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

An intervention based on Well-Being Therapy to prevent alcohol use and other unhealthy lifestyle behaviors among students: a three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial

Unhealthy lifestyle, such as alcohol use, and negative health outcomes have been associated with impairments in psychological well-being. The primary objective of the study was to test the efficacy of an intervention based on Well-Being Therapy to prevent or stem alcohol use, binge drinking and other unhealthy lifestyle among Italian adolescents in school settings. A three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial including three test periods (baseline, post-test, six-month follow-up) was implemented. Seven classes (144 students) were randomly assigned to receive well-being intervention (WBI), lifestyle intervention (LI), or no intervention (NI). Primary outcomes were alcohol use (AUDIT-C), binge drinking and other unhealthy lifestyle behaviors (i.e. unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, tobacco and cannabis smoking, poor sleep and Internet addiction). Linear mixed models and mixed-effects logistic regression were used to test the efficacy of WBI in comparison with LI and NI. At six-month follow-up, AUDIT-C total score increased more in NI in comparison with WBI (p = 0.044) and LI (p = 0.016), whereas the odds of being classified as at-risk drinker were lower in WBI (p = 0.038) and LI (p = 0.002), than NI. Only WBI showed a protective effect for cannabis use at post-test in comparison with NI (p = 0.003) and LI (p = 0.014). Sleep hours at night decreased more in NI than in LI (p = 0.027) at six months. Internet addiction decreased more in WBI (p = 0.002) and LI (p = 0.005) at post-test in comparison with NI. Although both interventions showed a positive impact on adolescent lifestyle, the positive effect of WBI on cannabis use underlines how this approach might be promising to stem adolescents' substance use.

A multicomponent psychosocial intervention to reduce substance use by adolescents involved in the criminal justice system: the RISKIT-CJS RCT

Background

Substance use and offending are related in the context of other disinhibitory behaviours. Adolescents involved in the criminal justice system constitute a particularly vulnerable group, with a propensity to engage in risky behaviour that has long-term impact on their future health and well-being. Previous research of the RISKIT programme provided evidence of a potential effect in reducing substance use and risky behaviour in adolescents.

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent psychosocial intervention compared with treatment as usual in reducing substance use for substance-using adolescents involved in the criminal justice system.

Design

A mixed-methods, prospective, pragmatic, two-arm, randomised controlled trial with follow-up at 6 and 12 months post randomisation.

Setting

The study was conducted across youth offending teams, pupil referral units and substance misuse teams across four areas of England (i.e. South East, London, North West, North East).

Participants

Adolescents aged between 13 and 17 years (inclusive), recruited between September 2017 and June 2020.

Interventions

Participants were randomised to treatment as usual or to treatment as usual in addition to the RISKIT-Criminal Justice System (RISKIT-CJS) programme. The RISKIT-CJS programme was a multicomponent intervention and consisted of two individual motivational interviews with a trained youth worker (lasting 45 minutes each) and two group sessions delivered over half a day on consecutive weeks.

Main outcome measures

At 12 months, we assessed per cent days abstinent from substance use over the previous 28 days. Secondary outcome measures included well-being, motivational state, situational confidence, quality of life, resource use and fidelity of interventions delivered.

Results

A total of 693 adolescents were assessed for eligibility, of whom 505 (73%) consented. Of these, 246 (49%) were allocated to the RISKIT-CJS intervention and 259 (51%) were allocated to treatment as usual only. At month 12, the overall follow-up rate was 57%: 55% in the RISKIT-CJS arm and 59% in the treatment-as-usual arm. At month 12, we observed an increase in per cent days abstinent from substances in both arms of the study, from 61% to 85%, but there was no evidence that the RISKIT-CJS intervention was superior to treatment as usual. A similar pattern was observed for secondary outcomes. The RISKIT-CJS intervention was not found to be any more cost-effective than treatment as usual. The qualitative research indicated that young people were positive about learning new skills and acquiring new knowledge. Although stakeholders considered the intervention worthwhile, they expressed concern that it came too late for the target population.

Limitations

Our original aim to collect data on offences was thwarted by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and this affected both the statistical and economic analyses. Although 214 (87%) of the 246 participants allocated to the RISKIT-CJS intervention attended at least one individual face-to-face session, 98 (40%) attended a group session and only 47 (19%) attended all elements of the intervention.

Conclusions

The RISKIT-CJS intervention was no more clinically effective or cost-effective than treatment as usual in reducing substance use among adolescents involved in the criminal justice system.

Future research

The RISKIT-CJS intervention was considered more acceptable, and adherence was higher, in pupil referral units and substance misuse teams than in youth offending teams. Stakeholders in youth offending teams thought that the intervention was too late in the trajectory for their population.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN77037777.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 11, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cost-effectiveness of Internet Interventions Compared With Treatment as Usual for People With Mental Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The economic costs of mental disorders for society are huge. Internet-based interventions are often coined as cost-effective alternatives to usual care, but the evidence is mixed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to review the literature on the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with usual care and to provide an estimate of the monetary benefits of such interventions compared with usual care.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted, which included participants with symptoms of mental disorders; investigated a telephone- or internet-based intervention; included a control condition in the form of treatment as usual, psychological placebo, waiting list control, or bibliotherapy; reported outcomes on both quality of life and costs; and included articles published in English. Electronic databases such as PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used. Data on risk of bias, quality of the economic evaluation, quality-adjusted life years, and costs were extracted from the included studies, and the incremental net benefit was calculated and pooled.

RESULTS

The search yielded 6226 abstracts, and 37 studies with 14,946 participants were included. The quality of economic evaluations of the included studies was rated as moderate, and the risk of bias was high. A random-effects approach was maintained. Analyses suggested internet interventions were slightly more effective than usual care in terms of quality-adjusted life years gain (Hedges g=0.052, 95% CI 0.010-0.094; P=.02) and equally expensive (Hedges g=0.002, 95% CI -0.080 to 0.84; P=.96). The pooled incremental net benefit was US $255 (95% CI US $91 to US $419; P=.002), favoring internet interventions over usual care. The perspective of the economic evaluation and targeted mental disorder moderated the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with a care-as-usual approach is likely, but generalizability to new studies is poor given the substantial heterogeneity. This is the first study in the field of mental health to pool cost-effectiveness outcomes in an aggregate data meta-analysis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019141659; https://tinyurl.com/3cu99b34.

Alcohol Misuse among English Youth, Are Harms Attributable to Alcohol or to Underlying Disinhibitory Characteristics?

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol use by young people is associated with a range of psychological and physical harms. However, similar harms are also reported with disinhibitory conditions such as conduct problems that are said to precede and predispose to alcohol misuse. We explored whether alcohol use or indicators of underlying disinhibition predict psychological and physical harms in a cohort of young people.

METHODS

We used data from a randomised controlled intervention trial that identified young people who consumed alcohol (n = 756), mean age = 15.6 years, attending emergency departments (EDs) in England. Disinhibition was measured by the self-report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire hyperactivity and conduct problem items, and alcohol-related harms by questions from the ESPAD, a major European school survey. We conducted a mediation analysis with a primary outcome of frequency of engaging in alcohol-related harms 12 months after screening in ED, exploring for the mediating influence of alcohol consumed at six months. We included age, gender, allocated group and baseline consumption as covariates and adjusted for the multi-level nature of the study, where young people were nested within EDs.

RESULTS

Conduct problems and to a lesser extent hyperactivity predicted harms at twelve months. This effect was not mediated by alcohol consumed at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Among young drinkers underlying behavioural attributes predict harm independently of alcohol use. This suggests that the harms associated with alcohol use are attributable more to underlying disinhibitory characteristics than the quantity of alcohol consumed.

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 two-arm parallel-group individually randomised prison pilot study of a male remand alcohol intervention for self-efficacy enhancement: the APPRAISE study protocol

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of at-risk drinking is far higher among those in contact with the criminal justice system (73%) than the general population (35%). However, there is little evidence on the effectiveness of alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) in reducing risky drinking among those in the criminal justice system, including the prison system and, in particular, those on remand. Building on earlier work, A two-arm parallel group individually randomised Prison Pilot study of a male Remand Alcohol Intervention for Self-efficacy Enhancement (APPRAISE) is a pilot study designed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of an ABI, delivered to male prisoners on remand. The findings of APPRAISE should provide the information required to design a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

APPRAISE will use mixed methods, with two linked phases, across two prisons in the UK, recruiting 180 adult men on remand: 90 from Scotland and 90 from England. Phase I will involve a two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomised pilot study. The pilot evaluation will provide data on the likely impact of A two-arm parallel group individually randomised Prison Pilot study of a male Remand Alcohol Intervention for Self-efficacy Enhancement (APPRAISE), which will be used to inform a future definitive multicentre RCT. Phase II will be a process evaluation assessing how the ABI has been implemented to explore the change mechanisms underpinning the ABI (figure 1) and to assess the context within which the ABI is delivered.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The APPRAISE protocol has been approved by the East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (19/ES/0068), National Offender Management System (2019-240), Health Board Research and Development (2019/0268), Scottish Prison Service research and ethics committee, and by the University of Edinburgh's internal ethics department. The findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal publications, presentations at local, national and international conferences, infographics and shared with relevant stakeholders through meetings and events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN27417180.