Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped care intervention for alcohol use disorders in primary care: pilot study

The research gap in evaluating community-based mental health interventions in Korea: A comparative analysis with the United Kingdom

South Korea has historically relied on inpatient psychiatric care. Although the 1995 Mental Health Act aimed to promote community mental health services, progress in developing community-based interventions has been limited. This review aims to provide a concise analysis of the current state of research on evaluating community mental health care in Korea, employing a comparative perspective with the United Kingdom (UK), where community-based mental health approaches have been more extensively studied and implemented. On November 19, 2024, a literature search was conducted using PubMed. The search strategy combined keywords related to mental illness and community intervention with the terms "Korea" or "United Kingdom." The review focused on randomized controlled trials from both countries that assessed patient-level outcomes of community-based mental health interventions. The findings reveal a striking contrast: in Korea, only one randomized pilot trial focused on depression in older adults was found. In contrast, 69 studies were identified in the UK, including 13 pilot/feasibility studies and 56 main studies, with 38 of these addressing severe mental illness. This clear difference underscores the limited research and evaluation of community-based mental health interventions in Korea. The results indicate a pressing need for research to assess these interventions. Such research could guide policy reforms toward deinstitutionalization and help Korea strengthen its community-based mental health system in line with global trends.

Economic benefits of substance use disorder treatment: A systematic literature review of economic evaluation studies from 2003 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

The economic burden of substance use disorder (SUD) is significant, comprising costs of health care and social services, criminal justice resources, loss of productivity, and premature mortality. This study assembles and synthesizes two decades of evidence describing the benefits of SUD treatment across five main outcome domains; 1) health care utilization; 2) self-reported criminal activity by offense type; 3) criminal justice involvement collected from administrative records or self-reported; 4) productivity assessed through working hours or wages earned; and 5) social services (e.g., a day spent in transitional housing).

METHODS

This review included studies if they reported the monetary value of the intervention outcomes, most commonly through a cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness framework. The search included studies from 2003 to the present day as of this writing (up to October 15, 2021). Summary cost estimates were adjusted using the US Consumer Price Index (CPI) to reflect the 12-month benefits per client in USD 2021. We followed the PRISMA methodology for study selection and assessed quality using the Checklist for Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS).

RESULTS

The databases yielded 729 studies after removing duplicates, and we ultimately selected 12 for review. Studies varied widely regarding analytical approaches, time horizons, outcome domains, and other methodological factors. Among the ten studies that found positive economic benefits, reductions in criminal activity or criminal justice costs represented the largest or second largest component of these benefits (range $621 to $193,440 per client).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with previous findings, a reduction in criminal activity costs is driven by the relatively high societal cost per criminal offense, notably for violent crimes, such as aggravated assault and rape/sexual assault. Accepting the economic rationale for increased investment in SUD interventions will require recognizing that more benefits accrue to individuals by avoiding being victims of a crime than to governments through budget offsets resulting from savings in non-SUD program expenses. Future studies should explore individually tailored interventions to optimize care management, which may yield unexpected economic benefits to services utilization, and criminal activity data to estimate economic benefits across a broad range of interventions.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of stepped-care interventions for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use

BACKGROUND

Stepped-care is a commonly recommended and implemented care model across health care domains, including substance use. Despite their presumed efficient allocation of treatment resources, a current and robust evidence synthesis is needed on the efficacy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stepped-care for substance use.

METHODS

This systematic review analyzed articles describing evaluations of stepped-care models that measured the use of acutely psychoactive substances (i.e., alcohol, cannabis, hallucinogens, inhalants, opioids, sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytics, and stimulants) as a primary or secondary outcome, in participants over 18 years old. The analysis investigated model and participant characteristics associated with treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

The study team conducted a search of five databases of literature (PsychINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus) published between January 1, 2010, and November 1, 2020. The search yielded 1051 unique articles, 19 of which were included in the analysis. The studies had considerable variability in sample sizes (n = 18-2310), time to follow-up (4.5 months to 3 years), and retention rates (35.1-100 %). Studies examined outcomes for either alcohol alone (n = 9), alcohol and other drug use (n = 9), or drug use alone (n = 1). Most studies (n = 13;) were rated as good quality. Three (15.8 %) were rated as fair and three (15.8 %) were rated as poor quality. The evidence regarding the efficacy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stepped-care approaches is limited, but four of seven studies found that adaptive-care interventions delivered in the context of other systemic interventions produced greater benefit than control conditions in relation to at least one alcohol-related outcome. We have insufficient evidence to determine whether the modes or intensity of interventions included in the models, or decision rules used to step people up or down to differing levels of care, have an impact on outcome.

CONCLUSION

Heterogeneity between studies with regard to model and evaluation design limited the degree to which the analysis could draw robust conclusions. Sample recruitment and statistical power are particular challenges, and the field needs more innovative evaluation designs to assess the efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of stepped-care models.

Does the Fast Alcohol Screening Test Accurately Distinguish Between Harmful and Severely Dependent Tiers of Alcohol Misuse?

AIMS

Primary aim: to determine the efficacy of FAST (the Fast Alcohol Screening Test) for detecting harmful and dependent levels of alcohol use. Secondary aim: to compare the performance of the FAST to two short forms of the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT): the AUDIT-C and AUDIT-3.

METHODS

Data from 3336 individuals in South Wales, compiled from full AUDIT datasets, were examined. AUROC analysis, alongside measures of sensitivity and specificity of the FAST, AUDIT-C and AUDIT-3 were utilized for the identification of harmful and dependent alcohol use.

RESULTS

The FAST demonstrated efficacy in the identification of harmful and dependent levels of alcohol use, with superior performance to both the AUDIT-C and AUDIT-3.

CONCLUSION

The present paper demonstrates the potential of the FAST as a cost- and time-effective method for appropriate screening and signposting in the stepped care model utilized by many health care and treatment services. Further studies are needed to ensure validity, both within the general population and for specific services and populations.

Brief interventions to prevent excessive alcohol use in adolescents at low-risk presenting to Emergency Departments: Three-arm, randomised trial of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Alcohol consumption and related harm increase rapidly from the age of 12 years. We evaluated whether alcohol screening and brief intervention is effective and cost-effective in delaying hazardous or harmful drinking amongst low-risk or abstaining adolescents attending Emergency Departments (EDs).

METHODS

This ten-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, pragmatic, individually randomised trial screened ED attenders aged between 14 and 17 years for alcohol consumption. We sampled at random one third of those scoring at most 2 on AUDIT-C who had access to the internet and, if aged under 16, were Gillick competent or had informed consent from parent or guardian. We randomised them between: screening only (control intervention); one session of face-to-face Personalised Feedback and Brief Advice (PFBA); and PFBA plus an electronic brief intervention (eBI) on smartphone or web. We conducted follow-up after six and 12 months. The principal outcomes were alcohol consumed over the 3 months before 12-month follow up, measured by AUDIT-C; and quality-adjusted life-years.

FINDINGS

Between October 2014 and May 2015, we approached 5,016 eligible patients of whom 3,326 consented to be screened and participate in the trial; 2,571 of these were low-risk drinkers or abstainers, consuming an average 0.14 units per week. We randomised: 304 to screening only; 285 to PFBA; and 294 to PFBA and eBI. We found no significant difference between groups, notably in weekly alcohol consumption: those receiving screening only drank 0.10 units (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.18); PFBA 0.12 (0.06 to 0.21); PFBA and eBI 0.10 (0.05 to 0.19).

INTERPRETATION

While drinking levels remained low in this population, this trial found no evidence that PFBA with or without eBI was more effective than screening alone in reducing or delaying alcohol consumption.

Examining untreated and treated alcohol problem resolution in an Australian online survey sample

INTRODUCTION

While treatment is an effective way to resolve alcohol problems, many people resolve their alcohol problems in the absence of treatment. Just how many do so is not known and may vary based on the definition of treatment. Various estimates of untreated alcohol problem resolution were calculated in this study, and the differences between people who resolve their alcohol problems with or without treatment were explored in relation to sociodemographic variables, levels of alcohol consumption in the past 12 months and lifetime alcohol problem severity.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was administered to 719 people who had resolved an alcohol problem in Australia. Convenience sampling was used through a recruitment strategy targeted towards the general population via Facebook.

RESULTS

Almost half (49.8%) of all people who resolved their alcohol problem did so in the absence of alcohol treatment, whether specialist alcohol treatment, mutual-aid services or digital support services. When accessing mental health treatment is included under the scope of 'treatment', this estimate dropped to 12.8%. The estimated odds of having accessed treatment increased with age and lifetime alcohol problem severity. Other sociodemographic variables, or levels of alcohol consumption in the past 12 months, were not significantly associated with treatment status.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

It might be beneficial to expand the scope of 'treatment' to include mental health services and focus on the development of cost-effective and less intrusive standalone activities, which can expedite and support alcohol problem resolution for those who choose not to access specialist treatment.

An efficacy trial of adaptive interventions for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Adaptive interventions, sometimes referred to as "stepped care", are those interventions in which the type or dosage of treatment offered to patients is tailored to baseline clinical presentation and then adjusted over time in response to patient progress or lack thereof. Currently, no adaptive brief interventions exist specifically for alcohol use disorder (AUD).

METHOD

This study used a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial design with 160 individuals with AUD recruited both locally and nationally who had a goal to reduce or abstain from drinking. Participants received brief advice (BA) and then the study reassessed them three weeks later; the study randomized those who did not respond to BA, defined as reducing their drinking to low-risk guidelines, to two session of motivational interviewing (MI) or more BA. The study then reassessed participants at week 8. The study re-randomized nonresponders to receive either MI alone or MI plus behavioral self-control therapy (BSCT), also referred to as coping skills therapy, and evaluated participants at week 13.

RESULTS

Overall, participants receiving any BSCT made the greatest reductions in drinking. Participants who received MI at week 4 and BSCT at week 8 outperformed all other groups.

CONCLUSION

Findings reveal that prolonged treatment, more sessions, and/or a specific combination of MI and BSCT provided optimal outcomes. Future research should determine whether such an algorithm holds across heterogenous groups of individuals with AUD.

Evidence based models of care for the treatment of alcohol use disorder in primary health care settings: a systematic review

Background

Pharmacological and behavioural treatments for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are effective but the uptake is limited. Primary care could be a key setting for identification and continuous care for AUD due to accessibility, low cost and acceptability to patients.

We aimed to synthesise the literature regarding differential models of care for the management of AUD in primary health care settings.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of articles published worldwide (1998-present) using the following databases; Medline, PsycINFO, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase. The Grey Matters Tool guided the grey literature search. We selected randomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of a primary care model in the management of AUD. Two researchers independently assessed and then reached agreement on the included studies. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2.0 for the critical appraisal.

Results

Eleven studies (4186 participants) were included. We categorised the studies into ‘lower’ versus ‘higher’ intensity given the varying intensity of clinical care evaluated across the studies. Significant differences in treatment uptake were reported by most studies. The uptake of AUD medication was reported in 5 out of 6 studies that offered AUD medication. Three studies reported a significantly higher uptake of AUD medication in the intervention group. A significant reduction in alcohol use was reported in two out of the five studies with lower intensity of care, and three out of six studies with higher intensity of care.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that models of care in primary care settings can increase treatment uptake (e.g. psychosocial and/or pharmacotherapy) although results for alcohol-related outcomes were mixed. More research is required to determine which specific patient groups are suitable for AUD treatment in primary health care settings and to identify which models and components are most effective.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO: CRD42019120293.

What can primary care services do to help First Nations people with unhealthy alcohol use? A systematic review: Australia, New Zealand, USA and Canada

Background

First Nations peoples of Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America (USA) and Canada are more likely to be non-drinkers than other people in these countries. However, those who do drink may be at greater risk of alcohol-related harms (at a population level) due to the ongoing impacts from colonisation and associated oppression. Addressing unhealthy drinking (drinking above recommended limits including alcohol use disorders) in primary care settings is one important way to increase accessibility of treatment.

Methods

This systematic review identifies peer-reviewed studies of alcohol treatments delivered in primary care or other non-residential settings for First Nations peoples of Australia, New Zealand, USA and Canada. Literature searches were conducted in seven academic databases from their inception until March, 2020. We assessed evidence of treatment or implementation effectiveness, perceived acceptability or accessibility, and the study quality as assessed by the AXIS tool and by a measure of community participation in the research process.

Results

Twenty-eight studies were included, published between 1968 and 2018. Studies reported on a range of alcohol treatments, from brief intervention to ambulatory withdrawal management, relapse prevention medicines, and cultural therapies. Brief intervention was the most studied approach. Cultural healing practices and bicultural approaches were a key theme amongst several studies. Four studies measured treatment effectiveness, including one randomised controlled trial (naltrexone vs naltrexone plus sertraline vs placebo) and two uncontrolled trials of disulfiram. Of the six implementation studies, three were (hybrid) effectiveness-implementation designs. Most of the remaining studies (n = 21) focused on treatment accessibility or acceptability. Community participation in the research process was poorly reported in most studies.

Conclusions

Research evidence on how best to care for First Nations peoples with unhealthy alcohol use is limited. Trials of naltrexone and disulfiram presented promising results. Cultural and bicultural care were perceived as highly important to clinical staff and clients in several studies. More effectiveness studies on the full scope of alcohol treatments are needed. Greater community participation in research and more transparent reporting of this in study methods will be key to producing quality research that combines scientific rigour with cultural appropriateness.

An economic evaluation of a specialist preventive care clinician in a community mental health service: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines and policies direct community mental health services to provide preventive care to address chronic disease risks, however, such care is infrequently provided in routine consultations. An alternative model of care is to appoint a clinician to the dedicated role of offering and providing preventive care in an additional consultation: the 'specialist clinician' model. Economic evaluations of models of care are needed to determine the cost of adhering to guidelines and policies, and to inform pragmatic service delivery decisions. This study is an economic evaluation of the specialist clinician model; designed to achieve policy concordant preventive care delivery.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the incremental costs, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact of a 'specialist preventive care clinician' (an occupational therapist) was conducted in a randomised controlled trial, where participants were randomised to receive usual care; or usual care plus the offer of an additional preventive care consultation with the specialist clinician. The study outcome was client acceptance of referrals to two free telephone-based chronic disease prevention services. This is a key care delivery outcome mandated by the local health district policy of the service. The base case analysis assumed the mental health service cost perspective. A budget impact analysis determined the annual budget required to implement the model of care for all clients of the community mental health service over 5 years.

RESULTS

There was a significantly greater increase from baseline to follow-up in the proportion of intervention participants accepting referrals to both telephone services, compared to usual care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $347 per additional acceptance of a referral (CI: $263-$494). The annual budget required to implement the model of care for all prospective clients was projected to be $711,446 over 5-years; resulting in 2616 accepted referrals.

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluation provides key information regarding the costs for the mental health service to adhere to policy targets, indicating the model of care involved a low per client cost whilst increasing key preventive care delivery outcomes. Additional modelling is required to further explore its economic benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12616001519448. Registered 3 November 2016, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371709.

Redressing responses to the treatment gap for people with alcohol problems: The overlooked role of untreated remission from alcohol problems

Abstract. Aims: The “treatment gap” for people with alcohol problems has been identified as very large in the literature. An array of responses to the treatment gap have been focussed upon, including changing the perceptions of untreated people in order to make them want treatment more. A separate approach identifies the treatment system itself as the cause of the treatment gap. The aim of this paper was to consider research on untreated remission from alcohol problems to better understand responses to the treatment gap. Methodology: Three areas of existing published literature were thematically reviewed and synthesised: treatment gap research, untreated remission from alcohol problems research, and treatment planning and system design research. Results: Including rates of untreated remission from alcohol problems reduces the size of the treatment gap considerably. Treatment planning models which estimate unmet demand are better suited than unmet need when identifying gaps in service provision. Responding to the treatment gap requires broadening the treatment system beyond the specialised setting, and the assumptions associated with the process and expected outcomes of remission may need revisiting. Conclusions: Treatment planning models are useful when identifying gaps in service provision, but more sophisticated inclusion of untreated remission data is required. The treatment response may need to be diversified to support the life circumstances and perspectives of people with alcohol problems, with one example (outlined in this paper) being the provision of digital support services.

Screening and brief interventions for adolescent alcohol use disorders presenting through emergency departments: a research programme including two RCTs

Background

Alcohol consumption and related harm increase steeply from the ages of 12–20 years. Adolescents in the UK are among the heaviest drinkers in Europe. Excessive drinking in adolescents is associated with increased risk of accidents, injuries, self-harm, unprotected or regretted sex, violence and disorder, poisoning and accidental death. However, there is lack of clear evidence for the most clinically effective and cost-effective screening and brief interventions for reducing or preventing alcohol consumption in adolescents attending emergency departments (EDs).

Objectives

To estimate the distribution of alcohol consumption, alcohol-related problems and alcohol use disorders in adolescents attending EDs; to develop age-appropriate alcohol screening and brief intervention tools; and to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these interventions.

Design

The research has been conducted in three linked stages: (1) a prevalence study, (2) intervention development and (3) two linked randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Setting

Twelve EDs in England (London, North East, and Yorkshire and The Humber).

Participants

A total of 5376 participants in the prevalence study [mean age 13.0 years, standard deviation (SD) 2.0 years; 46.2% female] and 1640 participants in the two linked RCTs (mean age 15.6 years, SD 1.0 years; 50.7% female).

Interventions

Personalised feedback and brief advice (PFBA) and personalised feedback plus electronic brief intervention (eBI), compared with alcohol screening alone. These age-appropriate alcohol interventions were developed in collaboration with the target audience through a series of focus groups and evaluations during stage 2 of the research programme and following two literature reviews.

Main outcome measures

Total alcohol consumed in standard UK units (1 unit = 8 g of ethanol) over the previous 3 months at 12-month follow-up, assessed using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, Consumption (3 items) (AUDIT-C).

Results

In the prevalence study, 2112 participants (39.5%) reported having had a drink of alcohol that was more than a sip in their lifetime, with prevalence increasing steadily with age and reaching 89.5% at the age of 17 years. The prevalence of at-risk alcohol consumption was 15% [95% confidence interval (CI) 14% to 16%] and the optimum cut-off point of the AUDIT-C in identifying at-risk drinking was ≥ 3. Associations of alcohol consumption and early onset of drinking with poorer health and social functioning were also found. In the RCT, the analysis of the primary outcome (average weekly alcohol consumption at month 12) identified no significant differences in effect between the three groups in both trials. In the high-risk drinking trial, the mean difference compared with control was 0.57 (95% CI –0.36 to 1.70) for PFBA and 0.19 (95% CI –0.71 to 1.30) for eBI. In the low-risk drinking trial, the mean difference compared with control was 0.03 (95% CI –0.07 to 0.13) for PFBA and 0.01 (95% CI –0.10 to 0.11) for eBI. The health economic analysis showed that eBI and PFBA were not more cost-effective than screening alone.

Conclusions

The ED can offer an opportunity for the identification of at-risk alcohol use in adolescents. A simple, short, self-completed screening instrument, the AUDIT-C, is an effective tool for identifying adolescents who are at risk of alcohol-related problems. Associations of alcohol consumption and earlier onset of drinking with poorer health and social functioning were observed in the prevalence study. The trials were feasible to implement and exceeded the recruitment target and minimum follow-up rates. However, PFBA and eBI were not found to be more effective than screening alone in reducing or preventing alcohol consumption in 14- to 17-year-olds attending EDs.

Limitations and future work

Only one-third of participants engaged with the application program; this is likely to have limited the effect of the intervention. We recommend that future research should focus on methods to maximise engagement with digital interventions and evaluate the effect of such engagement on clinical outcomes.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN45300218.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 8, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Telehealth interventions to reduce alcohol use in men with HIV who have sex with men: Protocol for a factorial randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Heavy alcohol use is prevalent among men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV and is associated with reduced antiretroviral therapy adherence, reduced HIV viral suppression, and reduced survival. We recently found that compared to HIV treatment as usual, three sessions of in-person motivational interviewing (MI) substantially reduced drinking in MSM with HIV. In an effort to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of this intervention, the present study will test whether MI is more effective than brief intervention when delivered by videoconferencing, whether interactive text messaging (ITM) can enhance the effects of alcohol intervention, and whether extended duration of intervention is more effective than brief duration.

METHODS

Using a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design, we will randomly assign 224 heavy-drinking MSM with HIV to: MI or brief intervention (BI); ITM or no ITM; Standard or Extended intervention (EI). All participants will receive intervention immediately after baseline assessment via videoconferencing and at 1-month post baseline via telephone. Participants randomized to EI will receive additional intervention sessions at 3, 6, and 9 months. Participants randomized to ITM will receive daily interactive texts about alcohol use for 1 month, with those randomized to EI receiving weekly interactive texts through 9 months. Alcohol and HIV-related outcomes will be assessed at 6 and 12 months post baseline.

CONCLUSION

By testing the combinations of interventions that can most effectively reduce alcohol use among MSM with HIV, this study will set the stage for wider-scale implementation of an optimized intervention combination.

Interventions to Reduce Unhealthy Alcohol Use among Primary Care Patients with HIV: the Health and Motivation Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Unhealthy alcohol use has adverse effects on HIV treatment. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) has some evidence of efficacy but may not be sufficient for those with low motivation or comorbid substance use.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) and emailed feedback (EF) among primary care HIV-positive patients, compared with treatment as usual care (UC) only, which included SBIRT.

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Six hundred fourteen adult HIV-positive patients in Kaiser Permanente Northern California who reported prior-year unhealthy alcohol use.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized to either three sessions of MI (one in person and two by phone), information regarding alcohol risks via EF through a patient portal, or UC alone. MI and EF participants who reported unhealthy alcohol use at 6 months were offered additional MI and EF treatment, respectively.

MAIN MEASURES

Participant-reported unhealthy alcohol use (defined as ≥ 4/≥ 5 drinks per day for women/men), alcohol problems at 12 months, based on blinded telephone interviews. Secondary outcomes included drug use and antiretroviral (ART) adherence.

KEY RESULTS

At 12 months, there were no overall group differences, but in all three arms, there were declines in unhealthy alcohol use and alcohol-related problems (p < 0.001). Participants reporting low motivation to reduce drinking at baseline were less likely to report unhealthy alcohol use if they received MI vs. EF and UC (p = 0.013). At 6 months, reported illegal drug use/misuse of prescription drugs other than marijuana was lower in the MI arm than EF or UC (p = 0.012). There were no differences in ART adherence between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized trial of HIV-positive patients using two behavioral interventions compared with SBIRT alone, participants in all three conditions reduced unhealthy alcohol use. MI may provide added benefit for patients with low motivation or who report illegal drug use/misuse of prescription drugs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01671501 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ).

Brief alcohol intervention for risky drinking in young people aged 14–15 years in secondary schools: the SIPS JR-HIGH RCT

Background

Adverse effects from young people’s alcohol consumption manifest in a range of physical and psychosocial factors, including neurological issues, cognitive impairment and risk-taking behaviours. The SIPS JR-HIGH pilot trial showed alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) to be acceptable to young people and schools in the north-east of England.

Objectives

To conduct a two-arm, individually randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ASBI for risky drinking in young people aged 14–15 years in the school setting, to monitor the fidelity of ASBI and to explore the barriers to, and facilitators of, implementation with staff, young people and parents.

Design

A baseline survey with a 12-month follow-up. Interviews with 30 school staff, 21 learning mentors and nine teachers, and 33 young people and two parents.

Setting

Thirty state schools in four areas of England: north-east, north-west, Kent and London.

Participants

Year 10 school pupils who consented to the study (aged 14–15 years, recruited between November 2015 and June 2016), school-based staff and parents of the young people who took part in the study.

Interventions

Young people who screened positively on a single alcohol screening question and consented were randomised to the intervention or control arm (blinded). The intervention was a 30-minute one-to-one structured brief intervention with a trained learning mentor and an alcohol leaflet. The control group received a healthy lifestyle leaflet (no alcohol information).

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome measure was total alcohol consumed in the last 28 days. Secondary outcomes related to risky drinking, general psychological health, sexual risk-taking, energy drink consumption, age of first smoking, quality of life, quality-adjusted life-years, service utilisation and demographic information.

Results

A total of 4523 young people completed the baseline survey, with 1064 screening positively (24%) and 443 being eligible to take part in the trial. Of those 443, 233 (53%) were randomised to the control arm and 210 were randomised to the intervention arm. Of the 443, 374 (84%) were successfully followed up at 12 months (intervention, n = 178; control, n = 196). The results were that the intervention showed no evidence of benefit for any alcohol-related measure when compared with the control arm. At 12 months we found a reduction from 61.9% to 43.3% using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test cut-off point of 8 and cut-off point of 4 (69.0% to 60.7%). These results were not significant. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the average net cost saving of the brief intervention was £2865 (95% confidence interval –£11,272 to £2707) per year compared with usual practice, with the intervention showing a 76% probability of being cost saving compared with usual practice. The interview findings showed that school was an acceptable setting to carry out ASBI among staff and young people.

Limitations

Recruitment of parents to take part in interviews was poor. Only 18 ASBI sessions were recorded, making it difficult to assess internal validity.

Conclusions

Although the intervention was ineffective in reducing risky drinking in young people aged 14–15 years, it was well received by the young people and school staff who participated.

Future work

Uniform reporting of the outcomes used for ASBI would generate more robust conclusions on the effectiveness of ASBI in the future. Pilot feasibility studies should include more than one geographical area. Future work on involving parents is needed.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN45691494.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 7, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Management of comorbid mental and somatic disorders in stepped care approaches in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Stepped care models comprise a graded treatment intensity and a systematic monitoring. For an effective implementation, stepped care models have to account for the high rates of mental and somatic comorbidity in primary care.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the systematic review was to take stock of whether present stepped care models take comorbidities into consideration. A further aim was to give an overview on treatment components and involved health care professionals.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Selection criteria were a randomized controlled trial of a primary-care-based stepped care intervention, adult samples, publication between 2000 and 2017 and English or German language.

RESULTS

Of 1009 search results, 39 studies were eligible. One-third of the trials were conceived for depressive disorders only, one-third for depression and further somatic and/or mental comorbidity and one-third for conditions other than depression. In 39% of the studies comorbidities were explicitly integrated in treatment, mainly via transdiagnostic self-management support, interprofessional collaboration and digital approaches for treatment, monitoring and communication. Most care teams were composed of a primary care physician, a care manager and a psychiatrist and/or psychologist. Due to the heterogeneity of the addressed disorders, no meta-analysis was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Several stepped care models in primary care already account for comorbidities, with depression being the predominant target disorder. To determine their efficacy, the identified strategies to account for comorbidities should be investigated within stepped care models for a broader range of disorders.

Screening and Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Reduce Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Adolescents and Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Unhealthy alcohol use is common, increasing, and a leading cause of premature mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To review literature on the effectiveness and harms of screening and counseling for unhealthy alcohol use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through October 12, 2017; literature surveillance through August 1, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies and randomized clinical trials of screening and counseling to reduce unhealthy alcohol use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers. Counseling trials were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drinks per week, exceeding recommended limits, heavy use episodes, abstinence (for pregnant women), and other health, family, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen studies (N = 314 466) were included. No studies examined benefits or harms of screening programs to reduce unhealthy alcohol use. For adolescents (10 studies [n = 171 363]), 1 study (n = 225) reported a sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.83) and specificity of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.86) using the AUDIT-C (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption) to detect the full spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use. For adults (35 studies [n = 114 182]), brief screening instruments commonly reported sensitivity and specificity between 0.70 and 0.85. Two trials of the effects of interventions to reduce unhealthy alcohol use in adolescents (n = 588) found mixed results: one reported a benefit in high-risk but not moderate-risk drinkers, and the other reported a statistically significant reduction in drinking frequency for boys but not girls; neither reported health or related outcomes. Across all populations (68 studies [n = 36 528]), counseling interventions were associated with a decrease in drinks per week (weighted mean difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.2 to -1.0]; 32 studies [37 effects; n = 15 974]), the proportion exceeding recommended drinking limits (odds ratio [OR], 0.60 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.67]; 15 studies [16 effects; n = 9760]), and the proportion reporting a heavy use episode (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.77]; 12 studies [14 effects; n = 8108]), and an increase in the proportion of pregnant women reporting abstinence (OR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.43 to 3.56]; 5 studies [n = 796]) after 6 to 12 months. Health outcomes were sparsely reported and generally did not demonstrate group differences in effect. There was no evidence that these interventions could be harmful.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among adults, screening instruments feasible for use in primary care are available that can effectively identify people with unhealthy alcohol use, and counseling interventions in those who screen positive are associated with reductions in unhealthy alcohol use. There was no evidence that these interventions have unintended harmful effects.

Topiramate versus naltrexone for alcohol use disorder: study protocol for a genotype-stratified, double-blind randomised controlled trial (TOP study)

Background

Current treatments for alcohol use disorders have limited efficacy and there is a high degree of variability in treatment response. In a randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial, there was a large effect size for topiramate in people homozygous for the GRIK1 rs2832407*C allele. The primary aim of the TOP study is to examine prospectively the therapeutic and cost-effectiveness of topiramate versus an active control (naltrexone) in improving treatment outcomes for alcohol dependence. Participants will be stratified on rs2832407 to compare C-allele homozygotes with A-allele carriers to examine the moderating effect of rs2832407 on drinking outcomes. An exploratory aim is to examine the moderating effects of rs1799971, a polymorphism in OPRM1, on the response to naltrexone by comparing Asn40 homozygotes with Asp40 carriers.

Methods/design

This double-blind trial will randomise 180 alcohol-dependent participants to a 12-week regime of either topiramate (titrating the dose up to 200 mg/day) or naltrexone (50 mg/day). Participants will be stratified on the two polymorphisms before randomisation. All participants will receive medical management. The primary drinking outcome will be the number of heavy drinking days per week and secondary drinking outcomes will include the time to relapse, the time to lapse and the percentage of abstinent days. Other secondary outcomes will include body mass index, tobacco use, anxiety symptoms and depressive symptoms.

Discussion

If successful, the TOP study will improve management strategies for alcohol dependence by providing support for the use of genetic biomarkers to inform medication selection.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03479086. Registered on 27 March 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2824-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Mental Health Needs and Psychoactive Drug Use in a User Population of the Family Health Strategy (FHS) in Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil

This cross-sectional study was conducted in Family Health Care's field of  Ribeirão Preto city, São Paulo, Brazil to identify the prevalence of substance-related disorders and mental distress among patients with mental disorders. We also aimed to identify sociodemographic and social support risk factors. The data collection was done using medical records, the Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ-6), Self Report Questionnaire (SRQ-20) and home visits. Of the 272 families studied, 211 contained individuals with mental disorders, and 61 included individuals who had substance-related disorders, or both. The mental disorders recorded in these families were most frequently mood disorders, followed by neurotic disorders, stress-related disorders and somatoform disorders. Women received twice as many psychotropic prescriptions associated with non-psychiatric medication. A significant relationship was established between education and mental distress as measured using the SRQ-20 (p = 0.024). The SSQ-6 revealed a family presence of social support in all of the conditions established by the six questions.

Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Opportunistic Screening and Stepped-care Interventions for Older Alcohol Users in Primary Care

Aims

To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care intervention versus a minimal intervention for the treatment of older hazardous alcohol users in primary care.

Method

Multi-centre, pragmatic RCT, set in Primary Care in UK. Patients aged ≥ 55 years scoring ≥ 8 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test were allocated either to 5-min of brief advice or to 'Stepped Care': an initial 20-min of behavioural change counselling, with Step 2 being three sessions of Motivational Enhancement Therapy and Step 3 referral to local alcohol services (progression between each Step being determined by outcomes 1 month after each Step). Outcome measures included average drinks per day, AUDIT-C, alcohol-related problems using the Drinking Problems Index, health-related quality of life using the Short Form 12, costs measured from a NHS/Personal Social Care perspective and estimated health gains in quality adjusted life-years measured assessed EQ-5D.

Results

Both groups reduced alcohol consumption at 12 months but the difference between groups was small and not significant. No significant differences were observed between the groups on secondary outcomes. In economic terms stepped care was less costly and more effective than the minimal intervention.

Conclusions

Stepped care does not confer an advantage over a minimal intervention in terms of reduction in alcohol use for older hazardous alcohol users in primary care. However, stepped care has a greater probability of being more cost-effective.

Trial Registration

Current controlled trials ISRCTN52557360.

Short summary

A stepped care approach was compared with brief intervention for older at-risk drinkers attending primary care. While consumption reduced in both groups over 12 months there was no significant difference between the groups. An economic analysis indicated the stepped care which had a greater probability of being more cost-effective than brief intervention.

Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of cannabinoid replacement therapy (Nabiximols) for the management of treatment-resistant cannabis dependent patients: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

The cannabis extract nabiximols (Sativex®) effectively supresses withdrawal symptoms and cravings in treatment resistant cannabis dependent individuals, who have high relapse rates following conventional withdrawal treatments. This study examines the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of longer-term nabiximols treatment for outpatient cannabis dependent patients who have not responded to previous conventional treatment approaches.

METHODS/DESIGN

A phase III multi-site outpatient, randomised, double-blinded, placebo controlled parallel design, comparing a 12-week course of nabiximols to placebo, with follow up at 24 weeks after enrolment. Four specialist drug and alcohol outpatient clinics in New South Wales, Australia. One hundred forty-two treatment seeking cannabis dependent adults, with no significant medical, psychiatric or other substance use disorders. Nabiximols is an oromucosal spray prescribed on a flexible dose regimen to a maximum daily dose of 32 sprays; 8 sprays (total 21.6 mg tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 20 mg cannabidiol (CBD)) four times a day, or matching placebo, dispensed weekly. All participants will receive six-sessions of individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and weekly clinical reviews. Primary endpoints are use of non-prescribed cannabis (self-reported cannabis use days, urine toxicology), safety measures (adverse events and abuse liability), and cost effectiveness (incremental cost effectiveness in achieving additional Quality Adjusted Life Years). Secondary outcomes include, improvement in physical and mental health parameters, substance use other than cannabis, cognitive functioning and patient satisfaction measures.

DISCUSSION

This is the first outpatient community-based randomised controlled study of nabiximols as an agonist replacement medication for treating cannabis dependence, targeting individuals who have not previously responded to conventional treatment approaches. The study and treatment design is modelled upon an earlier study with this population and more generally on other agonist replacement treatments (e.g. nicotine, opioids).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000103460 (Registered 1st February 2016).

Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations

BACKGROUND

Excessive drinking is a significant cause of mortality, morbidity and social problems in many countries. Brief interventions aim to reduce alcohol consumption and related harm in hazardous and harmful drinkers who are not actively seeking help for alcohol problems. Interventions usually take the form of a conversation with a primary care provider and may include feedback on the person's alcohol use, information about potential harms and benefits of reducing intake, and advice on how to reduce consumption. Discussion informs the development of a personal plan to help reduce consumption. Brief interventions can also include behaviour change or motivationally-focused counselling.This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of screening and brief alcohol intervention to reduce excessive alcohol consumption in hazardous or harmful drinkers in general practice or emergency care settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and 12 other bibliographic databases to September 2017. We searched Alcohol and Alcohol Problems Science Database (to December 2003, after which the database was discontinued), trials registries, and websites. We carried out handsearching and checked reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of brief interventions to reduce hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption in people attending general practice, emergency care or other primary care settings for reasons other than alcohol treatment. The comparison group was no or minimal intervention, where a measure of alcohol consumption was reported. 'Brief intervention' was defined as a conversation comprising five or fewer sessions of brief advice or brief lifestyle counselling and a total duration of less than 60 minutes. Any more was considered an extended intervention. Digital interventions were not included in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We carried out subgroup analyses where possible to investigate the impact of factors such as gender, age, setting (general practice versus emergency care), treatment exposure and baseline consumption.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 69 studies that randomised a total of 33,642 participants. Of these, 42 studies were added for this update (24,057 participants). Most interventions were delivered in general practice (38 studies, 55%) or emergency care (27 studies, 39%) settings. Most studies (61 studies, 88%) compared brief intervention to minimal or no intervention. Extended interventions were compared with brief (4 studies, 6%), minimal or no intervention (7 studies, 10%). Few studies targeted particular age groups: adolescents or young adults (6 studies, 9%) and older adults (4 studies, 6%). Mean baseline alcohol consumption was 244 g/week (30.5 standard UK units) among the studies that reported these data. Main sources of bias were attrition and lack of provider or participant blinding. The primary meta-analysis included 34 studies (15,197 participants) and provided moderate-quality evidence that participants who received brief intervention consumed less alcohol than minimal or no intervention participants after one year (mean difference (MD) -20 g/week, 95% confidence interval (CI) -28 to -12). There was substantial heterogeneity among studies (I² = 73%). A subgroup analysis by gender demonstrated that both men and women reduced alcohol consumption after receiving a brief intervention.We found moderate-quality evidence that brief alcohol interventions have little impact on frequency of binges per week (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.02; 15 studies, 6946 participants); drinking days per week (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.04; 11 studies, 5469 participants); or drinking intensity (-0.2 g/drinking day, 95% CI -3.1 to 2.7; 10 studies, 3128 participants).We found moderate-quality evidence of little difference in quantity of alcohol consumed when extended and no or minimal interventions were compared (-14 g/week, 95% CI -37 to 9; 6 studies, 1296 participants). There was little difference in binges per week (-0.08, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.12; 2 studies, 456 participants; moderate-quality evidence) or difference in days drinking per week (-0.45, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.09; 2 studies, 319 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Extended versus no or minimal intervention provided little impact on drinking intensity (9 g/drinking day, 95% CI -26 to 9; 1 study, 158 participants; low-quality evidence).Extended intervention had no greater impact than brief intervention on alcohol consumption, although findings were imprecise (MD 2 g/week, 95% CI -42 to 45; 3 studies, 552 participants; low-quality evidence). Numbers of binges were not reported for this comparison, but one trial suggested a possible drop in days drinking per week (-0.5, 95% CI -1.2 to 0.2; 147 participants; low-quality evidence). Results from this trial also suggested very little impact on drinking intensity (-1.7 g/drinking day, 95% CI -18.9 to 15.5; 147 participants; very low-quality evidence).Only five studies reported adverse effects (very low-quality evidence). No participants experienced any adverse effects in two studies; one study reported that the intervention increased binge drinking for women and two studies reported adverse events related to driving outcomes but concluded they were equivalent in both study arms.Sources of funding were reported by 67 studies (87%). With two exceptions, studies were funded by government institutes, research bodies or charitable foundations. One study was partly funded by a pharmaceutical company and a brewers association, another by a company developing diagnostic testing equipment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-quality evidence that brief interventions can reduce alcohol consumption in hazardous and harmful drinkers compared to minimal or no intervention. Longer counselling duration probably has little additional effect. Future studies should focus on identifying the components of interventions which are most closely associated with effectiveness.

Design and development of a stepped-care behavioral intervention to support parents of young children newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes

One of the most common chronic conditions of childhood, the prevalence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in young children is increasing. Early childhood development complicates optimal T1D management and glycemic outcomes. Parents are at risk for elevated psychological distress, especially immediately following diagnosis. Few empirically supported interventions are available to support parents and promote optimal T1D management during this vulnerable period. This paper reports on the development and study design of First STEPS: Study of Type 1 in Early childhood and Parenting Support. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy of a stepped care behavioral intervention for parents of young children over the first year following a new T1D diagnosis. The stepped care design provides participants with up to three intensity levels, or steps, of clinical behavioral intervention support based on need, compared to usual care. Intervention steps include peer parent coaching, telephone-based behavioral support, personalized psychological assessment and recommendations, and intensive assessment of T1D glycemic management with recommendations. Primary outcomes include children's glycemic control and parents' psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes include children's behavioral and psychosocial functioning. Exploratory analyses will evaluate demographic, disease-specific, and psychosocial factors related to progression in and response to each step of the intervention.

Economic evaluations of alcohol prevention interventions: Is the evidence sufficient? A review of methodological challenges

•

There are few economic evaluations of alcohol prevention interventions.

•

Consideration of impacts beyond an individual’s health in evaluations is limited.

•

No published studies using other priority-setting methods in the alcohol area.

•

Consideration of wider societal perspectives and health inequalities is minimal.

•

Including inter-sectoral costs and consequences in evaluations is challenging.

Public health interventions have unique characteristics compared to health technologies, which present additional challenges for economic evaluation (EE). High quality EEs that are able to address the particular methodological challenges are important for public health decision-makers. In England, they are even more pertinent given the transition of public health responsibilities in 2013 from the National Health Service to local government authorities where new agents are shaping policy decisions.

Addressing alcohol misuse is a globally prioritised public health issue. This article provides a systematic review of EE and priority-setting studies for interventions to prevent and reduce alcohol misuse published internationally over the past decade (2006–2016). This review appraises the EE and priority-setting evidence to establish whether it is sufficient to meet the informational needs of public health decision-makers.

619 studies were identified via database searches. 7 additional studies were identified via hand searching journals, grey literature and reference lists. 27 met inclusion criteria. Methods identified included cost-utility analysis (18), cost-effectiveness analysis (6), cost-benefit analysis (CBA) (1), cost-consequence analysis (CCA) (1) and return-on-investment (1). The review identified a lack of consideration of methodological challenges associated with evaluating public health interventions and limited use of methods such as CBA and CCA which have been recommended as potentially useful for EE in public health. No studies using other specific priority-setting tools were identified.

Assertive Community Treatment For People With Alcohol Dependence: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Aims

A pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the feasibility and potential efficacy of assertive community treatment (ACT) in adults with alcohol dependence.

Methods

Single blind, individually randomized, pilot RCT of 12 months of ACT plus treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU alone in adults (age 18+ years) with alcohol dependence and a history of previous unsuccessful alcohol treatment attending specialist community alcohol treatment services. ACT aimed to actively engage participants for 12 months with assertive, regular, minimum weekly contact. ACT was combined with TAU. TAU comprised access to the full range of services provided by the community teams. Primary outcome is mean drinks per drinking day and percent days abstinent at 12 months follow up. Analysis of covariance was conducted using 80% confidence intervals, appropriate in the context of a pilot trial.

Results

A total of 94 participants were randomized, 45 in ACT and 49 in TAU. Follow-up was achieved with 98 and 88%, respectively at 12 months. Those in ACT had better treatment engagement, and were more often seen in their homes or local community than TAU participants. At 12 months the ACT group had more problems related to drinking and lower quality of life than TAU but no differences in drinking measures. The ACT group had a higher percentage of days abstinent but lower quality of life at 6 months. The ACT group had less unplanned healthcare use than TAU.

Conclusions

An trial of ACT was feasible to implement in an alcohol dependent treatment population.

Trial registration

ISRCTN22775534

Prediction of Mental Health Services Use One Year After Regular Referral to Specialized Care Versus Referral to Stepped Collaborative Care

Referral to collaborative mental health care within the primary care setting is a service concept that has shown to be as effective as direct referral to specialized mental health care for patients with common mental disorders. Additionally it is more efficient in terms of lower mental health services use. This post-hoc analysis examines if treatment intensity during 1-year of follow-up can be predicted prospectively by baseline characteristics. With multilevel multivariate regression analyses baseline characteristics were examined as potential predictors of visit counts. Results showed that only the enabling factors service concept and referral delay for treatment had a significant association with mental health visit counts, when outcome was dichotomized in five or more visits. Inclusion of the outcome variable as a count variable confirmed the predictive value of service concept and referral delay, but added marital status as a significant predictor. Overall, enabling factors (service concept and referral delay) seem to be important and dominant predictors of mental health services use.

The Efficacy and Cost-Effectiveness of Stepped Care Prevention and Treatment for Depressive and/or Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Stepped care is an increasingly popular treatment model for common mental health disorders, given the large discrepancy between the demand and supply of healthcare service available. In this review, we aim to compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of stepped care prevention and treatment with care-as-usual (CAU) or waiting-list control for depressive and/or anxiety disorders. 5 databases were utilized from its earliest available records up until April 2015. 10 randomized controlled trials were included in this review, of which 6 examined stepped care prevention and 4 examined stepped care treatment, specifically including ones regarding depressive and/or anxiety disorders. Only trials with self-help as a treatment component were included. Results showed stepped care treatment revealed a significantly better performance than CAU in reducing anxiety symptoms, and the treatment response rate of anxiety disorders was significantly higher in stepped care treatment than in CAU. No significant difference was found between stepped care prevention/treatment and CAU in preventing anxiety and/or depressive disorders and improving depressive symptoms. In conclusion, stepped care model appeared to be better than CAU in treating anxiety disorders. The model has the potential to reduce the burden on existing resources in mental health and increase the reach and availability of service.

Treatment of prescription opioid disorders in Canada: looking at the 'other epidemic'?

The magnitude and consequences of prescription opioid (PO) misuse and harms (including rising demand for PO disorder treatment) in Canada have been well-documented. Despite a limited evidence-base for PO dependence treatment, opioid maintenance therapy (OMT) - mostly by means of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) - has become the de facto first-line treatment for PO-disorders. For example in the most populous province of Ontario, some 50,000 patients - large proportions of them young adults - are enrolled in MMT, resulting in a MMT-rate that is 3-4 times higher than that of the United States. MMT in Ontario has widely proliferated towards a quasi-treatment industry within a system context of the public fee-payer offering generous incentives for community-based MMT providers. Contrary to the proliferation of MMT, there has been no commensurate increase in availability of alternative (e.g., detox, tapering, behavioral), and less intrusive and/or costly, treatments which may provide therapeutic benefits at least for sub-sets of PO-dependent patients. Given the extensive PO-dependence burden combined with its distinct socio-demographic and clinical profile (e.g., involving many young people, less intensive or risky opioid use), an evidence-based 'stepped-care' model for PO dependence treatment ought to be developed in Canada where MMT constitutes one, but likely a last resort or option, for treatment. Other, less intrusive treatment options as well as the best mix of treatment options should be systematically investigated and implemented. This case study has relevance and implications for evidence-based treatment also for the increasing number of other jurisdictions where PO misuse and disorders have been rising.

Linked randomised controlled trials of face-to-face and electronic brief intervention methods to prevent alcohol related harm in young people aged 14-17 years presenting to Emergency Departments (SIPS junior)

BACKGROUND

Alcohol is a major global threat to public health. Although the main burden of chronic alcohol-related disease is in adults, its foundations often lie in adolescence. Alcohol consumption and related harm increase steeply from the age of 12 until 20 years. Several trials focusing upon young people have reported significant positive effects of brief interventions on a range of alcohol consumption outcomes. A recent review of reviews also suggests that electronic brief interventions (eBIs) using internet and smartphone technologies may markedly reduce alcohol consumption compared with minimal or no intervention controls. Interventions that target non-drinking youth are known to delay the onset of drinking behaviours. Web based alcohol interventions for adolescents also demonstrate significantly greater reductions in consumption and harm among 'high-risk' drinkers; however changes in risk status at follow-up for non-drinkers or low-risk drinkers have not been assessed in controlled trials of brief alcohol interventions.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The study design comprises two linked randomised controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two intervention strategies compared with screening alone. One trial will focus on high-risk adolescent drinkers attending Emergency Departments (Eds) and the other will focus on those identified as low-risk drinkers or abstinent from alcohol but attending the same ED. Our primary (null) hypothesis is similar for both trials: Personalised Feedback and Brief Advice (PFBA) and Personalised Feedback plus electronic Brief Intervention (eBI) are no more effective than screening alone in alcohol consumed at 12 months after randomisation as measured by the Time-Line Follow-Back 28-day version. Our secondary (null) hypothesis relating to economics states that PFBA and eBI are no more cost-effective than screening alone. In total 1,500 participants will be recruited into the trials, 750 high-risk drinkers and 750 low-risk drinkers or abstainers. Participants will be randomised with equal probability, stratified by centre, to either a screening only control group or one of the two interventions: single session of PFBA or eBI. All participants will be eligible to receive treatment as usual in addition to any trial intervention. Individual participants will be followed up at 6 and 12 months after randomisation.

DISCUSSION

The protocol represents an ambitious innovative programme of work addressing alcohol use in the adolescent population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN45300218. Registered 5th July 2014.

Placement matching of alcohol-dependent patients based on a standardized intake assessment: rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite considerable research on substance-abuse placement matching, evidence is still inconclusive. The aims of this exploratory trial are to evaluate (a) the effects of following matching guidelines on health-care costs and heavy drinking, and (b) factors affecting the implementation of matching guidelines in the treatment of alcohol-dependent patients.

METHODS

A total of 286 alcohol-dependent patients entering one of four participating detoxification units and having no arrangements for further treatment will be recruited. During the first week of treatment, all patients will be administered Measurements in the Addictions for Triage and Evaluation (MATE), European Quality of Life-Five Dimensions health status questionnaire (EQ-5D), and the Client Socio--Demographic and Service Receipt Inventory-European Version (CSSRI-EU). Patients who are randomly allocated to the intervention group will receive feedback regarding their assessment results, including clear recommendations for subsequent treatment. Patients of the control group will receive treatment as usual and, if requested, global feedback regarding their assessment results, but no recommendations for subsequent treatment. At discharge, treatment outcome and referral decisions will be recorded. Six months after discharge, patients will be administered MATE-Outcome, EQ-5D, and CSSRI-EU during a telephone interview.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide evidence on the effects and costs of using placement-matching guidelines based on a standardized assessment with structured feedback in the treatment of alcohol-dependent patients. A process evaluation will be conducted to facilitate better understanding of the relationship between the use of guidelines, outcomes, and potential mediating variables.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00005035. Registered 03 June 2013.

Cannabis abstinence during treatment and one-year follow-up: relationship to neural activity in men

Cannabis is among the most frequently abused substances in the United States. Cognitive control is a contributory factor in the maintenance of substance-use disorders and may relate to treatment response. Therefore, we assessed whether cognitive-control-related neural activity before treatment differs between treatment-seeking cannabis-dependent and healthy individuals and relates to cannabis-abstinence measures during treatment and 1-year follow-up. Cannabis-dependent males (N=20) completed a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) cognitive-control (Stroop) task before a 12-week randomized controlled trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy and/or contingency management. A healthy-comparison group (N=20) also completed the fMRI task. Cannabis use was assessed by urine toxicology and self-report during treatment, and by self-report across a 1-year follow-up period (N=18). The cannabis-dependent group displayed diminished Stroop-related neural activity relative to the healthy-comparison group in multiple regions, including those strongly implicated in cognitive-control and addiction-related processes (eg, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and ventral striatum). The groups did not differ significantly in response times (cannabis-dependent, N=12; healthy-comparison, N=14). Within the cannabis-dependent group, greater Stroop-related activity in regions including the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex was associated with less cannabis use during treatment. Greater activity in regions including the ventral striatum was associated with less cannabis use during 1-year posttreatment follow-up. These data suggest that lower cognitive-control-related neural activity in classic 'control' regions (eg, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and dorsal anterior cingulate) and classic 'salience/reward/learning' regions (eg, ventral striatum) differentiates cannabis-dependent individuals from healthy individuals and relates to less abstinence within-treatment and during long-term follow-up. Clinically, results suggest that treatment development efforts that focus on enhancing cognitive control in addition to abstinence may improve treatment outcomes in cannabis dependence.

What are the Implications for Policy Makers? A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness of Screening and Brief Interventions for Alcohol Misuse in Primary Care

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of screening and brief interventions (SBIs) for excessive alcohol use in primary care is well established; however, evidence on their cost-effectiveness is limited. A small number of previous reviews have concluded that SBI programs are likely to be cost-effective but these results are equivocal and important questions around the cost-effectiveness implications of key policy decisions such as staffing choices for delivery of SBIs and the intervention duration remain unanswered.

METHODS

Studies reporting both the costs and a measure of health outcomes of programs combining SBIs in primary care were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Econlit, the Cochrane Library Database (including NHS EED), CINAHL, PsycINFO, Assia and the Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index via Web of Knowledge. Included studies have been stratified both by delivery staff and intervention duration and assessed for quality using the Drummond checklist for economic evaluations.

RESULTS

The search yielded a total of 23 papers reporting the results of 22 distinct studies. There was significant heterogeneity in methods and outcome measures between studies; however, almost all studies reported SBI programs to be cost-effective. There was no clear evidence that either the duration of the intervention or the delivery staff used had a substantial impact on this result.

CONCLUSION

This review provides strong evidence that SBI programs in primary care are a cost-effective option for tackling alcohol misuse.

Intervention to reduce excessive alcohol consumption and improve comorbidity outcomes in hypertensive or depressed primary care patients: two parallel cluster randomized feasibility trials

BACKGROUND

Many primary care patients with raised blood pressure or depression drink potentially hazardous levels of alcohol. Brief interventions (BI) to reduce alcohol consumption may improve comorbid conditions and reduce the risk of future alcohol problems. However, research has not established their effectiveness in this patient population. This study aimed to establish the feasibility of definitive trials of BI to reduce excessive drinking in primary care patients with hypertension or mild to moderate depression.

METHODS

Thirteen general practices in North East England were randomized to the intervention or control arm of one of two parallel pilot trials. Adult patients drinking excessively and diagnosed with hypertension or mild-to-moderate depression received the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) by postal survey. Consenting respondents scoring more than 7 on AUDIT (score range 0 to 40) received brief alcohol consumption advice plus an information leaflet (intervention) or an information leaflet alone (control) with follow-up at six months. Measurements included the numbers of patients eligible, recruited, and retained, and the AUDIT score and systolic/diastolic blood pressure of each patient or the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score. Acceptability was assessed via practitioner feedback and patient willingness to be screened, recruited, and retained at follow-up.

RESULTS

In the hypertension trial, 1709 of 33,813 adult patients (5.1%) were eligible and were surveyed. Among the eligible patients, 468 (27.4%) returned questionnaires; 166 (9.6% of those surveyed) screened positively on AUDIT and 83 (4.8% of those surveyed) were recruited (50.0% of positive screens). Sixty-seven cases (80.7% of recruited patients) completed follow-up at six months. In the depression trial, 1,044 of 73,146 adult patients (1.4%) were eligible and surveyed. Among these eligible patients, 215 (20.6%) responded; 104 (10.0% of those surveyed) screened positively on AUDIT and 29 (2.8% of those surveyed) were recruited (27.9% of positive screens). Nineteen cases (65.5% of recruited patients) completed follow-up at six months.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruitment and retention rates were higher in the hypertension trial than in the depression trial. A full brief intervention trial appears feasible for primary care patients with hypertension who drink excessively. High AUDIT scores in the depression trial suggest the importance of alcohol intervention in this group. However, future work may require alternative screening and measurement procedures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN89156543; registered 21 October 2013.

The estimation of utility weights in cost-utility analysis for mental disorders: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review approaches and instruments used to derive utility weights in cost-utility analyses (CUAs) within the field of mental disorders and to identify factors that may have influenced the choice of the approach.

METHODS

We searched the databases DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects), NHS EED (National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database), HTA (Health Technology Assessment), and PubMed for CUAs. Studies were included if they were full economic evaluations and reported quality-adjusted life-years as the health outcome. Study characteristics and instruments used to estimate utility weights were described and a logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with the choice of either the direct (e.g. standard gamble) or the preference-based measure (PBM) approach (e.g. EQ-5D).

RESULTS

We identified 227 CUAs with a maximum in 2009, 2010, and 2012. Most CUAs were conducted in depression, dementia, or psychosis, and came from the US or the UK, with the EQ-5D being the most frequently used instrument. The application of the direct approach was significantly associated with depression, psychosis, and model-based studies. The PBM approach was more likely to be used in recent studies, dementia, Europe, and empirical studies. Utility weights used in model-based studies were derived from only a small number of studies.

LIMITATIONS

We only searched four databases and did not evaluate the quality of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct instruments and PBMs are used to elicit utility weights in CUAs with different frequencies regarding study type, mental disorder, and country.

The place of additional individual psychotherapy in the treatment of alcoholism: a randomized controlled study in nonresponders to anticraving medication-results of the PREDICT study

BACKGROUND

Goal of the presented study is to evaluate whether alcohol-dependent patients given additional individual psychotherapy after a heavy relapse during pharmacotherapy remain abstinent for longer than those who continue with pharmacotherapy alone.

METHODS

In a randomized, multicenter study, 109 alcohol-dependent patients who had suffered a heavy relapse either while receiving anticraving medication or placebo were randomized into 2 groups. One group received medication, medical management, and additional individual, disorder-specific, cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy, while the control group received medication and medical management only. Main outcome was defined as days until first heavy relapse.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were randomized to the psychotherapy group, 55 to the control group. Intention-to-treat and completer analyses found no differences between groups, whereas as-treated analyses (patients who actually received psychotherapy compared with those who did not) found a significant effect of psychotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that patients that are willing to attend psychotherapy benefit from receiving psychotherapy in addition to pharmacotherapy. We suggest that it may be beneficial to consider patients' preferences concerning psychotherapy at an earlier stage during treatment.

Efficacy of as-needed nalmefene in alcohol-dependent patients with at least a high drinking risk level: results from a subgroup analysis of two randomized controlled 6-month studies

AIMS

The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of as-needed use of nalmefene 18 mg versus placebo in reducing alcohol consumption in patients who did not reduce their alcohol consumption after an initial assessment, i.e. the pooled subgroup of patients with at least a high drinking risk level (men: >60 g/day; women: >40 g/day) at both screening and randomization from the two randomized controlled 6-month studies ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720) and ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461).

METHODS

Nalmefene 18 mg and placebo were taken on an as-needed basis. All the patients also received a motivational and adherence-enhancing intervention (BRENDA). The co-primary outcomes were number of heavy drinking days (HDDs) and mean total alcohol consumption (g/day) in Month 6 measured using the Timeline Follow-back method. Additionally, data on clinical improvement, liver function and safety were collected throughout the study.

RESULTS

The pooled population consisted of 667 patients: placebo n = 332; nalmefene n = 335. There was a superior effect of nalmefene compared with placebo in reducing the number of HDDs [treatment difference: -3.2 days (95% CI: -4.8; -1.6); P < 0.0001] and total alcohol consumption [treatment difference: -14.3 g/day (-20.8; -7.8); P < 0.0001] at Month 6. Improvements in clinical status and liver parameters were greater in the nalmefene group compared with the placebo group. Adverse events and adverse events leading to dropout were more common with nalmefene than placebo.

CONCLUSION

As-needed nalmefene was efficacious in reducing alcohol consumption in patients with at least a high drinking risk level at both screening and randomization, and the effect in this subgroup was larger than in the total population.

Evidence from regression-discontinuity analyses for beneficial effects of a criterion-based increase in alcohol treatment

Brief interventions effectively reduce alcohol problems; however, it is controversial whether longer interventions result in greater improvement. This study aims to determine whether an increase in treatment for people with more severe problems resulted in better outcome. We employed regression-discontinuity analyses to determine if drinking driver clients (n = 22,277) in Ontario benefited when they were assigned to a longer treatment program (8-hour versus 16-hour) based on assessed addiction severity criteria. Assignment to the longer16-hour program was based on two addiction severity measures derived from the Research Institute on Addictions Self-inventory (RIASI) (meeting criteria for assignment based on either the total RIASI score or the score on the recidivism subscale). The main outcome measure was self-reported number of days of alcohol use during the 90 days preceding the six month follow-up interview. We found significant reductions of one or two self-reported drinking days at the point of assignment, depending on the severity criterion used. These data suggest that more intensive treatment for alcohol problems may improve results for individuals with more severe problems.

Effectiveness of screening and brief alcohol intervention in primary care (SIPS trial): pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of different brief intervention strategies at reducing hazardous or harmful drinking in primary care. The hypothesis was that more intensive intervention would result in a greater reduction in hazardous or harmful drinking.

DESIGN

Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Primary care practices in the north east and south east of England and in London.

PARTICIPANTS

3562 patients aged 18 or more routinely presenting in primary care, of whom 2991 (84.0%) were eligible to enter the trial: 900 (30.1%) screened positive for hazardous or harmful drinking and 756 (84.0%) received a brief intervention. The sample was predominantly male (62%) and white (92%), and 34% were current smokers.

INTERVENTIONS

Practices were randomised to three interventions, each of which built on the previous one: a patient information leaflet control group, five minutes of structured brief advice, and 20 minutes of brief lifestyle counselling. Delivery of the patient leaflet and brief advice occurred directly after screening and brief lifestyle counselling in a subsequent consultation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was patients' self reported hazardous or harmful drinking status as measured by the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) at six months. A negative AUDIT result (score <8) indicated non-hazardous or non-harmful drinking. Secondary outcomes were a negative AUDIT result at 12 months, experience of alcohol related problems (alcohol problems questionnaire), health utility (EQ-5D), service utilisation, and patients' motivation to change drinking behaviour (readiness to change) as measured by a modified readiness ruler.

RESULTS

Patient follow-up rates were 83% at six months (n=644) and 79% at 12 months (n=617). At both time points an intention to treat analysis found no significant differences in AUDIT negative status between the three interventions. Compared with the patient information leaflet group, the odds ratio of having a negative AUDIT result for brief advice was 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.39) and for brief lifestyle counselling was 0.78 (0.48 to 1.25). A per protocol analysis confirmed these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

All patients received simple feedback on their screening outcome. Beyond this input, however, evidence that brief advice or brief lifestyle counselling provided important additional benefit in reducing hazardous or harmful drinking compared with the patient information leaflet was lacking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.

Building the first step: a review of low-intensity interventions for stepped care

Within the last 30 years, a substantial number of interventions for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) have received empirical support. Nevertheless, fewer than 25% of individuals with alcohol-related problems access these interventions. If several intensive psychosocial treatments are relatively effective, but most individuals in need do not access them, it seems logical to place a priority on developing more engaging interventions. Accordingly, after briefly describing findings about barriers to help-seeking, we focus on identifying an array of innovative and effective low-intensity intervention strategies, including telephone, computer-based, and Internet-based interventions, that surmount these barriers and are suitable for use within a stepped-care model. We conclude that these interventions attract individuals who would otherwise not seek help, that they can benefit individuals who misuse alcohol and those with more severe AUDs, and that they can facilitate subsequent help-seeking when needed. We note that these types of low-intensity interventions are flexible and can be tailored to address many of the perceived barriers that hinder individuals with alcohol misuse or AUDs from obtaining timely help. We also describe key areas of further research, such as identifying the mechanisms that underlie stepped-care interventions and finding out how to structure these interventions to best initiate a program of stepped care.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of alcohol screening and brief interventions in primary care in England

AIMS

To estimate the cost-effectiveness and resourcing implications of universal alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) programmes in primary care in England.

METHODS

This was a health economic model, combining evidence of the effectiveness and health care resource requirements of SBI activities with existing epidemiological modelling of the relationship between alcohol consumption and health harms.

RESULTS

Screening patients on registration with a family doctor would steadily capture ~40% of the population over a 10-year programme; screening patients at next primary care consultation would capture 96% of the population over the same period, but with high resourcing needs in the first year. The registration approach, delivered by a practice nurse, provides modest cost savings to the health care system of £120 m over 30 years. Health gains over the same period amount to 32,000 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). This SBI programme still appears cost-effective (at £6900 per QALY gained) compared with no programme, under pessimistic effectiveness assumptions. Switching to a consultation approach, delivered by a doctor, would incur an incremental net cost of £108 m, with incremental health gains equivalent to 92,000 QALYs, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £1175 per QALY gained compared with current practice.

CONCLUSION

A universal programme of alcohol SBI in primary care is estimated to be cost-effective, under all but the most pessimistic assumptions for programme costs and effectiveness. Policymakers should ensure that SBI programmes are routinely evaluated and followed up, given the substantial uncertainty over the effects of many of the implementation details.

Brief intervention for alcohol misuse in people attending sexual health clinics: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Over the last 30 years the number of people who drink alcohol at harmful levels has increased in many countries. There have also been large increases in rates of sexually transmitted infections. Available evidence suggests that excessive alcohol consumption and poor sexual health may be linked. The prevalence of harmful alcohol use is higher among people attending sexual health clinics than in the general population, and a third of those attending clinics state that alcohol use affects whether they have unprotected sex. Previous research has demonstrated that brief intervention for alcohol misuse in other medical settings can lead to behavioral change, but the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of this intervention on sexual behavior have not been examined.

Methods

We will conduct a two parallel-arm, randomized trial. A consecutive sample of people attending three sexual health clinics in London and willing to participate in the study will be screened for excessive alcohol consumption. Participants identified as drinking excessively will then be allocated to either active treatment (Brief Advice and referral for Brief Intervention) or control treatment (a leaflet on healthy living). Randomization will be via an independent and remote telephone randomization service and will be stratified by study clinic. Brief Advice will comprise feedback on the possible health consequences of excessive alcohol consumption, written information about alcohol and the offer of an appointment for further assessment and Brief Intervention. Follow-up data on alcohol use, sexual behavior, health related quality of life and service use will be collected by a researcher masked to allocation status six months later. The primary outcome for the study is mean weekly alcohol consumption during the previous three months, and the main secondary outcome is the proportion of participants who report unprotected sex during this period.

Discussion

Opportunistic intervention for excessive alcohol use has been shown to be effective in a range of medical settings. The SHEAR study will examine whether delivering such interventions in sexual health clinics results in reductions in alcohol consumption and will explore whether this is associated with changes in sexual behavior.

Cost-effectiveness of peer-delivered interventions for cocaine and alcohol abuse among women: a randomized controlled trial

Aims

To determine whether the additional interventions to standard care are cost-effective in addressing cocaine and alcohol abuse at 4 months (4 M) and 12 months (12 M) from baseline.

Method

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial with three arms: (1) NIDA's Standard intervention (SI); (2) SI plus a Well Woman Exam (WWE); and, (3) SI, WWE, plus four Educational Sessions (4ES).

Results

To obtain an additional cocaine abstainer, WWE compared to SI cost $7,223 at 4 M and $3,611 at 12 M. Per additional alcohol abstainer, WWE compared to SI cost $3,611 and $7,223 at 4 M and 12 M, respectively. At 12 M, 4ES was dominated (more costly and less effective) by WWE for abstinence outcomes.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first cost-effectiveness analysis simultaneously examining cocaine and alcohol abuse in women. Depending on primary outcomes sought and priorities of policy makers, peer-delivered interventions can be a cost-effective way to address the needs of this growing, underserved population.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01235091

Cost utility of behavioural activation delivered by the non-specialist

Behavioural activation by non-specialists appears effective in the treatment of depression. We examined incremental cost-effectiveness of behavioural activation (n = 24) v. treatment as usual (n = 23) in a randomised controlled trial. Intention-to-treat analyses indicated a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) difference in favour of behavioural activation of 0.20 (95% CI 0.01-0.39, P = 0.042), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £5756 per QALY and a 97% probability that behavioural activation is more cost-effective at a threshold value of £20,000. Results are promising for dissemination of behavioural activation but require replication in a larger study.

Stepped care treatment for depression and anxiety in primary care. a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Depressive and anxiety disorders are common in general practice but not always treated adequately. Introducing stepped care might improve this. In this randomized trial we examined the effectiveness of such a stepped care model.

METHODS

The study population consisted of primary care attendees aged 18-65 years with minor or major DSM-IV depressive and/or anxiety disorders, recruited through screening. We randomized 120 patients to either stepped care or care as usual. The stepped care program consisted of (1) watchful waiting, (2) guided self-help, (3) short face-to-face problem solving treatment and (4) pharmacotherapy and/or specialized mental health care. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 8, 16 and 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Symptoms of depression and anxiety decreased significantly over time for both groups. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (IDS: P = 0.35 and HADS: P = 0.64). The largest, but not significant, effect (d = -0.21) was found for anxiety on T3. In both groups approximately 48% of the patients were recovered from their DSM-IV diagnosis at the final 6 months assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary we could not demonstrate that stepped care for depression and anxiety in general practice was more effective than care as usual. Possible reasons are discussed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trails: ISRCTN17831610.

Identifying the gap between need and intervention for alcohol use disorders in Europe

AIMS

A literature review of existing research on the prevalence of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and availability of alcohol interventions in Europe was conducted. The review also explored what is known about the gap between need and provision of alcohol interventions in Europe.

METHODS

The review search strategy included: (i) descriptive studies of alcohol intervention systems in Europe; (ii) studies of alcohol service provision in Europe; and (iii) studies of prevalence of AUD and alcohol needs assessment in Europe.

RESULTS

Europe has a relatively high level of alcohol consumption and the resulting disabilities are the highest in the world. Most research on implementation of alcohol interventions in Europe has been restricted to screening and brief interventions. Alcohol needs assessment methodology has been developed but has not been applied in comparative studies across countries in Europe.

CONCLUSIONS

This review points to key gaps in knowledge related to alcohol interventions in Europe. There is a lack of comparative data on variations in alcohol treatment systems across European countries and there is also a lack of comparative data on the prevalence of alcohol use disorders across European countries and the relative gap between need and access to treatment. The forthcoming Alcohol Measures for Public Health Research Alliance (AMPHORA) research project work package on 'Early identification and treatment' aims to address these gaps.

Screening and brief interventions for hazardous and harmful alcohol use in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

There have been many randomized controlled trials of screening and brief alcohol intervention in primary care. Most trials have reported positive effects of brief intervention, in terms of reduced alcohol consumption in excessive drinkers. Despite this considerable evidence-base, key questions remain unanswered including: the applicability of the evidence to routine practice; the most efficient strategy for screening patients; and the required intensity of brief intervention in primary care. This pragmatic factorial trial, with cluster randomization of practices, will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different models of screening to identify hazardous and harmful drinkers in primary care and different intensities of brief intervention to reduce excessive drinking in primary care patients.

METHODS AND DESIGN

GPs and nurses from 24 practices across the North East (n=12), London and South East (n=12) of England will be recruited. Practices will be randomly allocated to one of three intervention conditions: a leaflet-only control group (n=8); brief structured advice (n=8); and brief lifestyle counselling (n=8). To test the relative effectiveness of different screening methods all practices will also be randomised to either a universal or targeted screening approach and to use either a modified single item (M-SASQ) or FAST screening tool. Screening randomisation will incorporate stratification by geographical area and intervention condition. During the intervention stage of the trial, practices in each of the three arms will recruit at least 31 hazardous or harmful drinkers who will receive a short baseline assessment followed by brief intervention. Thus there will be a minimum of 744 patients recruited into the trial.

DISCUSSION

The trial will evaluate the impact of screening and brief alcohol intervention in routine practice; thus its findings will be highly relevant to clinicians working in primary care in the UK. There will be an intention to treat analysis of study outcomes at 6 and 12 months after intervention. Analyses will include patient measures (screening result, weekly alcohol consumption, alcohol-related problems, public service use and quality of life) and implementation measures from practice staff (the acceptability and feasibility of different models of brief intervention.) We will also examine organisational factors associated with successful implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.