Patient-centered primary care for adults at high risk for AUDs: the Choosing Healthier Drinking Options In primary CarE (CHOICE) trial

Integrated and collaborative care across the spectrum of alcohol-associated liver disease and alcohol use disorder

The public health impact of alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), a serious consequence of problematic alcohol use, and alcohol use disorder (AUD) is growing, with ALD becoming a major cause of alcohol-associated death overall and the leading indication for liver transplantation in the United States. Comprehensive care for ALD often requires treatment of AUD. Although there is a growing body of evidence showing that AUD treatment is associated with reductions in liver-related morbidity and mortality, only a minority of patients with ALD and AUD receive this care. Integrated and collaborative models that streamline both ALD and AUD care for patients with ALD and AUD are promising approaches to bridge this treatment gap and rely on multidisciplinary and interprofessional teams and partnerships. Here, we review the role of AUD care in ALD treatment, the effects of AUD treatment on liver-related outcomes, the impact of comorbid conditions such as other substance use disorders, obesity, and metabolic syndrome, and the current landscape of integrated and collaborative care for ALD and AUD in various treatment settings. We further review knowledge gaps and unmet needs that remain, including the role of precision medicine, the application of harm reduction approaches, the impact of health disparities, and the need for additional AUD treatment options, as well as further efforts to support implementation and dissemination.

Connecting Vietnamese-Speaking Immigrants who Smoke to the Asian Smokers Quitline: A Feasibility Pilot of Proactive Outreach Interventions

INTRODUCTION

Cigarette smoking is highly prevalent among Asian American immigrant subgroups. Previously, Asian-language telephone Quitline services were only available in California. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the national Asian Smokers' Quitline (ASQ) to expand Asian-language Quitline services nationally. However, there are relatively few calls to the ASQ from outside California.

AIMS AND METHODS

This pilot study assessed the feasibility of two proactive outreach interventions to connect Vietnamese-speaking participants who smoke to the ASQ. Both interventions, (1) proactive telephone outreach with a counselor trained in motivational interviewing (PRO-MI) and (2) proactive telephone outreach with interactive voice response (PRO-IVR), were adapted to be culturally and linguistically appropriate for Vietnamese-speaking participants. Participants were randomly assigned 2:1 to PRO-IVR versus PRO-MI. Assessments were conducted at baseline and 3 months post-enrollment. Feasibility indicators were the recruitment rate and initiation of ASQ treatment.

RESULTS

Using the HealthPartners electronic health record, a large health system in Minnesota, we identified approximately 343 potentially eligible Vietnamese participants who were mailed invitation letters and baseline surveys with telephone follow-up. We enrolled 86 eligible participants (25% recruitment rate). In the PRO-IVR group 7/58 participants were directly transferred to the ASQ (12% initiation rate) and in the PRO-MI group 8/28 participants were warm transferred to the ASQ (29% initiation rate).

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of our recruitment methods and of implementing proactive outreach interventions to promote the initiation of smoking cessation treatment with the ASQ.

IMPLICATIONS

This pilot study contributes novel data on the uptake of Asian Smokers' Quitline (ASQ) services among Vietnamese-speaking people who smoke (PWS) with two proactive outreach interventions: (1) proactive telephone outreach with a counselor trained in motivational interviewing (PRO-MI) and (2) proactive telephone outreach with interactive voice response (PRO-IVR). We found that it is feasible to implement these proactive outreach interventions to promote the initiation of ASQ cessation treatment among Vietnamese-language speaking PWS. Future large trials are needed to rigorously compare PRO-MI and PRO-IVR and conduct budget impact analyses to understand the most efficient strategies for incorporation into health system settings.

Barriers and facilitators to changing drinking and receiving alcohol-related care: Interviews with Veterans Health Administration primary care patients who indicated interest but did not enroll in an alcohol care management intervention trial

Background: Most people with alcohol use disorder do not receive treatment, and primary care (PC)-based management of alcohol use disorder is a key strategy to close this gap. Understanding PC patients' perspectives on changing drinking and receiving alcohol-related care is important for this goal, particularly among those who decline alcohol-related care. This study examined perspectives on barriers and facilitators to changing drinking and receiving alcohol-related care among Veterans Health Administration (VA) PC patients who indicated interest but did not enroll in the Choosing Healthier drinking Options In primary CarE trial (CHOICE), which tested a PC-based alcohol care management intervention. Methods: VA PC patients with frequent heavy drinking who indicated interest in CHOICE but did not enroll were invited to participate. Twenty-seven patients completed in-person, semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were analyzed using iterative deductive and inductive content analysis. Results: Participants were mostly men (96%) and White (59%), and the mean age was 48. Seventy-four percent met criteria for alcohol use disorder, and the median number of past-week standard drinks was 41.5. Participants reported fewer alcohol-related problems, lower importance of/readiness to change drinking, and higher confidence in their ability to change than patients who enrolled in the CHOICE trial. Barriers fell into 5 domains: drinking fulfills need(s); reducing drinking or treatment is not needed; treatment is not effective/not acceptable; alcohol-related stigma; and practical barriers. Facilitators fell into 4 domains: reasons to change drinking; social support; treatment is acceptable/meets patients' needs; and practical facilitators. Participants discussed how Veteran identity and military experiences impacted drinking and willingness to receive care, which amplified multiple barriers/facilitators. Conclusions: This study identified barriers and facilitators to changing drinking and receiving alcohol-related care among VA PC patients who indicated interest but did not enroll in an alcohol care management trial. Findings can inform patient-centered interventions and support clinicians in engaging patients in care.

Usability and Acceptability of a Mobile App for the Self-Management of Alcohol Misuse Among Veterans (Step Away): Pilot Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Alcohol misuse is common among Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans, yet barriers limit treatment participation. Mobile apps hold promise as means to deliver alcohol interventions to veterans who prefer to remain anonymous, have little time for conventional treatments, or live too far away to attend treatment in person.

OBJECTIVE

This pilot study evaluated the usability and acceptability of Step Away, a mobile app designed to reduce alcohol-related risks, and explored pre-post changes on alcohol use, psychological distress, and quality of life.

METHODS

This single-arm pilot study recruited Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans aged 18 to 55 years who exceeded National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism drinking guidelines and owned an iPhone. Enrolled veterans (N=55) completed baseline and 1-, 3-, and 6-month assessments. The System Usability Scale (scaled 1-100, ≥70 indicating acceptable usability) assessed the effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction dimensions of usability, while a single item (scaled 1-9) measured the attractiveness of 10 screenshots. Learnability was assessed by app use during week 1. App engagement (proportion of participants using Step Away, episodes of use, and minutes per episode per week) over 6 months measured acceptability. Secondary outcomes included pre-post change on heavy drinking days (men: ≥5 drinks per day; women: ≥4 drinks per day) and Short Inventory of Problems-Revised, Kessler-10, and brief World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire scores.

RESULTS

Among the 55 veterans enrolled in the study, the mean age was 37.4 (SD 7.6), 16% (9/55) were women, 82% (45/55) were White, and 82% (45/55) had an alcohol use disorder. Step Away was used by 96% (53/55) of participants in week 1, 55% (30/55) in week 4, and 36% (20/55) in week 24. Step Away use averaged 55.1 minutes (SD 57.6) in week 1 and <15 minutes per week in weeks 2 through 24. Mean System Usability Scale scores were 69.3 (SD 19.7) and 71.9 (SD 15.8) at 1 and 3 months, respectively. Median attractiveness scores ranged from 5 to 8, with lower ratings for text-laden screens. Heavy drinking days decreased from 29.4% (95% CI 23.4%-35.4%) at baseline to 16.2% (95% CI 9.9%-22.4%) at 6 months (P<.001). Likewise, over 6 months, Short Inventory of Problems-Revised scores decreased from 6.3 (95% CI 5.1-7.5) to 3.6 (95% CI 2.4-4.9) (P<.001) and Kessler-10 scores decreased from 18.8 (95% CI 17.4-20.1) to 17.3 (95% CI 15.8-18.7) (P=.046). Changes were not detected on quality of life scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans found the usability of Step Away to be acceptable and engaged in the app over the 6-month study. Reductions were seen in heavy drinking days, alcohol-related problems, and Kessler-10 scores. A larger randomized trial is warranted to confirm our findings.

Treating alcohol use disorders in primary care - a qualitative evaluation of a new innovation: the 15-method

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore how the characteristics of an innovation, the 15-method, a stepped care model for treatment of alcohol use disorders in primary care was perceived.

METHODS/DESIGN/SETTING/SUBJECT

General practitioners and heads of primary care units (n = 10) that delivered the 15-method in a randomized controlled trial participated in individual interviews at two occasions in Stockholm, Sweden. Data were analyzed with theoretical thematic analysis, using Diffusion of Innovation Theory.

RESULTS

The participants described that offering the 15-method met a need among their patients. Participants were positive towards the training and the manual for the method. They mentioned a previous lack of routines to work with alcohol use disorders. The 15-method was described as easy to use. It would however be more feasible to implement in a team of different professions, rather than among general practitioners only. Priorities made by regional health care managers were described as important for the implementation, as well as financial incentives. A barrier to implementation was that alcohol screening was perceived as difficult. While the 15-method was perceived as effective in reducing the patients' alcohol use and cost effective, participants expressed uncertainty about the long-term effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The 15-method provides structure for treatment of alcohol use disorders and is described by general practitioners and heads as a promising approach. Being able to offer treatment for alcohol dependence may increase the uptake of alcohol interventions in primary care.KEY POINTSLittle attention has been given to develop treatment models for alcohol use disorders that are adapted to primary care settings.This study describes how an innovation, the 15-method, a stepped care model for treatment of alcohol use disorders in primary care was perceived.The 15-method provides structure for treatment of alcohol use disorders in primary care and is described by general practitioners and heads as a promising approach.Being able to offer treatment for alcohol dependence may increase the uptake of alcohol interventions in primary care.

Using peers to increase veterans' engagement in a smartphone application for unhealthy alcohol use: A pilot study of acceptability and utility

Mobile apps can only increase access to alcohol treatment if patients actively engage with them. Peers may be able to facilitate such engagement by providing supportive accountability and instruction and encouragement for app use. We developed a protocol for peers to support engagement in the Stand Down app for unhealthy alcohol use in veterans and tested the acceptability and utility of the protocol. Thirty-one veteran primary care patients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use and were not currently in addiction treatment were given access to Stand Down for four weeks and concurrently received weekly phone support from a Department of Veterans Affairs peer specialist to facilitate engagement with the app. App usage was extracted daily, and pre/post treatment assessments measured changes in drinking patterns, via the Timeline Followback interview, and satisfaction with care, via quantitative and qualitative approaches. A priori benchmarks for acceptability were surpassed: time spent in the app (M = 93.89 min, SD = 92.1), days of app use (M = 14.05, SD = 8.0), and number of daily interviews completed for tracking progress toward a drinking goal (M = 12.64, SD = 9.7). Global satisfaction, per the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, was high (M = 26.4 out of 32, SD = 4.5). Pre to post, total standard drinks in the prior 30 days (MPre = 142.7, MPost = 85.6), Drinks Per Drinking Day (MPre = 5.4, MPost = 4.0), and Percent Heavy Drinking Days (MPre = 35.3%, MPost = 20.1%) decreased significantly (ps < .05). Findings indicate that Peer-Supported Stand Down is highly acceptable to veteran primary care patients and may help reduce drinking in this population. A larger controlled trial of this intervention is warranted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Documented brief intervention associated with reduced linkage to specialty addictions treatment in a national sample of VA patients with unhealthy alcohol use with and without alcohol use disorders

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Alcohol screening, brief intervention (BI) and referral to treatment is often considered stepped care, such that BI with referral links patients to treatment. A meta-analysis of randomized trials found no evidence that BI increases treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD). This study aimed to determine whether BI is associated with receipt of treatment for AUD among patients receiving BI as part of routine care.

DESIGN

Regression analysis.

SETTING

US Veterans Health Administration (VA), in which BI is supported by performance measurement and electronic clinical reminders.

PARTICIPANTS

VA outpatients with positive Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption screens (≥ 5) (n = 830,825) documented nationally from 1 October 2009 to 30 May 2013.

MEASUREMENTS

Regression models estimated the prevalence of receiving VA specialty addictions treatment within 0-365 days for patients with documented BI (advice to reduce/abstain within 0-14 days) compared to those without. Models clustered on patient and adjusted for demographics and mental health and substance use conditions were fit among all patients and stratified across documented past-year AUD diagnosis. Multiple secondary analyses assessed robustness of findings, including assessing repeated BI as a predictor.

FINDINGS

Among 830,825 VA outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use (1,172,606 positive screens), documented BI was associated with lower likelihood of receiving VA specialty addictions treatment [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) = 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.83-0.84]. Associations were similar for those with and without AUD (aIRR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.82-0.84 and aIRR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.83-0.88, respectively) and in most secondary analyses. However, among patients without AUD, documentation of more than one BI was associated with greater likelihood of treatment relative to no BI (aIRR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.68-1.83).

CONCLUSIONS

In a national sample of US Veterans Health Administration patients with unhealthy alcohol use, documented brief intervention for alcohol use was associated with lower likelihood of receiving specialty addictions treatment regardless of alcohol use disorder diagnosis.

From "Step Away" to "Stand Down": Tailoring a Smartphone App for Self-Management of Hazardous Drinking for Veterans

BACKGROUND

US military veterans who screen positive for hazardous drinking during primary care visits may benefit from a mobile app. Step Away is an evidence-based mobile intervention system for the self-management of hazardous drinking. However, Step Away was not designed for veterans, and differences between veterans and civilians could limit the reach and effectiveness of the app with this population.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to repurpose Step Away to address the needs and preferences of the veteran primary care population. The Method for Program Adaptation through Community Engagement (M-PACE) model was used to guide the adaptation process. This model can serve as a generalizable approach that other researchers and intervention developers can follow to systematically tailor mobile health tools for a new population.

METHODS

Veteran patients who screened positive for hazardous drinking during a primary care visit (n=12) and peer providers employed by the US Veterans Health Administration (n=11) were recruited to systematically review Step Away and provide feedback on its content and presentation via Web-based surveys and a semistructured interview. Participant feedback was reviewed through an iterative process by key stakeholders who adjudicated which suggested modifications to the app could enhance engagement and effectiveness with veterans while maintaining program integrity.

RESULTS

Usability ratings of the individual modules of Step Away were uniformly positive across patients and peers, as was the perceived utility of the app overall. Personalized feedback on the health consequences and costs of drinking, options for customization, and the measurement-based care capabilities of the app were viewed as facilitators of engagement. Conversely, lengthy text, small font, and a lack of interactive features were viewed as potential barriers with the older primary care population. Modifications to create a veteran version of the app (Stand Down: Think Before You Drink) included altering the appearance of the app to incorporate more veteran-centric content, adding links and options for resources and activities for veterans, and reducing the amount of text and adding veteran-specific references and common concerns and triggers for drinking in this population.

CONCLUSIONS

The M-PACE model provided a systematic approach to repurpose Step Away to fit the needs and preferences of veteran primary care patients who engage in hazardous drinking. Stand Down may serve as an innovative, low-cost means of expanding access to care for veterans who engage in hazardous drinking.

Effect of a Care Management Intervention on 12-Month Drinking Outcomes Among Patients With and Without DSM-IV Alcohol Dependence at Baseline

BACKGROUND

The CHOICE care management intervention did not improve drinking relative to usual care (UC) for patients with frequent heavy drinking at high risk of alcohol use disorders. Patients with alcohol dependence were hypothesized to benefit most. We conducted preplanned secondary analyses to test whether the CHOICE intervention improved drinking relative to UC among patients with and without baseline DSM-IV alcohol dependence.

METHODS

A total of 304 patients reporting frequent heavy drinking from 3 VA primary care clinics were randomized (stratified by DSM-IV alcohol dependence, sex, and site) to UC or the patient-centered, nurse-delivered, 12-month CHOICE care management intervention. Primary outcomes included percent heavy drinking days (%HDD) using 28-day timeline follow-back and a "good drinking outcome" (GDO)-abstaining or drinking below recommended limits and no alcohol-related symptoms on the Short Inventory of Problems at 12 months. Generalized estimating equation binomial regression models (clustered on provider) with interaction terms between dependence and intervention group were fit.

RESULTS

At baseline, 59% of intervention and UC patients had DSM-IV alcohol dependence. Mean drinking outcomes improved for all subgroups. For participants with dependence, 12-month outcomes did not differ for intervention versus UC patients (%HDD 37% versus 38%, p = 0.76 and GDO 16% versus 16%, p = 0.77). For participants without dependence, %HDD did not differ between intervention (41%) and UC (31%) patients (p = 0.12), but the proportion with GDO was significantly higher among UC participants (26% versus 13%, p = 0.046). Neither outcome was significantly modified by dependence (interaction p values 0.19 for %HDD and 0.10 for GDO).

CONCLUSIONS

Among participants with frequent heavy drinking, care management had no benefit relative to UC for patients with dependence, but UC may have had benefits for those without dependence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01400581.

Integrated stepped alcohol treatment for patients with HIV and alcohol use disorder: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

We examined the effectiveness of integrated stepped alcohol treatment (ISAT) on alcohol use and HIV outcomes among patients living with HIV and alcohol use disorder.

METHODS

In this multisite, randomised controlled trial, conducted in five Veterans Affairs-based HIV clinics in the USA (Atlanta, GA; Brooklyn-Manhattan, NY; Dallas and Houston, TX; and Washington, DC), we recruited people living with HIV and an alcohol use disorder who were not otherwise receiving formal alcohol treatment. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, HIV positive, English speaking, and met criteria for alcohol use disorder by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-IV criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence. Key exclusion criteria included if the patient was acutely suicidal or had a psychiatric condition that affected their ability to participate in counselling interventions, or if they had any medical conditions that would preclude completing the study or cause harm during the course of the study. Using a web-based clinical trial management system, we randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive ISAT or treatment as usual; patients, investigators, and clinicians were unmasked to allocation. ISAT involved three steps: step 1, addiction physician management, comprising eight sessions; step 2, addiction physician management plus motivational enhancement therapy, comprising four sessions; and step 3, specialty referral. Participants were stepped up at weeks 4 and 12 if they exceeded a priori drinking criteria. Treatment as usual involved referral to substance use treatment services. The primary outcome was number of drinks per week over the past 30 days at week 24 by use of the timeline followback method, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Adverse events were tracked throughout the study period in all randomly assigned participants. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01410123.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 28, 2013, and July 14, 2017, 128 of 351 patients assessed for eligibility were eligible and randomly assigned to receive ISAT (n=63) or treatment as usual (n=65). Mean age was 54 years (range 23-70), 125 (98%) of 128 participants were men, and 101 (79%) were black. 25 (20%) were lost to follow-up. In the ISAT group, of 57 participants who did not die or withdraw, 30 (52%) advanced to step 2, and 17 (57%) of 30 advanced to step 3. 32 (51%) of 63 participants assigned to ISAT versus 17 (26%) of 65 assigned to treatment as usual received at least one alcohol treatment medication (p=0·004). Participants in both groups decreased their alcohol consumption, but at week 24 we did not detect a difference in number of drinks per week between the groups (least squares mean 10·4 drinks per week [SD 16·5] in the ISAT group vs 15·6 drinks per week [SD 17·6] in the treatment as usual group; adjusted mean difference -4·2, 95% CI -9·4 to 0·9; p=0·11). One adverse event occurred that was possibly related to treatment occurred in the ISAT group (headache).

INTERPRETATION

ISAT increases the receipt of alcohol treatment medications and counselling without changes in drinking at week 24. Strategies to implement and enhance ISAT are needed. Future efforts should focus on promoting ISAT with attention to enhancing patient engagement and retention in alcohol-related care.

FUNDING

US National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Strategies to increase implementation of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorders: a structured review of care delivery and implementation interventions

Background

Effective medications for treating alcohol use disorders (AUD) are available but underutilized. Multiple barriers to their provision have been identified, and optimal strategies for addressing and overcoming barriers to use of medications for AUD treatment remain elusive. We conducted a structured review of published care delivery and implementation studies evaluating interventions that aimed to increase medication treatment for patients with AUD to identify interventions and component strategies that were most effective.

Methods

We reviewed literature through May 2018 and used networking to identify intervention studies with AUD medication receipt reported as a primary or secondary outcome. Studies were identified as care delivery studies, characterized by patient-level recruitment and willingness to be randomized to candidate treatment options, and implementation studies, characterized by inclusion of all patients treated at sites involved in the study. Each identified study was independently coded by two investigators for strategies used, guided by a published taxonomy of implementation strategies. All authors reviewed coding discrepancies and revised codes based on consensus. After reaching internal consensus, we solicited feedback from lead investigators on studies to code additional strategies. We reviewed implementation strategies used across studies to assess their relationship with medication receipt, as well as alcohol use outcomes, as available.

Results

Nine studies were identified: four RCTs of care delivery interventions, four quasi-experimental evaluations of large-scale implementation interventions, and one quasi-experimental evaluation of a targeted single-site implementation intervention. Implementation strategies used were variable across studies; no strategy was universally used. Effects of the interventions on receipt of AUD pharmacotherapy and alcohol use outcomes also varied. Three of four care delivery interventions resulted in increased receipt of AUD medications, but only one of these three improved alcohol use outcomes. One large-scale and one single-site implementation intervention were associated with increased AUD medication receipt, and these studies did not assess alcohol use outcomes. Patterns of implementation strategies did not clearly distinguish studies that successfully increased use of pharmacotherapy versus those that did not.

Conclusions

Our review did not reveal strategies most effective for implementing AUD medications. Interventions designed to overcome identified barriers may have missed the mark, or differences in the intensity or targets of strategies may matter more than differences in strategies. Further research is needed to understand effective implementation methods and to better understand patient-level perspective, preferences and barriers to receipt of medications.

Alcohol-Related Nurse Care Management in Primary Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Experts recommend that alcohol use disorders (AUDs) be managed in primary care, but effective approaches are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether 12 months of alcohol care management, compared with usual care, improved drinking outcomes among patients with or at high risk for AUDs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted at 3 Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics. Between October 11, 2011, and September 30, 2014, the study enrolled 304 outpatients who reported heavy drinking (≥4 drinks per day for women and ≥5 drinks per day for men).

INTERVENTIONS

Nurse care managers offered outreach and engagement, repeated brief counseling using motivational interviewing and shared decision making about treatment options, and nurse practitioner-prescribed AUD medications (if desired), supported by an interdisciplinary team (CHOICE intervention). The comparison was usual primary care.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes, assessed by blinded telephone interviewers at 12 months, were percentage of heavy drinking days in the prior 28 days measured by timeline follow-back interviews and a binary good drinking outcome, defined as abstinence or drinking below recommended limits in the prior 28 days (according to timeline follow-back interviews) and no alcohol-related symptoms in the past 3 months as measured by the Short Inventory of Problems.

RESULTS

Of 304 participants, 275 (90%) were male, 206 (68%) were white, and the mean (SD) age was 51.4 (13.8) years. At baseline, both the CHOICE intervention (n = 150) and usual care (n = 154) groups reported heavy drinking on 61% of days (95% CI, 56%-66%). During the 12-month intervention, 137 of 150 patients in the intervention group (91%) had at least 1 nurse visit, and 77 of 150 (51%) had at least 6 nurse visits. A greater proportion of patients in the intervention group than in the usual care group received alcohol-related care: 42% (95% CI, 35%-49%; 63 of 150 patients) vs 26% (95% CI, 19%-35%; 40 of 154 patients). Alcohol-related care included more AUD medication use: 32% (95% CI, 26%-39%; 48 of 150 patients in the intervention group) vs 8% (95% CI, 5%-13%; 13 of 154 patients in the usual care group). No significant differences in primary outcomes were observed at 12 months between patients in both groups. The percentages of heavy drinking days were 39% (95% CI, 32%-47%) and 35% (95% CI, 28%-42%), and the percentages of patients with a good drinking outcome were 15% (95% CI, 9%-22%; 18 of 124 patients) and 20% (95 % CI, 14%-28%; 27 of 134 patients), in the intervention and usual care groups, respectively (P = .32-.44). Findings at 3 months were similar.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The CHOICE intervention did not decrease heavy drinking or related problems despite increased engagement in alcohol-related care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01400581.