An International, Multidisciplinary Consensus Set of Patient-Centered Outcome Measures for Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders

Background: In 1990, the United States' Institute of Medicine promoted the principles of outcomes monitoring in the alcohol and other drugs treatment field to improve the evidence synthesis and quality of research. While various national outcome measures have been developed and employed, no global consensus on standard measurement has been agreed for addiction. It is thus timely to build an international consensus. Convened by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM), an international, multi-disciplinary working group reviewed the existing literature and reached consensus for a globally applicable minimum set of outcome measures for people who seek treatment for addiction. Methods: To this end, 26 addiction experts from 11 countries and 5 continents, including people with lived experience (n = 5; 19%), convened over 16 months (December 2018-March 2020) to develop recommendations for a minimum set of outcome measures. A structured, consensus-building, modified Delphi process was employed. Evidence-based proposals for the minimum set of measures were generated and discussed across eight videoconferences and in a subsequent structured online consultation. The resulting set was reviewed by 123 professionals and 34 people with lived experience internationally. Results: The final consensus-based recommendation includes alcohol, substance, and tobacco use disorders, as well as gambling and gaming disorders in people aged 12 years and older. Recommended outcome domains are frequency and quantity of addictive disorders, symptom burden, health-related quality of life, global functioning, psychosocial functioning, and overall physical and mental health and wellbeing. Standard case-mix (moderator) variables and measurement time points are also recommended. Conclusions: Use of consistent and meaningful outcome measurement facilitates carer-patient relations, shared decision-making, service improvement, benchmarking, and evidence synthesis for the evaluation of addiction treatment services and the dissemination of best practices. The consensus set of recommended outcomes is freely available for adoption in healthcare settings globally.

The selection of statistical models for reporting count outcomes and intervention effects in brief alcohol intervention trials: A review and recommendations

Understanding the efficacy and relative effectiveness of a brief alcohol intervention (BAI) relies on obtaining a credible intervention effect estimate. Outcomes in BAI trials are often count variables, such as the number of drinks consumed, which may be overdispersed (i.e., greater variability than expected based on a given model) and zero-inflated (i.e., greater probability of zeros than expected based on a given model). Ignoring such distribution characteristics can lead to biased estimates and invalid statistical conclusions. In this critical review, we identified and reviewed 64 articles that reported count outcomes from a systematic review of BAI trials for adolescents and young adults from 2013 to 2018. Given many statistical models to choose from when analyzing count outcomes, we reviewed the models used and reporting practices in the BAI trial literature. A majority (61.3%) of analyses with count outcomes used linear models despite violations of normality assumptions; 75.6% of outcome variables demonstrated clear overdispersion. We provide an overview of available count models (Poisson, negative binomial, zero-inflated or hurdle, and marginalized zero-inflated Poisson regression) and formulate practical guidelines for reporting outcomes of BAIs. We provide a visual step-by-step decision guide for selecting appropriate statistical models and reporting results for count outcomes. We list accessible resources to help researchers select an appropriate model with which to analyze their data. Recent advances in count distribution-based models hold promise for evaluating count outcomes to gauge the efficacy and effectiveness of BAIs and identify critical covariates in alcohol epidemiologic research. We recommend that researchers report the distributional properties of count outcomes, such as the proportion of zero counts, and select an appropriate statistical analysis for count outcomes using the provided decision tree. By following these recommendations, future research may yield more accurate, transparent, and reproducible results.

The effect of question order on outcomes in the orbital core outcome set for alcohol brief interventions among online help-seekers (QOBCOS): Findings from a randomised factorial trial

Objective

A core outcome set (COS) has been developed in alcohol brief intervention (ABI) research through international consensus. This study aimed to estimate order effects among questions in the COS.

Methods

Individuals aged 18 or older who searched online for alcohol-related help were invited to complete the COS. The order of questions was randomised following a factorial design. Primary outcomes were order effects among the COS items and patterns of attrition.

Results

Between 21/10/2020 and 26/11/2020, we randomised 7334 participants, of which 5256 responded to at least one question and were available for analyses. Current non-drinkers were excluded. We found evidence of higher self-reported average consumption and odds of harmful and hazardous drinking was found among those who first answered questions on recent consumption and impact of alcohol use. Lower self-reported recent consumption was found among those first asked about average consumption. Quality of life (QoL) was reported lower among those who first responded to when questions on impact of alcohol use were asked first, which in turn was lower among those who first answered question on when average consumption and QoL were asked first. Attrition was lowest when average consumption was asked first, and highest when QoL or impact of alcohol use was asked first. Median completion time for the COS was 4.3 min.

Conclusions

Question order affects outcomes and attrition. If the aim is to minimize attrition, consumption measures should be asked before QoL and impact of alcohol use; however, this order impacts self-reported alcohol consumption and so researchers should be guided by study priorities. At a minimum, all participants should be asked the same questions in the same order.

Trial registration

The trial was prospectively registered (ISRCTN17954645).

Practitioner and digitally delivered interventions for reducing hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption in people not seeking alcohol treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of practitioner versus digitally delivered interventions for reducing hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis comprising comprehensive search for randomised controlled trials, robust screening and selection methods and appraisal with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Network meta-analyses were conducted in Stata using random effects, frequentist models. The confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) tool was used to assess confidence in effect sizes.

SETTING

Online or community or health settings where the intervention was immediately accessible without referral.

PARTICIPANTS

Non treatment-seeking hazardous or harmful drinkers.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome was mean difference in alcohol consumption (g/wk); secondary outcome was number of single high intensity drinking episodes. Baseline consumption was analysed as a covariate.

FINDINGS

Of 201 included trials (94 753 participants), 152 reported a consumption outcome that could be converted to grams/week; 104 reported number of single high intensity drinking episodes. At 1 and 6 months, practitioner delivered interventions reduced consumption more than digitally delivered interventions (1 month: -23 g/wk (95% CI, -43 to -2); 6 months: -14 g/wk [95% CI, -25 to -3]). At 12 months there was no evidence of difference between practitioner and digitally delivered interventions (-6 g/wk [95% CI, -24 to 12]). There was no evidence of a difference in single high intensity drinking episodes between practitioner and digitally delivered interventions at any time point. Effect sizes were small, but could impact across a population with relatively high prevalence of hazardous and harmful drinking. Heterogeneity was a concern. Some inconsistency was indicated at 1 and 6 months, but little evidence was apparent at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Practitioner delivered interventions for reducing hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption are more effective than digitally delivered interventions up to 6 months; at 12 months there is no evidence of a difference.

Digital multiple health behaviour change intervention targeting online help seekers: protocol for the COACH randomised factorial trial

INTRODUCTION

Unhealthy lifestyle behaviours continue to be highly prevalent, including alcohol consumption, unhealthy diets, insufficient physical activity and smoking. There is a lack of effective interventions which have a large enough reach into the community to improve public health. Additionally, the common co-occurrence of multiple unhealthy behaviours demands investigation of efforts which address more than single behaviours.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The effects of six components of a novel digital multiple health behaviour change intervention on alcohol consumption, diet, physical activity and smoking (coprimary outcomes) will be estimated in a factorial randomised trial. The components are designed to facilitate behaviour change, for example, through goal setting or increasing motivation, and are either present or absent depending on allocation (ie, six factors with two levels each). The study population will be those seeking help online, recruited through search engines, social media and lifestyle-related websites. Included will be those who are at least 18 years of age and have at least one unhealthy behaviour. An adaptive design will be used to periodically make decisions to continue or stop recruitment, with simulations suggesting a final sample size between 1500 and 2500 participants. Multilevel regression models will be used to analyse behavioural outcomes collected at 2 months and 4 months postrandomisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority on 2021-08-11 (Dnr 2021-02855). Since participation is likely motivated by gaining access to novel support, the main concern is demotivation and opportunity cost if the intervention is found to only exert small effects. Recruitment began on 19 October 2021, with an anticipated recruitment period of 12 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN16420548.

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.

Interventions to promote physical distancing behaviour during infectious disease pandemics or epidemics: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Physical distancing, defined as keeping 1-2m apart when co-located, can prevent cases of droplet or aerosol transmitted infectious diseases such as SARS-CoV2. During the COVID-19 pandemic, distancing was a recommendation or a requirement in many countries. This systematic review aimed to determine which interventions and behavior change techniques (BCTs) are effective in promoting adherence to distancing and through which potential mechanisms of action (MOAs).

METHODS

Six databases were searched. The review included studies that were (a) conducted on humans, (b) reported physical distancing interventions, (c) included any comparator (e.g., pre-intervention versus post-intervention; randomized controlled trial), and (d) reported actual distancing or predictors of distancing behavior. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. BCTs and potential MoAs were identified in each intervention.

RESULTS

Six articles (with seven studies and 19 comparisons) indicated that distancing interventions could successfully change MoAs and behavior. Successful BCTs (MoAs) included feedback on behavior (e.g., motivation); information about health consequences, salience of health consequences (e.g., beliefs about consequences), demonstration (e.g., beliefs about capabilities), and restructuring the physical environment (e.g., environmental context and resources). The most promising interventions were proximity buzzers, directional systems, and posters with loss-framed messages that demonstrated the behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicates several BCTs and potential MoAs that should be targeted in interventions and highlights gaps that should be the focus of future research.

Multiple lifestyle behaviour mHealth intervention targeting Swedish college and university students: protocol for the Buddy randomised factorial trial

Introduction

The time during which many attend college or university is an important period for developing health behaviours, with potentially major implications for future health. Therefore, it is concerning that many Swedish students excessively consume alcohol, have unhealthy diets, are not physical active and smoke. The potential of digital interventions which integrate support for change of all of these behaviours is largely unexplored, as are the dismantled effects of the individual components that make up digital lifestyle behaviour interventions.

Methods and analysis

A factorial randomised trial (six factors with two levels each) will be employed to estimate the effects of the components of a novel mHealth multiple lifestyle intervention on alcohol consumption, diet, physical activity and smoking among Swedish college and university students. A Bayesian group sequential design will be employed to periodically make decisions to continue or stop recruitment, with simulations suggesting that between 1500 and 2500 participants will be required. Multilevel regression models will be used to analyse behavioural outcomes collected at 2 and 4 months postrandomisation.

Ethics and dissemination

The study was approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority on 2020-12-15 (Dnr 2020-05496). The main concern is the opportunity cost if the intervention is found to only have small effects. However, considering the lack of a generally available evidence-based multiple lifestyle behaviour support to university and college students, this risk was deemed acceptable given the potential benefits from the study.

Recruitment will begin in March 2021, and it is expected that recruitment will last no more than 24 months. A final data set will, therefore, be available in July 2023, and findings will be reported no later than December 2023.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN23310640; Pre-results.

Outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials of major depressive disorder in older adults: protocol for a methodological review

INTRODUCTION

Major depressive disorder (MDD or depression) is prevalent among adults aged 65 years and older. The effectiveness and safety of interventions used to treat depression is often assessed through randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, heterogeneity in the selection, measurement and reporting of outcomes in RCTs renders comparisons between trial results, interpretability and generalisability of findings challenging. There is presently no core outcome set (COS) for use in RCTs that assess interventions for older adults with MDD. We will conduct a methodological review of the literature for outcomes reported in trials for adults 65 years and older with depression to assess the heterogeneity of outcome measures.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

RCTs evaluating pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, or any other treatment intervention for older adults with MDD published in the last 10 years will be located using electronic database searches (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials). Reviewers will conduct title and abstract screening, full-text screening and data extraction of trials eligible for inclusion independently and in duplicate. Outcomes will be synthesised and mapped to core outcome-domain frameworks. We will summarise characteristics associated with trials and outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We hope that findings from our methodological review will reduce variability in outcome selection, measurement and reporting and facilitate the development of a COS for older adults with MDD. Our review will also inform evidence synthesis efforts in identifying the best treatment practices for this clinical population. Ethics approval is not required, as this study is a literature review.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021244753.

Effects of a waiting list control design on alcohol consumption among online help-seekers: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Sparse attention has been given to the design of control conditions in trials, despite their important role as contrasts for novel treatments, and thus as a key determinant of effect sizes. This undermines valid inferences on effect estimates in trials, which are fundamentally comparative in nature. Such challenges to understanding also makes generalisation of effect estimates complex, for example, it may not be clear to what degree real-world alternatives to the novel treatments in pragmatic trials are similar to the control conditions studied. The present study aims to estimate the effects of being allocated to a waiting list control condition.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Individuals searching online for help to reduce their drinking will be invited to take part in a study. Individuals aged 18 years or older, who in the past month consumed six or more drinks on one occasion, or consumed 10 or more drinks the past week, will be eligible to participate. Both groups will receive identical feedback and advice on behaviour change; however, one group will be informed that they have to wait 1 month for the intervention materials. One month postrandomisation, participants will receive an email with the follow-up questionnaire measuring the primary outcomes: (1) frequency of heavy episodic drinking (defined as at study entry) in the past month; and (2) overall past week alcohol consumption. Differences between groups will be analysed using negative binomial regression models estimated using Bayesian inference. Recruitment will begin in October 2021. A Bayesian group sequential design will be employed to determine when to end enrolment (expected to be between 500 and 1500 individuals).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority on 2021-01-25 (Dnr 2020-06267). Findings will be disseminated in open access peer-reviewed journals no later than 2023.

TRIAL REGISTRATION TRIAL

ISRCTN14959594; Pre-results.

mHealth intervention for multiple lifestyle behaviour change among high school students in Sweden (LIFE4YOUth): protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

National surveys in Sweden demonstrate that the majority of young people do not engage in health promoting behaviours at levels recommended by the Public Health Agency of Sweden. The objective of this study is to estimate the effectiveness of a novel mHealth intervention named LIFE4YOUth, which targets multiple lifestyle behaviours (alcohol, diet, physical activity, and smoking) among high school students in Sweden.

Methods

A 2-arm parallel groups single blind randomised controlled trial (1:1) will be employed to estimate the effectiveness of the novel mHealth intervention. Students will be recruited at high schools throughout Sweden, and will be included if they fulfil one of six criteria relating to unhealthy behaviours with respect to alcohol, diet, physical activity and smoking. Eligible participants will be randomised to either receive the novel intervention immediately, or to be placed on a waiting list for 4 months. The intervention consists of a combination of recurring screening, text messages, and an interactive platform which is adaptable to individual preferences. Outcome measures with respect to alcohol, diet, physical activity and smoking will be assessed through questionnaires at 2 and 4 months post randomisation.

Discussion

The findings of this trial could be generalised to a diverse high-school student population as our recruitment encompass a large proportion of schools throughout Sweden with various educational profiles. Furthermore, if effective, the mHealth intervention has good potential to be able to be scaled up and disseminated at high schools nationally.

Trial registration

Registered prospectively on 2020-05-20 in ISRCTN (ISRCTN34468623).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11446-9.

Text messaging interventions for reducing alcohol consumption among risky drinkers: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The global growth of mobile phone use has led to new opportunities for health interventions, including through text messaging. We aimed to estimate the effects of text messaging interventions on alcohol consumption among risky drinkers.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of reports on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English. Searches were conducted on 23 May 2019 in PubMed; PubMed Central; CENTRAL; CDSR; DARE; NHS-EED; Scopus; PsycINFO; PsycARTICLES; CINAHL; and Web of Science. Measurements included number of episodes of heavy drinking (HED) per month and weekly alcohol consumption (WAC) in grams. Trials among risky drinkers who were not receiving co-interventions were included in the review (n = 3481, mean age 29 years, 41% female). Data were extracted from reports and authors were contacted for additional data.

RESULTS

Ten trials were included and all analyses were based on random-effects models. Primary analyses, including seven trials (n = 2528) for HED and five trials (n = 2236) for WAC, found that the interventions may reduce self-reported HED [-0.33 episodes per month; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.79, 0.12] and WAC (-18.62 g per week; 95% CI = -39.61, 2.38), although both estimates included the null. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) quality of evidence was judged to be low for both HED and WAC, primarily due to risk of attrition and performance bias, heterogeneity and influence of pilot trials on estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Text messaging alcohol interventions may reduce alcohol consumption compared with no or basic health information; however, there are doubts about the overall quality of the evidence.

Psychosocial interventions for reducing alcohol consumption in sub-Saharan African settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Harmful alcohol use is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA); however, the effects of non-pharmacological alcohol interventions in this region are unknown.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature through 14 March 2019 was undertaken. Two authors extracted and reconciled relevant data and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted. The review protocol is registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42019094509).

SETTING

Studies conducted in sSA were eligible for inclusion.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals participating in interventions aimed at reducing alcohol use.

INTERVENTIONS

Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials testing non-pharmacological interventions (psychosocial and structural) on alcohol consumption in sSA.

MEASUREMENTS

Eligible outcomes included the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) scores; alcohol abstinence; measures of drinking quantity and frequency; and biomarkers of alcohol consumption.

FINDINGS

Nineteen intervention trials (18 reports) testing psychosocial interventions (no structural interventions included), judged of moderate quality, were included in meta-analyses. A beneficial effect was identified for psychosocial interventions on alcohol abstinence at 3-6 months [odds ratio (OR) = 2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.20-3.48, k = 5, n = 2312, I²  = 79%] and 12-60 months (OR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.40-2.61, k = 6, n = 2737, I²  = 63%) follow-up. There were no statistically significant effects found for AUDIT score [2-3 months: mean differences (MD) = -1.13, 95% CI = -2.60 to 0.34, k = 6, n = 992, I²  = 85%; 6 months: MD = -0.83, 95% CI = -1.92 to 0.26, k = 6, n = 1081, I²  = 69%; 12 months: MD = -0.15, 95% CI = -1.66 to 1.36, k = 4; n = 677; I²  = 75%], drinks per drinking day (3 months: MD = -0.22, 95% CI = -2.51 to 2.07, k = 2, n = 359, I²  = 82%; 6-36 months: MD = -0.09, 95% CI = -0.49 to 0.30, k = 3, n = 1450, I²  = 60%) or percentage of drinking days (3 months: MD = -4.60, 95% = -21.14 to 11.94; k = 2; n = 361; I²  = 90%; 6-9 months: MD = 1.96, 95% CI = -6.54 to 10.46; k = 2; n = 818; I²  = 88%).

CONCLUSION

Psychosocial interventions show promise at increasing self-reported alcohol abstinence in sSA, but clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity across meta-analytical outcomes suggests that results should be interpreted with caution.

The Effect of Question Order on Outcomes in the Core Outcome Set for Brief Alcohol Interventions Among Online Help-Seekers: Protocol for a Factorial Randomized Trial

Background

A core outcome set (COS) for trials and evaluations of the effectiveness and efficacy of alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) has recently been established through international consensus to address the variability of outcomes evaluated.

Objective

This is a protocol for studies to assess if there are order effects among the questions included in the COS.

Methods

The 10 items of the COS are organized into 4 clusters. A factorial design will be used with 24 arms, where each arm represents 1 order of the 4 clusters. Individuals searching online for help will be asked to complete a questionnaire, and consenting participants will be randomized to 1 of the 24 arms (double-blind with equal allocation). Participants will be included if they are 18 years or older. The primary analyses will (1) estimate how the order of the clusters of outcomes affects how participants respond and (2) investigate patterns of abandonment of the questionnaire.

Results

Data collection is expected to commence in November 2020. A Bayesian group sequential design will be used with interim analyses planned for every 50 participants completing the questionnaire. Data collection will end no more than 24 months after commencement, and the results are expected to be published no later than December 2023.

Conclusions

Homogenizing the outcomes evaluated in studies of ABIs is important to support synthesis, and the COS is an important step toward this goal. Determining whether there may be issues with the COS question order may improve confidence in using it and speed up its dissemination in the research community. We encourage others to adopt the protocol as a study within their trial as they adopt the ORBITAL (Outcome Reporting in Brief Intervention Trials: Alcohol) COS to build a worldwide repository and provide materials to support such analysis.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN17954645; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17954645

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/24175

Alcohol screening and brief intervention in emergency departments: Review of the impact on healthcare costs and utilization

PURPOSE

To review the published evidence of the impact of alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) delivered in emergency departments (EDs) on healthcare utilization and costs.

PRINCIPAL RESULTS

This scoping review used existing literature reviews supplemented with an electronic database. We included studies if they assessed SBIs for alcohol delivered in an ED setting and reported healthcare utilization and/or costs. We abstracted methodological approaches and healthcare utilization outcomes from each study and categorized them based on substance of focus (alcohol only vs. alcohol and other substances). We updated cost estimates from each study to 2018 U.S. dollars. We identified seven studies published between 2010 and 2019 that met study inclusion criteria. Two of the seven studies evaluated SBI that targeted both alcohol and other substances. Six studies found a reduction in healthcare utilization or costs, and one found an increase in healthcare utilization.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

This literature review suggests that SBI delivered in ED settings can be a cost-reducing approach to treating excessive alcohol consumption, a factor that policy-makers and payers might consider in prioritizing interventions.

How often are outcomes other than change in substance use measured? A systematic review of outcome measures in contemporary randomised controlled trials

ISSUES

Recovery is a theoretical construct and empirical object of inquiry. The aim was to review whether outcome measures used in randomised controlled trials of drug treatment reflect a comprehensive conceptualisation of recovery.

APPROACH

Systematic review using the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Search returned 6556 original articles and 504 met the following inclusion criteria: randomised controlled trial in English-language peer-reviewed journal; sample meets criteria for drug dependence or drug use disorder; reports non-substance use treatment outcomes. Review protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018090064).

KEY FINDINGS

3.8% of the included studies had a follow up of 2 years or more. Withdrawal/craving was present in 31.1% of short-term versus 0% of long-term studies. Social functioning in 8% of short-term versus 36.8% of long-term studies. Role functioning (0.9 vs. 26.3%), risk behaviour (15.6 vs. 36.8%) and criminality (3.8 vs. 21.1%) followed a similar pattern. Housing was not examined short-term and unregularly long-term (2.0%). 'Use of health-care facilities', clinical psychological, behavioural factors were frequently reported. Physiological or somatic health (15.2 vs. 10.5%), motivation (14.2 vs. 15.8%) and quality of life (7.1 vs. 0%) were less frequently reported.

CONCLUSION

The short time interval of the follow up and lack of information on relevant factors in recovery prevents the development of evidence-based approaches to improve these factors. Particularly, measures of social and role functioning should be added to reflect an adequate conceptualisation of recovery.

Study protocol for a systematic review of evidence for digital interventions for comorbid excessive drinking and depression in community-dwelling populations

INTRODUCTION

Excessive drinking and depression are frequently comorbid and make a substantial contribution to the global non-communicable disease burden. A range of effective interventions and treatments exist for either excessive drinking or depression alone, including a positive emerging evidence base for the use of digital interventions. Computerised and/or smartphone delivered advice could provide flexible, coordinated support for patients with comorbid excessive drinking and depression. However, to date, no systematic review of the evidence has been conducted focused on the effectiveness of digital interventions for this specific comorbid population. This systematic review will identify and evaluate the effectiveness of digital interventions for reducing comorbid excessive drinking and depression in community-dwelling populations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC and SCI from inception to end of July 2019 for randomised controlled trials that evaluate any personalised digital intervention for comorbid excessive drinking and depression and published in any language. Primary outcomes will be changes in quantity of alcohol consumed and depressive symptoms. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be undertaken independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through discussion. Meta-analytic methods will be used to synthesise the data collected relating to the primary outcomes of interest.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

As a systematic review, ethical approval is not needed. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019130134.