Inequities in Alcohol Screening of Primary Care Patients with Chronic Conditions

INTRODUCTION

Routine alcohol screening of people with chronic health conditions that are exacerbated by alcohol can help to prevent morbidity and mortality. The U.S. Affordable Care Act and other recent health reforms expanded insurance coverage and supported alcohol screening in primary care. This study assessed increases in alcohol screening following health reform and insurance-related and racial and ethnic disparities in screening.

METHODS

Data are from the 2013 to 2019 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health for adults with alcohol-related chronic conditions who received primary care in the past year (N=46,014). The outcome was receipt of alcohol screening (yes/no) in which a healthcare provider inquired whether, how often, or how much the respondent drank, or about having alcohol-related problems. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed temporal changes in screening overall and by insurance type and race/ethnicity, adjusting for demographics, health conditions, and primary care utilization. Statistical analysis was performed in 2023.

RESULTS

Alcohol screening prevalence rose from 69% to 77% from 2013 through 2019, with a notable increase in 2014-2015 for both Medicaid-insured and privately-insured patients. Black and Asian American patients were generally less likely to be screened than White patients. Importantly, racial disparities in screening were found among privately-insured patients, patients with hypertension, patients with heart disease, and patients with diabetes who drink alcohol.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol screening of primary care patients with chronic conditions increased following health reform, but persistent disparities among patients with private insurance and specific chronic conditions underscore the need to address drivers of unequal preventive care.

Using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to investigate facilitators and barriers of implementing alcohol screening and brief intervention among primary care health professionals: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is recommended to be implemented in primary care settings to intervene against hazardous/harmful drinking. However, studies showed that the uptake rate was low in many regions/countries. This systematic review presented current findings on the facilitators and barriers of SBI implemented by health professionals in primary care settings using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

METHODS

We included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method studies identified through four electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science) from inception to June 2020. Included articles had to address barriers and facilitators of SBI implementation and provide sufficient details that the CFIR domains could be identified and data were abstracted using a standardized extraction form.

RESULTS

A total of 74 studies published from 1985 to 2019 were finally analysed and summarized. The most common facilitators were knowledge and positive beliefs about SBI (characteristics of the individuals) and available resources (inner setting). In contrast, the most common barriers were cost related to implementing SBI (intervention characteristics), negative beliefs about SBI (characteristics of the individuals), and lack of self-efficacy in implementing SBI (characteristics of the individuals). It could be observed that factors related to the inner setting and characteristics of individuals were extensively studied whilst the process received the least attention.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the facilitators and barriers are modifiable. Additionally, most literature focused on various kinds of available assets to implement SBI. To promote the spread of SBI implementation, more high-quality studies on the implementation process are needed. This systematic review could serve as a reference framework for health authorities to devise strategies for improving the implementation of SBI in primary care settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO ( CRD42021258833 ).

Factors influencing the implementation of screening and brief interventions for alcohol use in primary care practices: a systematic review using the COM-B system and Theoretical Domains Framework

BACKGROUND

Alcohol is a leading risk factor contributing to the global burden of disease. Several national and international agencies recommend that screening and brief interventions (SBI) should be routinely delivered in primary care settings to reducing patients' alcohol consumption. However, evidence shows that such activities are seldom implemented in practice. A review of the barriers and facilitators mediating implementation, and how they fit with theoretical understandings of behaviour change, to inform the design of implementation interventions is lacking. This study aimed to conduct a theory-informed review of the factors influencing general practitioners' and primary care nurses' routine delivery of alcohol SBI in adults.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out in four electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, CENTRAL, PsycINFO) using comprehensive search strategies. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included. Two authors independently abstracted and thematically grouped the data extracted. The barriers and facilitators identified were mapped to the domains of the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour system/Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

RESULTS

Eighty-four out of the 258 studies identified met the selection criteria. The majority of the studies reported data on the views of general practitioners (n = 60) and used a quantitative design (n = 49). A total of 660 data items pertaining to barriers and 253 data items pertaining to facilitators were extracted and thematically grouped into 46 themes. The themes mapped to at least one of the 14 domains of the TDF. The three TDF domains with the highest number of data units coded were 'Environmental Context and Resources' (n = 158, e.g. lack of time), 'Beliefs about Capabilities' (n = 134, e.g. beliefs about the ability to deliver screening and brief advice and in helping patients to cut down) and 'Skills' (n = 99, e.g. lack of training).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified a range of potential barriers and facilitators to the implementation of alcohol SBI delivery in primary care and adds to the scarce body of literature that identifies the barriers and facilitators from a theoretical perspective. Given that alcohol SBI is seldom implemented, this review provides researchers with a tool for designing novel theory-oriented interventions to support the implementation of such activity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42016052681.

Stereotypes of Older Adults: Development and Evaluation of an Updated Stereotype Content and Strength Survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Stereotypes are beliefs about a particular group often adopted to bypass complex information processing. Like racism and other forms of discrimination, ageism affects individuals and society as a whole. The purpose of the study was to analyze the Stereotype Content and Strength Survey (SCSS) designed to update assessment tools commonly used to measure stereotypes of older adults.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An updated survey was developed including aging-related descriptive items from previously published studies. Students enrolled at two Midwestern universities (n = 491) were directed to think about their perceptions of "older adults" and select the proportion they believed could be described by the items used in the tool. Response categories for each descriptive item were dichotomized and operationalized to be a strong stereotype if the collapsed response percentage was significantly ≥80%.

RESULTS

A Principal Axis Factor analysis and Direct Oblim rotation was computed on 117 descriptive items representing positive, negative, and physical characteristics, resulting in a 3-factor model with acceptable psychometric properties. Cronbach alpha analyses revealed reliable scales for negative (α = .92), positive (α = .88), and physical (α = .81) stereotypes. Of 117 descriptive items, 33 emerged as strong stereotypes including 30 positive, 2 physical, and 1 negative item.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This updated assessment has the potential to contribute to an understanding of the existence of age-related stereotypes as well as the strength, or the proportion of older adults who could be described by each of the items used in the SCSS.

Prescribing or dispensing medication represents the best opportunity for GPs and pharmacists to engage older people in alcohol-related clinical conversations

OBJECTIVES

This research aimed to identify older Australian drinkers' knowledge about Australian Alcohol Guidelines and their beliefs about the risks and benefits of alcohol; their recall of alcohol-related issues being raised with them by their community pharmacist and General Practitioner (GP); and their receptiveness to alcohol-related information being provided by either health professional.

METHODS

This research was conducted in Perth, Western Australia. Flyers calling for participants were placed in local health and service centres, and advertisements were placed in local media. Participants who met eligibility requirements were posted a survey pack (n = 190) including an information letter, consent form, quantitative survey, and return addressed, postage paid envelope. 188 people aged over 60 years returned completed questionnaires.

KEY FINDINGS

Women were more familiar with national alcohol guidelines, and were more conservative about the potential health benefits of alcohol. While 90% of participants were receptive to their GP asking about their alcohol use, only 30% of men and 20% of women recalled their GP raising this issue with them in the prior 12 months. Of these, high-risk drinkers were six times more likely than low-risk drinkers to have been asked by their GP. Likewise, 50% of men and 65% of women were receptive to having alcohol-related health conversations with their community pharmacist, but less than 4% recalled their pharmacist raising this issue. Participants were most receptive to receiving information about alcohol-medication interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

This research highlights that prescribing and dispensing medication represents the ideal opportunity for health professionals to deliver alcohol-related information to older people.

Screening and Brief Intervention for Alcohol Misuse in Older Adults: Training Outcomes Among Physicians and Other Healthcare Practitioners in Community-Based Settings

Screening and brief intervention (SBI) is increasingly available to older adults who engage in at-risk drinking. This study examined the extent to which SBI training influenced the willingness of healthcare providers in a community-based hospital and other clinical settings to promote the implementation of SBI. Ninety-three healthcare practitioners (primarily physicians, nurses, and social workers) who attended SBI training were asked about their intentions to apply the information in their professional practice, as well as their enthusiasm about recommending the training to others in their profession. Although there were no differences among the professions in terms of commitment to apply the information or level of comfort using the techniques, physicians were less interested in promoting SBI training among their colleagues. Although it may be more difficult to promote SBI in locations that don't primarily provide mental health services, results suggest that primary care settings are precisely where training may be most useful.

Screening for alcohol and substance use for older people in geriatric hospital and community health settings

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine the rates of alcohol and substance use in geriatric hospital and community health settings, and to evaluate the performance of screening instruments.

METHOD

A two-phase cross-sectional study was undertaken in geriatric and aged care psychiatry wards and associated community services of a teaching hospital. Participants were screened with the Brief Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) and the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) for other substances; Geriatric Depression Scale-15 for mood; the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale; and the Subjective Quality of Life scale. Medical conditions were established. Screen positives for risky substance use continued with the full AUDIT, full ASSIST, CAGE, Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised, and the Functional Activities Questionnaire. Medical records were reviewed after three months to ascertain recognition and management of substance use.

RESULTS

Of 210 participants aged 60+ (mean age 81.9, 63.3% female) without dementia or delirium and Mini Mental State Examination score ≥24, 41 (19.5%) were screen positive - 36 (17.1%) for alcohol, seven for non-medical benzodiazepine use (3.3%) (four alcohol and benzodiazepine) and two for non-medical opioid use (0.95%). Screen positives differed from screen negatives on few demographic or health measures. On the ASSIST, 26 (12.4%) were rated as medium/high risk. The AUDIT-C with cut-point of ≥5 was the optimal measure for detecting risky alcohol use.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients in geriatric health services have risky alcohol or substance use, but few clinical features distinguish them from other patients. Routine screening of alcohol and substance use is recommended.