engage in body modification are more likely to screen positive for alcohol and other drug problems than those who do not. MethodsAdolescents aged 14 to 18 years presenting to an urban adolescent clinic for routine health care completed a questionnaire about body modification and a substance use assessment battery that included the 17-item Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers Alcohol/Drug Use and Abuse Scale (POSIT-ADS). Body modification was defined as piercings (other than one pair of bilateral earlobe piercings in females), tattoos, scarification, and branding. Problem substance use was defined as a POSIT-ADS score ≥1. Data were analyzed using logistic regression to determine whether the presence of body modification was an independent predictor of problem substance use. ResultsThe 210 participants had a mean (± SD) age of 16.0 (± 1.4) years and 63% were female. One hundred adolescents (48%) reported at least one body modification; girls were more likely than boys to have body modification (59% vs. 28%, p ≤ .0005). Ninety (42%) reported piercings, 22 (10%) tattoos, 9 (4%) scarification, and 1 (< 1%) branding; 21 (10%) had more than one type of body modification. These were in a variety of locations, most commonly the ear and the nose (piercings) or the extremities (tattoos). One-third of the sample (33%) screened positive for problem substance use on the POSIT-ADS questionnaire. Controlling for age, adolescents with body modification had 3.1 times greater odds of problem substance use than those without body modification (95% CI 1.7, 5.8). ConclusionsBody modification was associated with self-reported problem alcohol and other drug use among middle adolescents presenting for primary care. More research is needed to determine the clinical and sociocultural significance of body modification and its relationship to substance use in this population.
Body modification, an ancient art, is the practice of permanently altering one’s appearance [1]. Body modification, including piercing, tattooing, scarification, and branding, may be used by individuals as a means of self-expression and a vehicle for self-awareness 1, 2. The practice is becoming increasingly common, especially among teenagers 1, 2, 3, 4. Most of the information currently available is about piercing 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, which may be heavily influenced by peer pressure. Piercing might be obtained because it is viewed as carefree, risqué behavior that makes a fashion statement, but is not as permanent as other forms of body modification [1]. Compared with those without tattoos, young people with tattoos rate themselves as more adventurous, creative, artistic, individualistic, and risky, and report more behavioral risks, including drug use [17].
After piercing or other body modification, medical complications specific to the anatomic location may occur, including foreign body reaction, oral and tooth complications, aspiration and hypoxia, edema and swelling, streptococcal infections, and viral transmission, including hepatitis and HIV 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19. One study of university undergraduates reported that the incidence of medical complications from piercings and tattooing was 17% and 0%, respectively [20]. The practice of body modification is not always well-regulated, although certain professional groups are trying to change that pattern to prevent the spread of infection [21]. In 1998, the American Dental Association issued a statement opposing the practice of oral piercing, citing it as a public health hazard because of its potential for negative sequelae [7].
Body modification may be associated with behavioral risks as well 22, 23, 24. In one study among patients committed to a psychiatric institution [23], increasing sites and numbers of body modification were associated with more severe violent behavior. Among adolescent detainees, tattooing has been correlated with alcohol and drug use [25]. An Australian study of amateur tattooing practices among high school students showed that students with tattoos had higher scores on school-related problem scales than those without tattoos [24]. Recent data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health demonstrated that tattooing was associated with sexual intercourse, substance use, violence, and truancy among teens [22]. Additionally, body piercing was correlated with truancy among both male and female adolescents, and with sexual intercourse and smoking among female adolescents [26]. Finally, a study of Australians aged ≥14 years found that approximately 8% of those who had obtained body modification reported that they were under the influence of alcohol or other drugs while undergoing the procedure [27].
Because little is known about the range of body modification practices among adolescents, we sought to describe the prevalence and patterns of body modification in our adolescent clinic patient population. Substance use is a prevalent risk behavior in adolescents that may be associated with body modification because of clustering of risk behaviors, as suggested by Problem Behavior Theory 22, 28, 29. In addition, alcohol and drugs may impair judgment, resulting in a decision to obtain body modification, or they may be used for pain control during or after body modification procedures. We therefore hypothesized that adolescents who engage in body modification are more likely to report problem substance use than those who do not.
Methods  Participants The sample was composed of 210 patients aged 14 to 18 years receiving routine health care at an adolescent clinic of an urban children’s hospital and participating in a larger ongoing study of substance use among adolescents [30]. After providing informed assent (age < 18 years) or consent (age = 18 years), participants completed a structured interview about substance use and self-administered the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers/Alcohol and Drug Abuse Scale (POSIT-ADS) 31, 32, 33 and a questionnaire on body modification. Administration time of the entire assessment battery was approximately 30 to 60 minutes. The hospital’s Institutional Review Board approved the protocol and authorized a waiver of parental consent. Questionnaire Demographic variables included age, gender, and race/ethnicity. For the purposes of this study, a 12-item questionnaire was developed to assess the type, extent, and anatomic site of body modification, which participants indicated on a schematic drawing. In addition, participants were asked where and how the body modification was obtained, attitudes toward their body modification, and whether and why substances had been used immediately before obtaining the body modification. Body modification was defined as tattoos, piercing (beyond one pair of bilateral earlobe piercings in females), branding, or scarification. The POSIT-ADS questionnaire is designed to detect substance-associated problems and risks. The reliability and validity of the POSIT have been established in adolescents, including high school students [31] and youth attending a general adolescent clinic [33]. The 17 “yes”/“no” POSIT-ADS questions include “During the past month have you driven a car while you were drunk or high?” and “Do you miss out on activities because you spend too much money on drugs or alcohol?” Each positive response is scored as one point; a score of one or higher indicates that a problem with substance use may exist [34]. Data management and statistical analysis Data entry was performed by the first author (T.L.B.) and verified by a research assistant checking all of the entries. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus of the co-authors. Analyses were performed using SPSS 10.0 for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, 1999). Descriptive data are presented as means (± standard deviation) for continuous variables and as frequencies for categorical variables. Associations of the demographic variables and the presence of body modification with problem substance use were analyzed using the Chi-square test, Fisher’s Exact test, or Student’s t-test, as appropriate. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether the presence of body modification was an independent predictor of problem substance use. Effect modification by demographic variables was evaluated by testing the significance of interaction terms with the body modification variable [35]. The presence of confounding by demographic variables was determined using the change in estimate method (i.e., whether the estimate of the beta for the body modification variable and its standard error changed by at least 10% with inclusion of the demographic variable in question in the model) [36]. Results Descriptive data are shown in Table 1. The mean age of the sample was 16.0 (± 1.4) years; 63% were female and 48% were black. One hundred adolescents (47%) reported some type of body modification. More than twice as many teens with any body modification reported problem substance use, compared with those without body modification (47% vs. 21%, p < .0005). Older adolescents were more likely than younger adolescents to have obtained any body modification (p = .004) and were somewhat more likely to report problem substance use (p = .05). Girls were more likely to report body modification than boys (55% vs. 28%, p < .0005); gender was not associated with problem substance use. Race/ethnicity were not associated with either problem substance use or body modification. Controlling for age, adolescents with body modification had 3.1 times greater odds of problem substance use compared with those without body modification (95% CI 1.7, 5.8). There was no evidence of effect modification or confounding by either gender or race/ethnicity, so these variables were excluded from the model. |
a
Results are presented as n (%) unless otherwise noted.
b
Beyond one pair of bilateral earlobe piercings in females. |
Table 2 displays the types of the body modifications and their anatomic locations. The majority of teens with body modifications reported piercings (beyond one pair of bilateral earlobe piercings in girls), followed by tattoos. Few adolescents had scarring or branding. The 90 adolescents with piercings reported 227 separate piercings (range, 1 to 7 per adolescent); most had piercings in the ear lobe (94%), upper ear or tragus (34%), or nose (26%). Most adolescents with piercings (89%) had obtained them from a professional in a jewelry store or salon, with fewer having the piercings done by a relative (10%), self (7%), friend (4%), or other nonprofessional (6%). The 22 adolescents with tattoos had 36 distinct tattoos, (range, 1 to 4 per adolescent); most reported at least one tattoo on a lower or upper extremity (77%). The majority of adolescents with tattoos reported obtaining them from a professional, either in a tattoo parlor (46%) or at a tattoo party (36%). Although most adolescents with piercings or tattoos reported using a new or sterilized needle to obtain the body modification, 10% of those with piercings and 10% of those with tattoos reported using an unsterile needle. Two percent of adolescents with piercings reported sharing a needle when obtaining a piercing. |
a
Beyond one pair of bilateral earlobe piercings in females. |
Sixty-seven percent of adolescents with body modification reported positive feelings about their body modification; 45% were “pleased,” 33% were “proud,” and 15% felt “attractive.” Fifty-five percent felt “neutral” about their body modification. Only 9% reported any negative feelings about their modifications (7% “regretful,” 3% “angry,” and 1% “guilty”). All of these adolescents had piercings. Five had just piercings, two also had tattooing, one also had scarring, and one also had scarring and branding. Four adolescents reported using substances at the time body modification was obtained and all cited the reason was “to control pain.” Only one participant reported becoming intoxicated before making the decision to obtain body modification. Discussion In this adolescent clinic sample, body modification and self-reported problem substance use were common, associated risk behaviors. Not surprisingly, older age was associated with the presence of both body modification and problem substance use. The relationship between age and other risk behaviors has been previously reported [28], and is likely owing to longer time for exposure to risk behaviors and opportunity to engage in risk. In addition, both liquor stores and venues offering body modification, such as tattoo parlors, may have required proof of age, presenting a barrier to younger adolescents engaging in the risk behaviors. Also, because tattoo parlors were illegal in Massachusetts at the time of this study, those who wished to obtain them legally were required to travel to another state, which was more likely to be accomplished by older adolescents who could drive. Almost one-half of adolescents participating in this study reported some form of body modification beyond a pair of bilateral earlobe piercings in girls, suggesting that body modification may be a relatively normative risk behavior. Most modifications were on visible sites of the body, such as the face and head for piercings, and on the extremities for tattoos. Unfortunately, a few adolescents had negative feelings about their body modifications. Health care providers should discuss permanence while a patient is making a decision about obtaining body modification. Most adolescents obtained their modifications using professional assistance and sterile materials. However, 22% of teens with piercings and 18% of those with tattoos opted to perform the modifications themselves or by a friend, relative, or other nonprofessional, putting them at increased risk for medical complications. Furthermore, 1 in 10 adolescents with piercings and 1 in 10 with tattoos did not use a sterile needle, increasing their risk of infection. Although infrequently reported in this study, sharing needles risks transmission of blood-borne pathogens, including human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C 16, 37. The conditions under which the adolescents in this study reported obtaining body modification points to the continued need for providers to educate patients about the hazards of unsafe body modification. Adolescents who choose to obtain body modification often repeat the behavior; nearly three out of four adolescents with body modification had more than one. If health care providers observe body modification, they should take the opportunity to discuss and promote safe body modification practices for the future. By obtaining body modification, adolescents may be seeking individuation, incorporating closely held persons or concepts (e.g., on a tattoo), declaring their allegiance to a group, or fulfilling a quest for permanence and stability [2]. In assessing an adolescent with body modification, it is important to explore the motivations, significance, and feelings behind the modification to distinguish positive self-expression from destructive self-mutilation. There are several strengths to this study. First, few studies have described body modification in general adolescent populations 10, 22, 24 or examined the association between body modification and other risk behaviors [22]. Second, this study sampled a general adolescent clinic population, rather than psychiatric inpatients [23] or incarcerated youth [25]. Third, we developed a comprehensive instrument to assess body modification in adolescents. Fourth, we had a substantial representation of youth of color. Our findings must be interpreted in light of some limitations to this study. Because this sample was drawn from patients in an adolescent clinic, street or other disenfranchised youth were likely not well-represented. Although diverse, the demographic characteristics of adolescents attending our clinic may be unique and thus limit the generalizability of the results to other adolescent populations. Furthermore, the sample was not selected randomly, which may have resulted in selection bias. Because healthy, low-risk adolescents are more likely to participate in clinical research, we suspect that any selection bias would have most likely produced an underestimation of body modification and problem substance use in our sample. However, it is possible that health care providers chose to refer higher risk adolescents to this study. Because the POSIT-ADS score was dichotomized, no measure of severity of problem substance use was made. Additionally, in exploring the association between body modification and problem substance use, we did not seek to differentiate among the types of body modification or the types, forms, or quantities of substances used because of small cell sizes. Finally, we were not able to determine directionality or causality in this cross-sectional study. Although unlikely, it is possible that body modification may lead to substance use, perhaps mediated by entrance into a peer group engaging in drug use. The reverse may also be true, that substance use may lead to body modification by way of a peer group. Substance use may impair judgment, resulting in a decision to obtain body modification. However, we found that very few adolescents reported substance use before obtaining their body modification. It is most likely that body modification and substance use are co-occurring risk behaviors, as suggested by Problem Behavior Theory [29]. Although we found evidence of an association between body modification and self-reported problem substance use, adolescents with body modification should not be automatically labeled as substance abusers. More than one-half of adolescents with body modification were at low risk for problem substance use (had a score of zero on the POSIT-ADS) and more than one in five respondents without body modification scored positively on the POSIT-ADS screen. Body modification, like substance use/abuse, is a risk behavior. The finding of body modification in an adolescent may indicate other risk behaviors, including substance use, and he/she should be screened appropriately. Body modification must be seen within a cultural context. In some cultures, body modification practices are normative. For example, many African and Pacific nations use scarification and tattooing as symbols of coming of age 3, 9, 38. Risk associated with body modification may also vary within a geographic region. At the time this study was conducted, adolescents desiring tattoos had to drive out of state to obtain them lawfully. Tattoo parlors have since been legalized in Massachusetts and many have opened; as a result, tattooing may now be more common. The findings from this study suggest the need for in-office screening questionnaires encompassing substance use and body modification. Health care providers, as well as patients, need to be educated about the different health risks associated with each type of body modification. Future research should explore the utility of body modification as a marker for risk behaviors other than substance use. Because body modification may also be associated with factors that protect against risk, such as higher self-esteem or membership in a cultural group [39], studies of health behaviors should incorporate assessment of body modification practices to determine which adolescents who engage in body modification are at risk for substance use and other problem behaviors. Acknowledgements We thank Erin Gates for collection of the data, Stacy Taylor for verification of data entry, and S. Jean Emans, M.D. for her helpful comments and reading of the manuscript. This work was supported by #R01 AA-12165-01A1 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, #036126 from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and LEAH 5 T71 MC 00009-08 from the Maternal and Child Health Bureau Health Resources and Services Administration. References 1.
1
Muldoon KA.
Body piercing in adolescents.
J Pediatr Health Care. 1997;11:298–301.
Full-Text PDF (764 KB)
|
CrossRef
2.
2
Martin A.
On teenagers and tattoos.
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1997;36:860–861.
Full-Text PDF (210 KB)
|
CrossRef
3.
3
Christensen MH, Miller KH, Patsdaughter CA, Dowd LJ.
To the point (The contemporary body piercing and tattooing renaissance).
Nurs Spectr. 1999;9:12–14. 4.
4
Marcoux D.
Cosmetics, skin care, and appearance in teenagers.
Semin Cutan Med Surg. 1999;18:244–249. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
5.
5
Tweeten SS, Rickman LS.
Infectious complications of body piercing.
Clin Infect Dis. 1998;26:735–740. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
6.
6
Slawik S, Pearce I, Pantelides M.
Body piercing (An unusual cause of priapism).
BJU Int. 1999;84:377. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
7.
7
American Dental Association (ADA). ADA statement on intraoral/perioral piercing, 1999. Revised edition, October 2000 available at: http://www.ada.org/prof/prac/issues/statements/piercing.html Accessed October 1, 2002 8.
8
Ferguson H.
Body piercing.
BMJ. 1999;319:1627–1629. 9.
9
Scully C, Chen M.
Tongue piercing (oral body art).
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1994;32:37–38. Abstract |
Full-Text PDF (1244 KB)
|
CrossRef
10.
10
Price SS, Lewis MW.
Body piercing involving oral sites.
J Am Dent Assoc. 1997;128:1017–1020. MEDLINE 11.
11
Perkins CS, Meisner J, Harrison JM.
A complication of tongue piercing.
Br Dent J. 1997;182:147–148. MEDLINE 12.
12
Ng KH, Siar CH, Ganesapillai T.
Sarcoid-like foreign body reaction in body piercing (A report of two cases).
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1997;84:28–31. Abstract |
Full-Text PDF (3694 KB)
|
CrossRef
13.
13
Wise H.
Hypoxia caused by body piercing.
Anaesthesia. 1999;54:1129. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
14.
14
Khanna R, Kumar SS, Raju BS, Kumar AV.
Body piercing in the accident and emergency department.
J Accid Emerg Med. 1999;16:418–421. MEDLINE 15.
15
O’Malley CD, Smith N, Braun R, Prevots DR.
Tetanus associated with body piercing.
Clin Infect Dis. 1998;27:1343–1344. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
16.
16
Pugatch D, Mileno M, Rich JD.
Possible transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 from body piercing.
Clin Infect Dis. 1998;26:767–768. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
17.
17
Drews D, Allison C, Probst J.
Behavioral and self-concept differences in tattooed and nontattooed college students.
Psychol Rep. 2000;96:475–481. 18.
18
Sperry K.
Tattoos and tattooing. Part II (Gross pathology, histopathology, medical complications, and applications).
Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 1992;13:7–17. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
19.
19
Kraytem A, Uldry PY, Lopez-Liuchi JV.
Tattoos, body piercing and thrush (A lesson on the harmful effects of lost objectivity).
Mayo Clin Proc Aug. 1999;74:844. 20.
20
Mayers L, Judelson D, Moriarty B, Rundell K.
Prevalence of body art (body piercing and tattooing) in university undergraduates and incidence of medical complications.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2002;77:29–34. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
21.
21
Association of Professional Piercers. Available at: http://www.safepiercing.org (formerly http://www.app.org). Accessed July 1, 2001 22.
22
Roberts T, Ryan S.
Tattooing and high risk behavior in adolescents.
Pediatr Res. 2001;49:5A;
. 23.
23
Ceniceros S.
Tattooing, body piercing, and Russian roulette.
J Nerv Ment Dis. 1998;186:503–504. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
24.
24
Houghton SJ, Durkin K, Parry E, et al.
Amateur tattooing practices and beliefs among high school adolescents.
J Adolesc Health. 1996;19:420–425.
CrossRef
25.
25
Braithwaite R, Robillard A, Woodring T, et al.
Tattooing and body piercing among adolescent detainees (Relationship to alcohol and other drug use).
J Subst Abuse. 2001;13:5–16. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
26.
26
Roberts T, Auinger P, Ryan S.
Gender differences in the association between body piercing and adolescent risk behaviors.
J Adolesc Health. 2002;30:103;
.
CrossRef
27.
27
Makkai T, McAllister I.
Prevalence of tattooing and body piercing in the Australian community.
Commun Dis Intell. 2001;25:67–72. MEDLINE 28.
28
Kann L, Kinchen SA, Williams BI, et al.
Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 1999. State and local YRBSS Coordinators.
J Sch Health. 2000;70:271–285. MEDLINE |
CrossRef
29.
29
Jessor R.
Risk behavior in adolescence (A psychosocial framework for understanding and action).
J Adolesc Health. 1991;12:597–605.
CrossRef
30.
30
Knight J, Sherritt L, Shrier L, et al. Validity of the CRAFFT substance abuse screening test among general adolescent clinic patients. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002;156:607–14 31.
31
Melchior L, Rahdert E, Huba G. Reliability and Validity Evidence for the Problem Oriented Screening Instruments for Teenagers (POSIT). American Public Health Association, 1994 32.
32
McLaney M, Boca FD, Babor T.
A validation study of the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers(POSIT).
J Mental Health. 1994;3:363–376. 33.
33
Knight J, Goodman E, Pulerwitz T, DuRant R.
Reliability of the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers(POSIT) in an adolescent medical clinic populations.
J Adolesc Health. 2001;29:125–130.
CrossRef
34.
34
Rahdert E. The Adolescent Assessment/Referral System Manual. DHHS Pub. No. (ADM)91-1735. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administrations, 1991 35.
35
Hosmer D, Lemeshow S.
Applied Logistic Regression. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1989;. 36.
36
Rothman K, Greenland S (eds). Modern Epidemiology, 2nd edition. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1998 37.
37
Hayes M, Harkness G.
Body piercing as a risk factor for viral hepatitis (An integrative research review).
Am J Infect Control. 2001;29:271–274. Abstract | Full Text |
Full-Text PDF (65 KB)
|
CrossRef
38.
38
Miller J-C.
The Body Art Book (A Complete, Illustrated Guide to Tattoos, Piercings, and Other Body Modifications). New York: Berkley Books; 1997;. 39.
39
Resnick M, Bearman P, Blum R, et al.
Protecting adolescents from harm (Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health).
JAMA. 1997;278:823–832. MEDLINE a Division of Adolescent/Young Adult Medicine, Children’s Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA (T.L.B., E.R.W., J.R.K., L.A.S.) b Division of General Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA (J.R.K) c Center for Adolescent Substance Abuse Research, Children’s Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA (J.R.K., L.A.S.)  Address correspondence to: Lydia A. Shrier, M.D., M.P.H., Division of Adolescent/Young Adult Medicine, Children’s Hospital Boston, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston MA 02115, USA.
PII: S1054-139X(02)00446-9 © 2002 Society for Adolescent Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | |
|
FULL TEXT