The effectiveness of alcohol screening and brief intervention in emergency departments: a multicentre pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

The effectiveness of a brief intervention for intensive care unit patients with hazardous alcohol use: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Screening for hazardous alcohol use and performing brief interventions (BIs) are recommended to reduce alcohol-related negative health consequences. We aimed to compare the effectiveness (defined as an at least 10% absolute difference) of BI with usual care in reducing alcohol intake in intensive care unit survivors with history of hazardous alcohol use.

METHODS

We used Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) score to assess history of alcohol use.

PATIENTS

Emergency admitted adult ICU patients in three Finnish university hospitals, with an AUDIT-C score > 5 (women), or > 6 (men). We randomized consenting eligible patients to receive a BI or treatment as usual (TAU).

INTERVENTION

BI was delivered by the time of ICU discharge or shortly thereafter in the hospital ward.

CONTROLS

Control patients received TAU.

OUTCOME

The primary outcome was self-reported alcohol consumption during the preceding week 6 and 12 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were the change in AUDIT-C scores from baseline to 6 and 12 months, health-related quality of life, and mortality. The trial was terminated early due to slow recruitment during the pandemic.

RESULTS

We randomized 234 patients to receive BI (N = 117) or TAU (N = 117). At 6 months, the median alcohol intake in the BI and TAU groups were 6.5 g (interquartile range [IQR] 0-141) and 0 g (0-72), respectively (p = 0.544). At 12 months, it was 24 g (0-146) and 0 g (0-96) in the BI and TAU groups, respectively (p = 0.157). Median change in AUDIT-C from baseline to 6 months was - 1 (- 4 to 0) and 2 (- 6 to 0), (p = 0.144) in the BI and TAU groups, and to 12 months - 3 (- 5 to - 1) and - 4 (- 7 to - 1), respectively (p = 0.187). In total, 4% (n = 5) of patients in the BI group and 11% (n = 13) of patients in the TAU group were abstinent at 6 months, and 10% (n = 12) and 15% (n = 17), respectively, at 12 months. No between-groups difference in mortality emerged.

CONCLUSION

As underpowered, our study cannot reject or confirm the hypothesis that a single BI early after critical illness is effective in reducing the amount of alcohol consumed compared to TAU. However, a considerable number in both groups reduced their alcohol consumption.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03047577).

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for tobacco consumption, alcohol misuse, and physical inactivity: an equity-informed rapid review

OBJECTIVE

This rapid review systematically synthesizes evidence of the effectiveness of the Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral (SBIR/T) approach for tobacco use, alcohol misuse, and physical inactivity.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a rapid review.

METHODS

We searched primary studies between 2012 and 2022 in seven electronic databases. The search strategy used concepts related to alcohol-related disorders, intoxication, cigarette, nicotine, physical activity, exercise, sedentary, screening, therapy, and referral. We reviewed both title/abstract and full-text using a priori set inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify the eligible studies. We appraised study quality, extracted data, and summarized the characteristics of the included studies. We applied health equity lenses in the synthesis.

RESULTS

Of the 44 included studies, most focused on alcohol misuse. SBIR/T improved patients' attitudes toward alcohol behavior change, improved readiness and referral initiation for change, and effectively reduced alcohol consumption. Few studies pertained to smoking and physical inactivity. Most studies on smoking demonstrated effectiveness pertaining to patients' acceptance of referral recommendations, improved readiness and attempts to quitting smoking, and reduced or cessation of smoking. Findings were mixed about the effectiveness of SBIR/T in improving physical activity. Minimal studies exist on the impacts of SBIR/T for these three risk factors on healthcare resource use or costs. Studies considering diverse population characteristics in the design and effectiveness assessment of the SBIR/T intervention are lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

More research on the impacts of SBIR/T on tobacco use, alcohol misuse, and physical inactivity is required to inform the planning and delivery of SBIR/T for general and disadvantaged populations.

Acceptability Among Frontline Staff Toward Distributing an Anonymous Alcohol Survey in Emergency Departments: A Mixed Methods Study

ABSTRACT

Emergency departments (EDs) serve as the front line when patients encounter the hospital system. Limited data are available of patients' alcohol habits collected during Danish ED visits, and no studies have, to our knowledge, examined frontline staffs' (registered nurses and medical secretaries) acceptability to deliver anonymous alcohol surveys to patients. We aimed at examining the proportion of survey respondents and the prevalence of patients' alcohol habits and also exploring frontline staff acceptability of the distribution of an anonymous survey regarding patients' alcohol habits in EDs. Intendedly, all eligible patients ≥18 years old entering two EDs in March 2019 should receive a survey based on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test. The study was an explanatory, sequential, mixed methods design, and results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and a deductive content analysis based on the theoretical framework of acceptability. In total, 15% (n = 1,305) of the total 8,679 patients in the EDs returned the survey. Qualitative analysis of interviews (n = 31) with staff showed that they had been reluctant to distribute the survey primarily because of ethical concerns of anonymity, freedom of choice, and being nonjudgmental toward patients. Hence, patients with no obvious alcohol problems were more likely to receive the survey. Still, we found that 23% of the respondents had an Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test score ≥ 8. Results indicate that frontline staffs' recognition of patients' alcohol use is inadequate, and findings show a low degree of acceptability among staff to deliver an anonymous survey, which is in line with earlier described barriers toward screening activities in EDs.

Extended-Release Naltrexone and Case Management for Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder in the Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility of initiating treatment for alcohol use disorder with extended-release naltrexone and case management services in the emergency department (ED) and measure the intervention's impact on daily alcohol consumption and quality of life.

METHODS

This is a 12-week prospective open-label single-arm study of a multimodal treatment for alcohol use disorder consisting of monthly extended-release naltrexone injections and case management services initiated at an urban academic ED. Participants were actively drinking adult patients in ED with known or suspected alcohol use disorder and an AUDIT-C score more than 4. The main feasibility outcomes included the rates of participant enrollment, retention in the study, and continuing treatment after study completion. Efficacy outcomes were the change in daily alcohol consumption (drinks per day; 14 g ethanol per drink), measured by a 14-day timeline followback, and the change in quality of life measured with a single-item Kemp quality of life scale.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-nine patients were approached, and 32 were enrolled (18%). Of the 32 enrolled patients, 25 (78%) completed all visits, and 22 (69%) continued naltrexone after the trial. The mean baseline daily alcohol consumption was 7.6 drinks per day (interquartile range, 4.5, 13.4), and the mean quality of life was 3.6 (SD 1.7) on a 7-point scale. The median daily alcohol consumption change was -7.5 drinks per day (Hodges-Lehmann 95% confidence interval -8.6, -5.9). The mean quality of life change was 1.2 points (95% confidence interval 0.5, 1.9; P<.01).

CONCLUSION

We found that initiation of treatment of alcohol use disorder with extended-release naltrexone and case management is feasible in an ED setting and observed significant reductions in drinking with improved quality of life in the short term. Multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to further validate these findings.

Cessation of smoking trial in the emergency department (CoSTED): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Attendees of emergency departments (EDs) have a higher than expected prevalence of smoking. ED attendance may be a good opportunity to prompt positive behaviour change, even for smokers not currently motivated to quit. This study aims to determine whether an opportunist smoking cessation intervention delivered in the ED can help daily smokers attending the ED quit smoking and is cost-effective.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A two-arm pragmatic, multicentred, parallel-group, individually randomised, controlled superiority trial with an internal pilot, economic evaluation and mixed methods process evaluation. The trial will compare ED-based brief smoking cessation advice, including provision of an e-cigarette and referral to local stop smoking services (intervention) with the provision of contact details for local stop smoking services (control). Target sample size is 972, recruiting across 6 National Health Service EDs in England and Scotland. Outcomes will be collected at 1, 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome at 6 months is carbon monoxide verified continuous smoking abstinence.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial was approved by the South Central-Oxford B Research Committee (21/SC/0288). Dissemination will include the publication of outcomes, and the process and economic evaluations in peer-reviewed journals. The findings will also be appropriately disseminated to relevant practice, policy and patient representative groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04854616; protocol V.4.2.

Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

BACKGROUND

Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined.

RESULTS

The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored 'low risk drinking/abstinence' according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population.

Title of the study: Practice and attitude of doctors towards patients with substance use: A study from south India

AIM

To evaluate the practice and attitude of doctors towards substance use disorders (SUD) and their management.

METHODS

Following stratified proportionate random sampling, selected doctors in the south zone of Bengaluru, India, were interviewed face-to-face using a structured questionnaire.

RESULTS

150 doctors were interviewed. In their practice, a quarter of patients (median of 27.5 (IQR: 11.45-45) use one or other form of Alcohol, Tobacco or Other Drugs of abuse (ATOD). Doctors, in general, enquire about substance use but do not actively intervene. They have mixed attitudes (both positive and negative) towards persons with SUD. A significant positive correlation was noted between the number of years of experience (post-MBBS) with practices related to "brief-intervention" (p = 0.014) and "concerned and sympathetic" attitudes (p < 0.001). However, a significant negative correlation was observed between the number of years of experience and "substance-specific management" practices (p < 0.001). Further, there was a positive correlation between "brief-interventions" practices with the attitude of being "concerned and sympathetic" (p < 0.001). A mediation analysis revealed that nearly a third of the overall effect of the number of years of experience on brief-interventions practices was mediated by a concerned and sympathetic attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Serious efforts must be made to train doctors in the effective management of SUD. Attitudes of the doctors influence practices such as brief interventions. Programs directed towards changing the attitudes of doctors can bring changes in their practices.

Pragmatic clinical trial design in emergency medicine: Study considerations and design types

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) focus on correlation between treatment and outcomes in real-world clinical practice, yet a guide highlighting key study considerations and design types for emergency medicine investigators pursuing this important study type is not available. Investigators conducting emergency department (ED)-based PCTs face multiple decisions within the planning phase to ensure robust and meaningful study findings. The PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary 2 (PRECIS-2) tool allows trialists to consider both pragmatic and explanatory components across nine domains, shaping the trial design to the purpose intended by the investigators. Aside from the PRECIS-2 tool domains, ED-based investigators conducting PCTs should also consider randomization techniques, human subjects concerns, and integration of trial components within the electronic health record. The authors additionally highlight the advantages, disadvantages, and rationale for the use of four common randomized study design types to be considered in PCTs: parallel, crossover, factorial, and stepped-wedge. With increasing emphasis on the conduct of PCTs, emergency medicine investigators will benefit from a rigorous approach to clinical trial design.

The efficacy and tolerability of pharmacologically active interventions for alcohol-induced hangover symptomatology: a systematic review of the evidence from randomised placebo-controlled trials

AIMS

To compare quantitatively the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacologically active interventions in the treatment and prevention of alcohol-induced hangover.

METHODS

Systematic review of placebo-controlled randomised trials in healthy adults that evaluated any pharmacologically active intervention in the treatment or prevention of hangover. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and CENTRAL from database inception until 1 August 2021. The primary efficacy outcome was any continuous measure of overall hangover symptoms and the primary tolerability outcome the number of people dropping out because of adverse events (AEs). Quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included reporting on 386 participants. No two studies reported on the same intervention; as such, meta-analysis could not be undertaken. Methodological concerns and imprecision resulted in all studied efficacy outcomes being rated as very low quality. When compared with placebo, individual studies reported a statistically significant reduction in the mean percentage overall hangover symptom score for clove extract (42.5% vs 19.0%, P < 0.001), tolfenamic acid (84.0% vs 50.0%, P < 0.001), pyritinol (34.1% vs 16.2%, P < 0.01), Hovenia dulcis fruit extract (P = 0.029), L-cysteine (P = 0.043), red ginseng (21.1% vs 14.0%, P < 0.05) and Korean pear juice (41.5% vs 33.3%, P < 0.05). All studied tolerability outcomes were of low or very low quality with no studies reporting any drop-outs because of AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Only very low quality evidence of efficacy is available to recommend any pharmacologically active intervention for the treatment or prevention of alcohol-induced hangover. Of the limited interventions studied, all had favourable tolerability profiles and very low quality evidence suggests clove extract, tolfenamic acid and pyritinol may most warrant further study.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of face-to-face and electronic brief interventions versus screening alone to reduce alcohol consumption among high-risk adolescents presenting to emergency departments: three-arm pragmatic randomized trial (SIPS Junior high risk trial)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Alcohol use increases throughout adolescence. Emergency department (ED) attendance is an opportunity for alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI), which is effective for adults. This trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ASBI compared with screening alone (SA) in high-risk adolescents.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Multi-centre, three-group, single-blind, individually randomized trial with follow-ups after 6 and 12 months in 10 ED settings in England. From October 2014 to May 2015 we screened 3327 adolescents aged 14 to 18 years, of whom 756 (22.7%) scored at least 3 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: consumption (AUDIT-C) and consented to participate in this trial. Mean age was 16.1 years; 50.2% were female and 84.9% were white.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions were personalized feedback and brief advice (PFBA), personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention (eBI) and SA.

MEASURES

The primary outcome was the weekly alcohol consumed in standard UK units (8 g ethanol) at 12 months post-randomization, derived from extended AUDIT-C. Economic outcomes included quality of life and service use, from perspectives of both the National Health Service and personal social services (NHS&PSS) and society.

FINDINGS

At 12 months, mean weekly consumption was 2.99 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.38-3.70] standard units for the SA group, 3.56 (95% CI = 2.90, 4.32) for PFBA and 3.18 (95% CI = 2.50, 3.97) for eBI, showing no significant differences. The PFBA group consumed mean 0.57 (-0.36, 1.70) units more than SA; and eBIs consumed 0.19 (-0.71, 1.30) more. Bayes factors suggested lack of effectiveness explained non-significance. From the NHS&PSS perspective, economic analysis showed that PFBA and eBI were not cost-effective compared with SA: PFBA yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £6213 (-£736 843, £812 884), with the intervention having 54% probability of being cost-effective compared with SA at the £20 000 WTP threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

In emergency departments in England, neither personalized feedback and brief advice nor personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention showed evidence of being effective or cost-effective when compared with screening alone in reducing alcohol consumption among adolescents.

A Rapid Systematic Review of Worldwide Alcohol Use Disorders and Brief Alcohol Interventions in the Criminal Justice System

Although the relationship is complex, there is an association between alcohol use and offending behavior with an interplay between the amount drank, the pattern of drinking and individual and contextual factors. Alcohol brief interventions have been shown to be effective in primary healthcare, however there is currently a lack of compelling evidence in the criminal justice system. We carried out a rapid systematic review of the literature, which updated our review conducted in 2016. Following systematic searches, we included 36 papers on prevalence and 13 papers on effectiveness. Between 26 and 88% of individuals in the policy custody setting scored positive for an alcohol use disorder. In the magistrates court this was 95%; 31-86% in the probation setting and between 19 and 86% in the prison system. In relation to probable dependence, between 21 and 38% of individuals were shown to have probable alcohol dependence in the police custody suite setting; 39 per cent in the magistrate court system; 17-36% in the probation setting and between 18 and 48% in the prison system. This compares to 6% in the general population. We included 13 studies of effectiveness with differing outcome measures and outcomes. We conclude more studies are needed in the field to develop the current evidence base.

Prevalence of at-risk drinking recognition: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a prominent "treatment gap" in relation to at-risk drinking (ARD), whereby a minority of at-risk drinkers ever access treatment. Research suggests that recognition of problem drinking is a necessary precursor for help-seeking and treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the prevalence of ARD recognition within those meeting criteria for ARD.

METHOD

PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, and MEDLINE were searched using the terms: problem* AND (recogni* OR perceive* OR perception OR self-identif*) AND alcohol - to identify studies published in English between 2000 and 2022. Studies reported the frequency (weighted or unweighted) of participants meeting ARD criteria that also directly identified ARD, perceived a need for help, or endorsed a readiness to change. The prevalence of ARD recognition was estimated using a random-effects meta-analysis with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

17 studies were included which provided data for 33,349 participants with ARD. Most (n = 14) were US studies. ARD was self-identified via a single indicator in 7 studies, whereas recognition was assessed via stages of change in 4 studies and need for help in 6 studies. The pooled prevalence of ARD recognition was 31% (95% CI: 25%-36%), and subgroup analyses indicated alcohol use severity, measure of recognition, and population type to be significant sources of heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Most individuals with ARD fail to recognise their drinking problem so preventive approaches that promote recognition may be helpful. However, we must be cautious of how inconsistency in question framing affects self-reported problem recognition.

Effectiveness of brief counselling in a hospital setting for smoking cessation and risky alcohol drinking reduction: randomised clinical trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Chronic diseases are a public health problem, and 80% of them are related to modifiable risk factors such as unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, smoking, and risky alcohol consumption. Although the intervention in smoking and hazardous alcohol drinking has proven to be effective in Primary Care, it is unknown whether it works in the same way in the hospital setting.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of brief counselling in order to modify the stage of change in smokers and at-risk drinkers treated in a high complexity hospital.

METHODS

A Randomised controlled trial to be conducted, in which an evaluation is made of four brief counselling strategies for smoking cessation and risky alcohol consumption compared to usual care, selected according to the patient's stage of change. The primary result will be the proportion of patients in each of the groups (intervention and control) with identified progress in the stage of change. The reduction of consumption will be also be analysed. Protocol registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03521622).

RESULTS

The results will be published in scientific journals, and its application aims to generate behavioural intervention protocols for modifiable risk factors in high complexity hospitals. The trial was presented and approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana and Hospital Universitario de San Ignacio, Bogota, Colombia (Approval 01/2018).

Addressing Patients' Alcohol Consumption-A Population-Based Survey of Patient Experiences

Objectives: To identify the proportion of the population that had experienced that alcohol was addressed in health care the previous year, to explore experiences and perceived effects of addressing alcohol, and to investigate the proportion of risky drinkers in the population. Methods: Cross-sectional national web-based survey with 1,208 participants. Socio-demographic data, alcohol consumption (AUDIT-C), and experiences with alcohol conversations were investigated. Results: Approximately four in five respondents had visited health care the past 12 months, and one in six reported having experienced addressing alcohol. Women and older respondents were less likely to report having experienced alcohol conversations compared to other groups. Risky drinkers were not more likely to have experienced an alcohol conversation, but reported longer duration of alcohol conversations and more frequently perceived addressing alcohol as awkward or judgmental. Almost a third of respondents were classified as risky drinkers. Conclusion: The proportion experiencing addressing alcohol in routine health care is low, also among risky drinkers, and risky drinkers more frequently experienced the conversations as judgmental. More sensitive and relevant ways of addressing alcohol in health care is needed.

An Ethnographic study of unhealthy alcohol use in a Danish Emergency Department

Background

Emergency Departments (EDs) are important arenas for the detection of unhealthy substance use. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for unhealthy alcohol use has been used in some ED settings with funding support from external sources. However, widespread sustained implementation is uncommon, and research aimed at understanding culture as a determinant for implementation is lacking. This study aims to explore cultural practices concerning the handling of patients with unhealthy alcohol use admitted to an ED.

Methods

An ethnographic study was conducted in an ED in the Capital Region of Denmark. The data consists of participant observations of Health Care Professionals (HCPs) and semi-structured interviews with nurses. Data was collected from July 2018 to February 2020. A cultural analysis was performed by using Qualitative Content Analysis as an analytic tool.

Results

150 h of observation and 11 interviews were conducted. Three themes emerged from the analysis: (1) Setting the scene describes how subthemes “flow,” “risky environment,” and “physical spaces and artefacts” are a part of the contextual environment of an ED, and their implications for patients with unhealthy alcohol use, such as placement in certain rooms; (2) The encounter presents how patients’ and HCPs’ encounters unfold in everyday practice. Subtheme “Professional differences” showcases how nurses and doctors address patients’ alcohol habits differently, and how they do not necessarily act on the information provided, due to several factors. These factors are shown in remaining sub-themes “gut-feeling vs. clinical parameters,” “ethical reasoning,” and “from compliance to zero-tolerance”; and (3) Collective repertoires shows how language shapes the perception of patients with unhealthy alcohol use, which may cause stigma and stereotyping. Subthemes are “occupiers” and “alcoholic or party animal?”.

Conclusions

Unhealthy alcohol use in the ED is entangled in complex cultural networks. Patients with severe and easily recognizable unhealthy alcohol use—characterized by an alcohol diagnosis in the electronic medical record, intoxication, or unwanted behavior—shape the general approach and attitude to unhealthy alcohol use. Consequently, from a prevention perspective, this means that patients with less apparent unhealthy alcohol use tend to be overlooked or neglected, which calls for a systematic screening approach.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13722-021-00269-z.

The 12 -year evolution of emergency department alcohol-related admissions in a student city

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the trends in incidence of alcohol-intoxicated patients who present at the emergency department (ED), as well as the characteristics of these patients.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study based on data collected from 2008 until 2019 in two EDs in Leuven, Belgium. As a routine ED procedure, a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test is ordered for all patients suspected of alcohol use as a primary presenting sign. Patients older than 10 years of age with a BAC ≥ 0.1 g/L were included. BAC levels, age, gender and proportion of repeat admissions were analysed.

RESULTS

The absolute number of patients with a positive BAC test increased from 1260 in 2008 to 1908 in 2019 (51.4%). Male-to-female ratio remained stable (2:1). In the University Hospital Leuven , the most represented age group shifted from 20-29 and 40-49 year olds (2008) to 50-59 year olds (2019). The most common age groups in Heilig Hart Leuven were 10-19 year olds and 20-29 year olds, which remained stable over the study period. The readmission rate was 18% within the entire study period with a range of 2 to 46 times.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed an annual increase in alcohol-related admissions. The highest rates of alcohol-related ED visits occurred in the age group 50-59. Patients with a repeat admission accounted for a large number of the total alcohol-related visits, placing a major burden on our healthcare system. It will be a challenge to timely detect patients at risk, regardless of their age, to prevent future ED admissions.

Frequency of Hazardous and Binge Drinking Alcohol Among Hospitalized Cardiovascular Patients

Excessive alcohol use is a risk factor for most cardiac diseases. The prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use among hospitalized cardiac patients is uncertain as is the frequency with which it is addressed. We performed a single center, patient-level anonymous survey among hospitalized cardiac patients eligible for cardiac rehabilitation. Hazardous drinking was defined as an Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) score of 8 or greater. Binge drinking was defined as 5+ drinks for men or 4+ for women on ≥1 occasion within the past 30 days. Unhealthy drinking was defined as either hazardous or binge drinking. Of 300 patients approached, 290 (96.7%) completed the survey. Mean ( ± SD) age was 69 ± 11 years; 70% were male and 31% were cardiac surgical patients. The proportion (95% CI) of hazardous, binge, and unhealthy drinking was 12% (9 to 16), 16% (12 to 20), and 18% (14-23), respectively. Overall, 58% of subjects reported being screened for alcohol use, mostly by nurses (56%). Those with unhealthy drinking reported being counseled more frequently about their alcohol use compared to non-unhealthy drinkers (11% versus 3%, p = 0.03), but the large majority (89%) of unhealthy drinkers reported receiving no advice about their alcohol use while admitted. In conclusion, almost one-fifth of hospitalized cardiac patients reported unhealthy drinking, these patients were only screened about half of the time, and were rarely counseled about their alcohol use.

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.

A Health Technician-delivered Brief Intervention linked to AUDIT for reduction of alcohol use in Chilean primary care: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Because of the shortage of health professionals in Chilean primary care, Health Technicians (HT) are providing Brief Interventions (BI) for risky alcohol consumption. We compared the efficacy of two AUDIT-linked interventions provided by HTs: an informative leaflet and a BI plus leaflet.

METHODS

This is a parallel-group randomized controlled trial with 1:1 randomization. Participants were identified through screening with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) at five primary care centers between March 2016 and July 2017. People older than 18 years at intermediate-risk (AUDIT score 8 to 15, inclusive) were randomized to receive either an HT-delivered BI (n = 174) or an informative leaflet (n = 168). Only data from participants (n = 294) who completed the 6-month assessment were analyzed. The leaflet was delivered without further advice. It contains alcohol consumption limits, a change planner, and strategies to decrease drinking. The BI was a 5-min discussion on the leaflet´s content plus normative feedback, tailored information on alcohol and health, and a change plan. The change in the AUDIT risk category six months after randomization (primary outcome) was compared among groups with a Chi-squared test. Changes in the secondary outcomes, which were scores on the AUDIT and the AUDIT´s consumption items (AUDIT-C), were compared with T-tests. Mixed-effects linear models adjusted for potential confounders. Outcome adjudicators were blinded to group assignment.

RESULTS

At 6-month follow-up, low-risk alcohol consumption was observed in 119 (80%) participants in the BI group, and in 103 (71%) in the leaflet group, with no difference among groups ([Formula: see text] [1, N = 294] = 2.6, p = 0.1; adjusted odds ratio 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34, 1.05). The mean AUDIT score decreased by 5.76 points in the BI group, and by 5.07 in the leaflet group, which represents a 0.86 AUDIT point reduction attributable to the BI (secondary outcome) (T = 2.03, p = 0.043; adjusted mean difference 0.86 CI 0.06, 1.66).

CONCLUSIONS

The AUDIT-linked BI delivered by HTs was not associated with a greater reduction of risky alcohol consumption than an informative leaflet. Delivering a leaflet could be more efficient than a BI when provided by HTs; however, more research on the effectiveness of the leaflet is needed. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02642757 (December 30, 2015) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02642757 .

Evaluating the effectiveness of the smartphone app, Drink Less, compared with the NHS alcohol advice webpage, for the reduction of alcohol consumption among hazardous and harmful adult drinkers in the UK at 6-month follow-up: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Digital interventions are effective for reducing alcohol consumption but evidence is limited regarding smartphone apps. Drink Less is a theory- and evidence-informed app to help people reduce their alcohol consumption that has been refined in terms of its content and design for usability across the sociodemographic spectrum. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of recommending Drink Less at reducing alcohol consumption compared with usual digital care.

DESIGN

Two-arm individually randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Online trial in the United Kingdom (UK).

PARTICIPANTS

Hazardous or harmful drinkers (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test [AUDIT] score ≥8) aged 18+ who want to drink less alcohol (n = 5562). Participants will be recruited from July 2020 to May 2022 using multiple strategies with a focus on remote digital methods.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Participants will be randomised to receive either an email recommending that they use Drink Less (intervention) or view the National Health Service (NHS) webpage on alcohol advice (comparator).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome is change in self-reported weekly alcohol consumption, assessed using the extended AUDIT-Consumption, between baseline and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include change in self-reported weekly alcohol consumption assessed at 1- and 3-month follow-ups, and the proportion of hazardous drinkers; alcohol-related problems and injury; health-related quality of life; and use of health services assessed at 6-month follow-up. Effectiveness will be examined with adjusted regression models, adjusting for baseline alcohol consumption and using an intention-to-treat approach. A mixed-methods process evaluation will assess engagement, acceptability and mechanism of action. Economic evaluations will be conducted using both a short- and longer-term time horizon.

COMMENTS

This study will establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Drink Less app at reducing alcohol consumption among hazardous and harmful adult drinkers and will be the first randomised controlled trial of an alcohol reduction app for the general population in the United Kingdom. This study will inform the decision on whether it is worth investing resources in large-scale implementation.

Effectiveness of Brief Counseling in a Hospital Setting for Smoking Cessation and Risky Alcohol Drinking Reduction: Randomized Clinical Trial Protocol

INTRODUCTION

Chronic diseases are a public health problem, and 80% of them are related to modifiable risk factors such as unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, smoking, and risky alcohol consumption. Although the intervention in smoking and hazardous alcohol drinking has proven to be effective in Primary Care, it is unknown whether it works in the same way in the hospital setting.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of brief counselling in order to modify the stage of change in smokers and at-risk drinkers treated in a high complexity hospital.

METHODS

A Randomised controlled trial to be conducted, in which an evaluation is made of four brief counselling strategies for smoking cessation and risky alcohol consumption compared to usual care, selected according to the patient's stage of change. The primary result will be the proportion of patients in each of the groups (intervention and control) with identified progress in the stage of change. The reduction of consumption will be also be analysed. Protocol registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03521622).

RESULTS

The results will be published in scientific journals, and its application aims to generate behavioural intervention protocols for modifiable risk factors in high complexity hospitals. The trial was presented and approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana and Hospital Universitario de San Ignacio, Bogota, Colombia (Approval 01/2018).

Systematic Review of Clinician-Reported Barriers to Provision of Brief Advice for Alcohol Intake in Hospital Inpatient and Emergency Settings

Hospital inpatient and emergency care settings provide frequent opportunities for clinicians to screen and provide brief interventions to patients who engage in the harmful use of alcohol. However, these services are not always provided, with several reasons given in different studies. We aimed to systematically review clinician-reported barriers in the provision of brief alcohol screening, brief advice, and intervention specific to hospital inpatient and emergency department (ED) settings. A systematic literature review was conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL to identify the barriers perceived by healthcare workers in the provision of alcohol screening and brief intervention. These barriers were then categorized according to the capability, opportunity, and motivation (COM-B) model of behavior change theory. Twenty-five articles were included in this study, which involved questionnaires, surveys, interviews, and conference call discussions. The most commonly cited barriers (i.e., greater than half of the studies) were related to capability (lack of knowledge cited in 60% of studies); opportunity (lack of time and resources, 76 and 52% of studies, respectively); and motivation (personal discomfort in 60% of studies). Twenty-two other barriers were reported but with lower frequency. Clinicians cite a multitude of factors that impede their delivery of alcohol screening and brief interventions in the hospital inpatient and ED settings. These barriers were explored further under the framework of the COM-B model, which allows for intervention design. As such, changes can be made at the policy, managerial, and educational levels to address these barriers and help improve the self-efficacy and knowledge of clinicians who counsel patients on alcohol use.

Impact of a new specialist alcohol and drug brief intervention service model integrated into the emergency department: An interrupted time series analysis

OBJECTIVE

To describe and examine the impact of a new specialist drug and alcohol brief intervention team (DABIT) model integrated into the ED on the identification of individuals at risk of future alcohol and other drug (AOD)-related harm. A cost-outcome analysis was conducted to assess the impact on costs per referral.

METHODS

An interrupted time series analysis examined the changes in number of referrals following the implementation of the DABIT model over 2 years (January 2015-December 2016) within a large 436-bed public hospital. The primary outcome of interest was the number of AOD-related referrals per month identified following ED presentations. The independent variables were: time (measured in months), implementation periods (pre-implementation; a transition period of adjustment during which the new DABIT model of care was developed; post-implementation period with a fully operational DABIT model); and the number of full-time equivalent staff per month to account for the increase in labour productivity. In a second time series analysis, the outcome was cost per referral per month.

RESULTS

After controlling for changes in labour productivity, the number of referrals was significantly higher following the implementation of the DABIT model when compared to those during the pre-implementation and transition periods. Costs were significantly lower following DABIT implementation resulting in $1096 net cost savings per referral.

CONCLUSIONS

Integration of a specialist brief intervention AOD model to support ED care may increase uptake of specialist AOD treatment and could be beneficial from an economic efficiency viewpoint.

Preoperative behavioural intervention to reduce drinking before elective orthopaedic surgery: the PRE-OP BIRDS feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Heavy alcohol consumption is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications and extended hospital stay. Alcohol consumption therefore represents a modifiable risk factor for surgical outcomes. Brief behavioural interventions have been shown to be effective in reducing alcohol consumption among increased risk and risky drinkers in other health-care settings and may offer a method of addressing preoperative alcohol consumption.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the feasibility of introducing a screening process to assess adult preoperative drinking levels and to deliver a brief behavioural intervention adapted for the target population group. To conduct a two-arm (brief behavioural intervention plus standard preoperative care vs. standard preoperative care alone), multicentre, pilot randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of proceeding to a definitive trial. To conduct focus groups and a national web-based survey to establish current treatment as usual for alcohol screening and intervention in preoperative assessment.

DESIGN

A single-centre, qualitative, feasibility study was followed by a multicentre, two-arm (brief behavioural intervention vs. treatment as usual), individually randomised controlled pilot trial with an embedded qualitative process evaluation. Focus groups and a quantitative survey were employed to characterise treatment as usual in preoperative assessment.

SETTING

The feasibility study took place at a secondary care hospital in the north-east of England. The pilot trial was conducted at three large secondary care centres in the north-east of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Nine health-care professionals and 15 patients (mean age 70.5 years, 86.7% male) participated in the feasibility study. Eleven health-care professionals and 68 patients (mean age 66.2 years, 80.9% male) participated in the pilot randomised trial. An additional 19 health-care professionals were recruited to one of three focus groups, while 62 completed an electronic survey to characterise treatment as usual.

INTERVENTIONS

The brief behavioural intervention comprised two sessions. The first session, delivered face to face in the preoperative assessment clinic, involved 5 minutes of structured brief advice followed by 15-20 minutes of behaviour change counselling, including goal-setting, problem-solving and identifying sources of social support. The second session, an optional booster, took place approximately 1 week before surgery and offered the opportunity to assess progress and boost self-efficacy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility was assessed using rates of eligibility, recruitment and retention. The progression criteria for a definitive trial were recruitment of ≥ 40% of eligible patients and retention of ≥ 70% at 6-month follow-up. Acceptability was assessed using themes identified in qualitative data.

RESULTS

The initial recruitment of eligible patients was low but improved with the optimisation of recruitment processes. The recruitment of eligible participants to the pilot trial (34%) fell short of the progression criteria but was mitigated by very high retention (96%) at the 6-month follow-up. Multimethod analyses identified the methods as acceptable to the patients and professionals involved and offers recommendations of ways to further improve recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence supports the feasibility of a definitive trial to assess the effectiveness of brief behavioural intervention in reducing preoperative alcohol consumption and for secondary outcomes of surgical complications if recommendations for further improvements are adopted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36257982.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 12. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.

The Cochrane 2018 Review on Brief Interventions in Primary Care for Hazardous and Harmful Alcohol Consumption: A Distillation for Clinicians and Policy Makers

AIMS

An updated Cochrane systematic review assessed effectiveness of screening and brief intervention to reduce hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption in general practice or emergency care settings. This paper summarises the implications of the review for clinicians.

METHODS

Cochrane methods were followed. Reporting accords with PRISMA guidance. We searched multiple resources to September 2017, seeking randomised controlled trials 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. 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 min. Our primary outcome was alcohol consumption, measured as or convertible to grams per week. We conducted meta-analyses to assess change in consumption, and subgroup analyses to explore the impact of participant and intervention characteristics.

RESULTS

We included 69 studies, of which 42 were added for this update. Most studies (88%) compared brief intervention to control. The primary meta-analysis included 34 studies and provided moderate-quality evidence that brief intervention reduced consumption compared to control after one year (mean difference -20 g/wk, 95% confidence interval -28 to -12). Subgroup analysis showed a similar effect for men and women.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief interventions can reduce harmful and hazardous alcohol consumption in men and women. Short, advice-based interventions may be as effective as extended, counselling-based interventions for patients with harmful levels of alcohol use who are presenting for the first time in a primary care setting.

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.

Identifying alcohol problems among suicide attempters visiting the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Many suicide attempters brought to our emergency department (ED) have been found to have alcohol problems, and this should be taken serious consideration because alcohol use disorder is a risk factor for suicide reattempt. In this study, we aimed to estimate the effectiveness of alcohol-related biochemical markers and Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C) in suicide attempters who visited our ED based on the gold standard for clinical diagnosis used by psychiatrists for alcohol use disorder. Moreover, we aimed to search for a significant standard when clinicians make correct predictions about alcohol use disorder using these markers.

METHODS

Among the subjects who visited ED following a suicide attempt, a total of 203 subjects were selected. Following a psychiatric interview, the subjects who met the criteria for alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence according to DSM-IV-TR in the past year were defined as the "alcohol use disorder" group. Although some subjects did not meet these criteria, men with a weekly alcohol intake of ≥14 drinks and women with a weekly alcohol intake of ≥7 drinks were classified as the "risky drinking" group. AUDIT-C was used as a self-report; further, aspartate aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT), and carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) were assayed using standard methods, and GGT-CDT was calculated using this formula: 0.8 × ln(GGT) + 1.3 × ln(%CDT).

RESULTS

In total, 88 subjects met the criteria for alcohol use disorder and 115 were included in the reference group. In the screening for alcohol use disorder, the AUC of AUDIT-C was 0.89 for men and 0.87 for women. In the screening for risky drinking, the AUC of AUDIT-C was 0.99 for men and 0.93 for women. Compared with other biochemical markers, AUDIT-C showed the highest AUC value for screening for both alcohol use disorder and risky drinking, with the trend being more prominent in men.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the biochemical markers, AUDIT-C yielded the highest sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in diagnosing alcohol use disorder among suicide attempters in ED. Comparison of results revealed that the use of AUDIT-C with biochemical markers or its use alone can help screen for alcohol use disorder or risky drinking in clinical settings.

The prevalence of wholly attributable alcohol conditions in the United Kingdom hospital system: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The prevalence of alcohol-related conditions is often reported as higher in hospital in-patients compared with the general population. However, formal prevalence estimates are commonly derived from small studies which report highly varied results. This systematic review and meta-analysis, within the UK hospital system, aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of the 26 ICD-10 conditions that are wholly attributable to alcohol in in-patient settings.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and CENTRAL from database inception until 1 May 2018. We included studies of any design that reported the prevalence of one of 26 wholly attributable alcohol conditions defined by the ICD-10. Studies were required to be conducted in one or more of the constituent nations of the United Kingdom and in an in-patient setting (general wards, intensive care units, accident and emergency departments or mental health in-patient units). Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis, and meta-regression tested study and patient factors contributing to variation. Quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

RESULTS

A total of 124 studies were included, reporting on a total of 1 657 614 patients. The majority of studies reported on harmful use of alcohol and alcohol dependence, for which the pooled prevalence was 19.76% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 15.61-24.26%] and 10.25% (95% CI = 7.06-13.96%), respectively. Mean patient age and type of in-patient setting were identified as the main sources of variation in prevalence estimates, but not date of data collection. Both estimates were deemed very low quality according to GRADE.

CONCLUSIONS

An estimated one in five patients in the UK hospital system use alcohol harmfully, and one in 10 are alcohol-dependent.

Brief interventions to de-escalate disturbances in emergency departments

This study aimed to systematically review evidence to assess the efficacy of non-pharmacological brief interventions in the emergency department to reduce the incidence, severity and impact of acute behavioural disturbances. The literature search was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A total of 18 articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria and read in full. Following a full read and a consensus discussion, it was subsequently considered the studies chosen had not met the inclusion criteria. Research into the use of non-pharmacological brief interventions in the management of acute behavioural disturbance in the emergency department is warranted given the absence of evidence found by this systematic review.

Alcohol care teams: where are we now?

Alcohol consumption affects the risks of approximately 230 three-digit disease and injury codes in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10th Revision. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals comprise 17 challenging goals with 169 targets, which the 193 Member States aim to achieve by 2030. Action to reduce the harmful use of alcohol, especially addressing global health inequalities, will contribute to achieving many of the health-related goals and targets. Alcohol care teams, mainly developed in acute UK hospitals, reduce acute hospital admissions, readmissions and mortality, improve the quality and efficiency of alcohol care, and have 11 key evidence-based, cost-effective and aspirational components. A clinician-led, multidisciplinary team, with integrated alcohol treatment pathways across primary, secondary and community care, coordinated alcohol policies for emergency departments and acute medical units, a 7-day alcohol specialist nurse service, addiction and liaison psychiatry services, an alcohol assertive outreach team, and consultant hepatologists and gastroenterologists with liver disease expertise facilitate collaborative, multidisciplinary, person-centred care. Quality metrics, national indicators, audit, workforce planning, training and accreditation support research and education of the public and healthcare professionals. Hospitals should collaborate with local authorities, public health, clinical commissioning groups, patients and key stakeholders to develop and disseminate cost-effective prevention and treatment strategies. Globally, alcohol care teams can support the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and should be advocated and implemented through the WHO global alcohol strategy. This requires collaborative care planning by key stakeholders, a skilled workforce, targeted financial resources and dedicated political commitment.

Evaluating possible intended and unintended consequences of the implementation of alcohol minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland: a natural experiment protocol

INTRODUCTION

Scotland is the first country to carry out a national implementation of minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol. MUP aims to reduce alcohol-related harms, which are high in Scotland compared with Western Europe, and to improve health equalities. MUP is a minimum retail price per unit of alcohol. That approach targets high-risk alcohol users. This work is key to a wider evaluation that will determine whether MUP continues. There are three study components.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Component 1 sampled an estimated 2800 interviewees at a baseline and each of two follow-ups from four Emergency Departments in Scotland and Northern England. Research nurses administered a standardised survey to assess alcohol consumption and the proportion of attendances that were alcohol-related.Component 2 covered six Sexual Health Clinics with similar timings and country allocation. A self-completion survey gathered information on potential unintended effects of MUP on alcohol source and drug use.Using a natural experiment design and repeated cross-sectional audit, difference between Scotland (intervention) and North England (control) will be tested for outcomes using regression adjusting for differences at baseline. Differential impacts by age, gender and socioeconomic position will be investigated.Component 3 used focus groups with young people and heavy drinkers and interviews with stakeholders before and after MUP implementation. The focus groups will allow exploration of attitudes, experiences and behaviours and the potential mechanisms by which impacts arise. The interviews will help characterise the implementation process.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Study components 1 and 2 have been ethically approved by the NHS, and component 3 by the University of Stirling. Dissemination plans include peer-reviewed journal articles, presentations, policy maker briefings and, in view of high public interest and the high political profile of this flagship policy, communication with the public via media engagement and plain language summaries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN16039407; Pre-results.

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.

Burden of Alcohol Disorders on Emergency Department Attendances and Hospital Admissions in England

AIMS

This study aims to estimate the prevalence and burden of alcohol disorders on Emergency Department (ED) and hospital inpatients in England through the exploratory analysis of NHS data.

METHODS

ED attendances and admission data were linked using hospital episode statistics. Diagnoses were preserved at a patient level to identify individuals who had an alcohol attributable diagnosis. Four groups were identified; a) individuals with no alcohol disorder (NAD), b) acute alcohol disorder (AAD), c) chronic alcohol disorder (CAD) and d) those with any alcohol disorder (AD) (b) and c) combined). Associations between ED diagnosis and alcohol disorders were examined using logistic regression adjusted for hospital provider, age and sex. Non-parametric tests were employed examining ED and hospital service use. Cost differences by group was explored using a propensity scored match sample.

RESULTS

Of the 1.2million subjects 6.7% were identified as having one or more AD accounting for 11.7% of ED attendances, 9.2% of hospital admissions and 7.2% total bed days. Bootstrapped derived means identified that hospital service use varied significantly between AAD and CAD. Whilst AAD accounted for greater attendances than NAD (2.78; 95% CI 2.680-2.879) those with CAD accounted for even greater attendances (4.33; 95% CI. 4.136-4.515), admissions (2.56; 95% CI. 2.502-2.625) and total bed days (15.14; 95% CI. 14.716-15.559).

CONCLUSIONS

AD place a disproportionate impact on hospital services with CAD exerting the greatest burden on hospital utilization. The complexity and burden of CAD suggests this group should be a priority for intervention.

Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention in Police Custody Suites: Pilot Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial (AcCePT)

Aims

There is a clear association between alcohol use and offending behaviour and significant police time is spent on alcohol-related incidents. This study aimed to test the feasibility of a trial of screening and brief intervention in police custody suites to reduce heavy drinking and re-offending behaviour.

Short summary

We achieved target recruitment and high brief intervention delivery if this occurred immediately after screening. Low rates of return for counselling and retention at follow-up were challenges for a definitive trial. Conversely, high consent rates for access to police data suggested at least some outcomes could be measured remotely.

Methods

A three-armed pilot Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial with an embedded qualitative interview-based process evaluation to explore acceptability issues in six police custody suites (north east and south west of the UK). Interventions included: 1. Screening only (Controls), 2. 10 min Brief Advice 3. Brief Advice plus 20 min of brief Counselling.

Results

Of 3330 arrestees approached: 2228 were eligible for screening (67%) and 720 consented (32%); 386 (54%) scored 8+ on AUDIT; and 205 (53%) were enroled (79 controls, 65 brief advice and 61 brief counselling). Follow-up rates at 6 and 12 months were 29% and 26%, respectively. However, routinely collected re-offending data were obtained for 193 (94%) participants. Indices of deprivation data were calculated for 184 (90%) participants; 37.6% of these resided in the 20% most deprived areas of UK. Qualitative data showed that all arrestees reported awareness that participation was voluntary, that the trial was separate from police work, and the majority said trial procedures were acceptable.

Conclusion

Despite hitting target recruitment and same-day brief intervention delivery, a future trial of alcohol screening and brief intervention in a police custody setting would only be feasible if routinely collected re-offending and health data were used for outcome measurement.

Trial registration

ISRCTN number: 89291046.

Investigating the effect of Alcohol Brief Interventions within accident and emergency departments using a data informatics methodology

BACKGROUND

Alcohol Brief Interventions (ABI) have been implemented throughout Scotland since 2008 and aim to reduce hazardous drinking through a Scottish Government funded initiative delivered in a range of settings, including Accident and Emergency (A and E) departments.

PURPOSE

To study the extent to which Alcohol Brief Interventions (ABI) are associated with later health service use.

METHOD

An opportunistic informatics approach was applied. A unique patient identifier was used to link patient data with core datasets spanning two years previous and two years post ABI. Variables included inpatient attendance, outpatient attendance, psychiatric admissions, and A and E attendance and prescribing. Patients (N = 1704) who presented at A and E departments who reported an average alcohol consumption of more than 8 units daily received the ABI. Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) was used to assess patients for hazardous alcohol consumption. Multilevel linear modelling was employed to predict post-intervention utilisation using pre-ABI variables and controlling for person characteristics and venue.

RESULTS

Significant decrease in A and E usage was found at one and two years following the ABI intervention. Previous health service use was predictive of later service use. A single question (Item 4) on the FAST was predictive of A and E attendance at one and two years.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation and methodology used provide support for the delivery of the ABI. However, it cannot be ascertained whether this is due to the ABI or simply is a result of making contact with a specialist in the addiction field.

Promoting Alcohol Reduction in Non-Treatment Seeking parents (PAReNTS): a protocol for a pilot feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of alcohol screening and brief interventions to reduce parental alcohol use disorders in vulnerable families

Background

Research estimates that 30% of children under the age of 16 years in the UK live with at least one parent with an alcohol use disorder (AUD). Parental AUDs are associated with adverse childhood experiences and poorer outcomes for children. The PAReNTS (Promoting Alcohol Reduction in Non-Treatment Seeking parents) trial aims to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial of brief alcohol interventions to reduce parental alcohol misuse.

Methods

The cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted within early help family support and children’s social care services in three local authorities in the North East of England: Newcastle, Durham and North Tyneside. All eligible parents the caseloads of participating practitioners will be screened for an AUD using the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test – Consumption (AUDIT-C) screening tool by the social care practitioners within routine appointments. All parents who score 5 or more on the AUDIT-C will be invited to participate in the trial. Consenting participants will complete a baseline questionnaire before receiving one of three randomised interventions: (i) healthy lifestyle leaflet (control intervention); (ii) a brief alcohol advice intervention delivered by the social care practitioner plus healthy lifestyle leaflet; (iii) a brief alcohol advice intervention delivered by the social care practitioner, healthy lifestyle leaflet plus a 40-min behaviour change intervention with an optional review session delivered by the local alcohol service. Follow-up data will be collected 6 and 12 months post recruitment. A linked qualitative study will explore participating parent and practitioner views on the acceptability of trial processes and interventions.

Discussion

The PAReNTS trial will provide a robust estimate of recruitment, retention and consent rates in order to inform the design of a future definitive study examining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alcohol screening and brief interventions to reduce parental AUDs within vulnerable families.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN60291091; protocol version 2; 17.10.2016

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-018-0305-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

DIAMOND (DIgital Alcohol Management ON Demand): a feasibility RCT and embedded process evaluation of a digital health intervention to reduce hazardous and harmful alcohol use recruiting in hospital emergency departments and online

BACKGROUND

The harmful use of alcohol is a causal factor in more than 200 disease and injury conditions and leads to over 3 million deaths every year worldwide. Relatively few problem alcohol users access treatment due to stigma and lack of services. Alcohol-specific digital health interventions (DHI) may help them, but trial data comparing DHI with face-to-face treatment are lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a feasibility RCT of an alcohol DHI, testing recruitment, online data-collection and randomisation processes, with an embedded process evaluation. Recruitment ran from October 2015 for 12 months. Participants were adults, drinking at hazardous and harmful levels, recruited from hospital emergency departments (ED) in London or recruited online. Participants were randomised to HeLP-Alcohol, a six module DHI with weekly reminder prompts (phone, email or text message), or to face-to-face treatment as usual (TAU). Participants were invited to take part in qualitative interviews after the trial.

RESULTS

The trial website was accessed 1074 times: 420 people completed online eligibility questionnaires; 350 did not meet eligibility criteria, 51 declined to participate, and 19 were recruited and randomised. Follow-up data were collected from three participants (retention 3/19), and four agreed to be interviewed for the process evaluation. The main themes of the interviews were:Participants were not at equipoise. They wanted to try the website and were disappointed to be randomised to face-to-face, so they were less engaged and dropped out.Other reasons for drop out included not accepting that they had a drink problem; problem drinking interfering with their ability to take part in a trial or forgetting appointments; having a busy life and being randomised to TAU made it difficult to attend appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

This feasibility RCT aimed to test recruitment, randomisation, retention, and data collection methods, but recruited only 19 participants. This illustrates the importance of undertaking feasibility studies prior to fully powered RCTs. From the qualitative interviews we found that potential recruits were not at equipoise for recruitment. An alternative methodology, for example a preference RCT recruiting from multiple locations, needs to be explored in future trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN31789096.

Text message intervention to reduce frequency of binge drinking among disadvantaged men: the TRAM RCT

Background

Socially disadvantaged men are more likely to binge drink frequently and to experience high levels of alcohol-related harm.

Objectives

To test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a text message intervention in reducing the frequency of binge drinking among disadvantaged men.

Study design

A four-centre, parallel-group, pragmatic, individually randomised controlled trial was conducted. Randomisation was carried out using a secure remote web-based system. It was stratified by participating centre and recruitment method and restricted using block sizes of randomly varying lengths.

Setting

The study was conducted in the community. Members of the public helped to develop the study methods.

Participants

Participants were men aged 25–44 years who had ≥ 2 episodes of binge drinking (> 8 units of alcohol in a single session) in the preceding 28 days. Men were recruited from areas of high deprivation.

Interventions

An empirically and theoretically based text message intervention was delivered by 112 interactive text messages over a 12-week period. The control group received an attentional control comprising 89 text messages on general health.

Primary outcome measure

The primary outcome measure was the proportion of men consuming > 8 units of alcohol on ≥ 3 occasions (in the previous 28 days) at 12 months post intervention.

Results

The recruitment target of 798 was exceeded and 825 men were randomised. Retention was high and similar in the intervention (84.9%) and control (86.5%) groups. Most men in the intervention group engaged enthusiastically with the text messages: almost all (92%) replied to text messages and over two-thirds (67%) replied more than 10 times. The intervention was estimated to have had a modest, statistically non-significant effect on the primary outcome at the 12-month follow-up [odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.08]. This corresponds to a net reduction of 5.7% in regular binge drinking. Five secondary outcomes showed small non-significant and inconsistent effects on alcohol consumption, with one suggesting a positive effect and four suggesting an adverse effect. Both the short- and the long-term cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) analysis suggested that the brief intervention was dominated by a ‘do-nothing’ option. The intervention’s impacts on patterns of alcohol consumption, QALYs and downstream costs were inconsistent and uncertain.

Limitations

The study used an active control that, combined with the recruitment procedures and baseline assessments, could have biased the treatment effect towards the null. The measurement of alcohol consumption relied on self-reported drinking.

Conclusions

The trial has demonstrated that it is possible to recruit and retain large numbers of socially disadvantaged men in a research study. The text messages delivered a complex theoretically and empirically based intervention that fostered enthusiastic engagement with the key components of the behaviour change sequence. The intervention produced a modest, statistically non-significant effect on the primary outcome, with wide CIs. Further research is needed to reduce uncertainty about the treatment effect. The methods developed for this study provide a platform for the design and testing of interventions to reduce inequalities in health.

Future work

A future trial could reduce the uncertainty around the treatment effect of the intervention.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN07695192.

Funding

This study 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. 6, No. 6. See NIHR Journals Library website for further information.

Alcohol-related presentations to emergency departments in Ireland: a descriptive prevalence study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of alcohol-related presentations in all 29 emergency departments (EDs) in Ireland and compare with non-alcohol-related presentations in order to identify opportunities for improvements in the quality of patient care and related data collection.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Descriptive prevalence study reviewing all records in the same four 6-hour periods in every 24-hour ED in the country.

PARTICIPANTS

3194 persons who attended EDs over four specified 6-hour periods.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The prevalence of alcohol-related presentations, comparison with non-alcohol-related presentations and the categorisation of these presentations according to WHO International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision codes.

RESULTS

The total number of presentations was 3194 in the four 6-hour periods, of whom 189 (5.9%) were alcohol related, varying from 29.0% in the early hours of Sunday morning to 1.2% on Monday morning (p>0.0001). The alcohol-related presentations were more likely to be men, attend on early hours of Sunday morning, arrive by ambulance, leave before being seen by a doctor or leave against medical advice; and they were less likely to be admitted to hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol-related presentations are a significant burden on EDs and ambulance services, especially in the early hours of Sunday mornings. Addressing the alcohol-related burden on EDs requires improvements in data collection and information systems, the development of appropriate interventions and related referral services and better preventive actions for alcohol-related harm.

Effectiveness of a Specialized Brief Intervention for At-risk Drinkers in an Emergency Department: Short-term Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs have been developed, evaluated, and shown to be effective, particularly in primary care and general practice. Nevertheless, effectiveness of SBIRT in emergency departments (EDs) has not been clearly established.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of an SBIRT program conducted by highly specialized professionals in the ED of a tertiary hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial to study the feasibility and efficacy of an SBIRT program conducted by alcohol specialists for at-risk drinkers presenting to the ED, measured with the three-item version of the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT-C). Patients were randomized to two groups, with the control group receiving two leaflets-one regarding alcohol use and the other giving information about the study protocol. The intervention group received the same leaflets as well as a brief motivational intervention on alcohol use and, where appropriate, a referral to specialized treatment. The primary outcomes were the proportion of at-risk alcohol use measured by AUDIT-C scale and the proportion of patients attending specialized treatment at 1.5 months.

RESULTS

Of 3,027 patients presenting to the ED, 2,044 (67%) were potentially eligible to participate, 247 (12%) screened positive for at-risk drinking, and 200 agreed to participate. Seventy-two percent of the participating sample were men, and the mean (±SD) age was 43 (±16.7) years. Follow-up rates were 76.5%. At 1.5 months, the intervention group showed greater reductions in alcohol consumption and fewer patients continuing with at-risk alcohol use (27.8% vs. 48.1%; p = 0.01). The SBIRT program also increased the probability of attending specialized treatment, compared to the control condition (23% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.0119) CONCLUSION: The SBIRT program in the ED was found to be feasible and effective in identifying at-risk drinkers, reducing at-risk alcohol use, and increasing treatment for alcohol problems.

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.

Using Bayes factors to evaluate evidence for no effect: examples from the SIPS project

AIMS

To illustrate how Bayes factors are important for determining the effectiveness of interventions.

METHOD

We consider a case where inappropriate conclusions were drawn publicly based on significance testing, namely the SIPS project (Screening and Intervention Programme for Sensible drinking), a pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial in each of two health-care settings and in the criminal justice system. We show how Bayes factors can disambiguate the non-significant findings from the SIPS project and thus determine whether the findings represent evidence of absence or absence of evidence. We show how to model the sort of effects that could be expected, and how to check the robustness of the Bayes factors.

RESULTS

The findings from the three SIPS trials taken individually are largely uninformative but, when data from these trials are combined, there is moderate evidence for a null hypothesis (H0) and thus for a lack of effect of brief intervention compared with simple clinical feedback and an alcohol information leaflet (B = 0.24, P = 0.43).

CONCLUSION

Scientists who find non-significant results should suspend judgement-unless they calculate a Bayes factor to indicate either that there is evidence for a null hypothesis (H0) over a (well-justified) alternative hypothesis (H1), or that more data are needed.

Accesses for alcohol intoxication to the emergency department and the risk of re-hospitalization: An observational retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorders (AUD) are a frequent cause of admission to emergency departments (EDs) for acute alcohol intoxication (AAI). Patients with AUD present a higher risk of readmission to EDs for AAI than the general population, however, the distinction between sporadic AAI and AAI in the context of AUD in the ED setting is difficult.

AIMS

To analyze the epidemiological characteristics of patients admitted to EDs because of AAI and to identify factors associated with repeated admissions in order to develop a risk stratification system for patients with AUD based on objective data that can be easily applied in an ED setting.

METHODS

An observational retrospective study was performed. All patients with diagnosis of AAI at admission in 2014 were enrolled.

RESULTS

Five hundred and sixty-five patients were enrolled, of which 92 (16%) were admitted more than once to the ED. At multivariate analysis, factors associated with readmission were past episodes of alcohol abuse, social discomfort, previous traumas and psychiatric disorders. Basing on this parameter, a risk-score for re-hospitalization was developed. This score has a high predictive power for the risk of readmission to the ED (AROC 0.837, 95%CI 0.808-0.866), moreover, the cumulative probability of readmission within one year, increased in parallel with score value, being highest in patients presenting 3 or more risk factors.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that several risk factors stratify the risk of re-hospitalization in patients admitted to EDs for AAI, allowing the identification of those presenting more severe conditions and who would likely benefit from multidisciplinary intervention.

A feasible model for early intervention for high-risk substance use in the emergency department setting

Objective In response to escalating alcohol and other drug (AOD)-related emergency department (ED) presentations, a tertiary Melbourne hospital embedded experienced AOD clinical nurse consultants in the ED on weekends to trial a model for screening, assessment and brief intervention (BI). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the relative contributions of AOD to ED presentations and to pilot a BI model. Methods Using a customised AOD screening tool and a framework for proactive case finding, screened participants were offered a comprehensive AOD assessment and BI in the ED. Immediate effects of the intervention were evaluated via the engagement of eligible individuals and a self-administered 'intention to change' survey. Results Over the 32-month pilot, 1100 patients completed a comprehensive AOD assessment, and 95% of these patients received a BI. The most commonly misused substances were, in order, alcohol, tobacco, amphetamine-type stimulants, gamma-hydroxybutyrate and cannabis. Thirty-two per cent of patients were found to be at risk of dependence from alcohol and 25% were found to be at risk of dependence from other substances. Forty per cent of the people assessed reported no previous AOD support or intervention. On leaving the ED, 78% of participants reported an intention to contact community support services and 65% stated they would change the way they used AOD in the future. Conclusion This study of a pilot program quantifies the relative contribution of AOD to ED presentations and demonstrates that hospital EDs can implement a feasible, proactive BI model with high participation rates for people presenting with AOD-related health consequences. What is known about the topic? Clinician-led BI for high-risk consumption of alcohol has been demonstrated to be effective in primary care and ED settings. However, hospital EDs are increasingly receiving people with high-risk AOD-related harms. The relative contribution of other drugs in relation to ED presentations has not been widely documented. In addition, the optimal model and effects of AOD screening and BI programs in the Australian ED setting are unknown. What does this paper add? This paper describes a 'real-life' pilot project embedding AOD-specific staff in a metropolitan Melbourne ED at peak times to screen and provide BI to patients presenting with AOD-related risk and/or harms. The study quantifies the relative contribution of other drugs in addition to alcohol to ED presentations and reports on this model's much higher levels of patient engagement in receiving BI than has been reported previously. What are the implications for practitioners? This study demonstrates the relative contribution of drugs, in addition to alcohol, to ED presentations at peak weekend times. Although BI has been well proven, the pilot project evaluated herein has demonstrated that by embedding AOD-specific staff in the ED, much higher rates of patient engagement, screening and BI can be achieved.