Support for Aboriginal health services in reducing harms from alcohol: 2-year service provision outcomes in a cluster randomized trial

Alcohol screening in 22 Australian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations: Clinical context and who is screened

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol screening among Indigenous Australians is important to identify individuals needing support to reduce their drinking. Understanding clinical contexts in which clients are screened, and which clients are more or less likely to be screened, could help identify areas of services and communities that might benefit from increased screening.

METHODS

We analysed routinely collected data from 22 Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations Australia-wide. Data collected between February 2016 and February 2021 were analysed using R, and aggregated to describe screening activity per client, within 2-monthly extraction periods. Descriptive analyses were performed to identify contexts in which clients received an Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test consumption (AUDIT-C) screen. Multi-level logistic regression determined demographic factors associated with receiving an AUDIT-C screen. Three models are presented to examine if screening was predicted by: (i) age; (ii) age and gender; (iii) age, gender and service remoteness.

RESULTS

We observed 83,931 occasions where AUDIT-C was performed at least once during a 2-monthly extraction period. Most common contexts were adult health check (55.0%), followed by pre-consult examination (18.4%) and standalone item (9.9%). For every 10 years' increase in client age, odds of being screened with AUDIT-C slightly decreased (odds ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98, 0.99). Women were less likely to be screened with AUDIT-C (odds ratio 0.95; 95% CI 0.93, 0.96) than men.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study identified areas where alcohol screening can be increased (e.g., among women). Increasing AUDIT-C screening across entire communities could help reduce or prevent alcohol-related harms. Future Indigenous-led research could help identify strategies to increase screening rates.

Unintended consequences: Alcohol screening at urban Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services was suppressed during COVID-19 lockdowns

INTRODUCTION

Regular screening for risky drinking is important to improve the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. We explored whether the rate of screening for risky drinking using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) questions was disrupted at Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS) during state-wide and territory-wide COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of screening data from 22 ACCHSs located in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia. These services provide holistic and culturally appropriate primary care. A multi-level Poisson regression, including AR(1) autocorrelation, was used to predict counts of AUDIT-C screening at ACCHSs.

RESULTS

AUDIT-C screening was suppressed during state-wide and territory-wide lockdowns in 2020 (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.42 [0.29, 0.61]). The effect of lockdowns differed by service remoteness. While there was a substantial reduction in AUDIT-C screening for urban and inner regional services (IRR 0.25 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15, 0.42]), there was not a statistically significant change in screening at outer regional and remote (IRR 0.60 [95% CI 0.33, 1.09]) or very remote services (IRR 0.67 [95% CI 0.40, 1.11]).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 lockdowns in Australia likely suppressed rates of screening for risky drinking in urban and inner regional regions. As harm from alcohol consumption may have increased during lockdowns, policymakers should consider implementing measures to enable screening for risky drinking to continue during future lockdowns.

Low rates of prescribing alcohol relapse prevention medicines in Australian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol dependence is a chronic condition impacting millions of individuals worldwide. Safe and effective medicines to reduce relapse can be prescribed by general practitioners but are underutilised in the general Australian population. Prescription rates of these medicines to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) Australians in primary care are unknown. We assess these medicines in Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services and identify factors associated with prescription.

METHODS

Baseline data (spanning 12 months) were used from a cluster randomised trial involving 22 Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services. We describe the proportion of First Nations patients aged 15+ who were prescribed a relapse prevention medicine: naltrexone, acamprosate or disulfiram. We explore associations between receiving a prescription, a patient AUDIT-C score and demographics (gender, age, service remoteness) using logistic regression.

RESULTS

During the 12-month period, 52,678 patients attended the 22 services. Prescriptions were issued for 118 (0.2%) patients (acamprosate n = 62; naltrexone n = 58; disulfiram n = 2; combinations n = 4). Of the total patients, 1.6% were 'likely dependent' (AUDIT-C ≥ 9), of whom only 3.4% received prescriptions for these medicines. In contrast, 60.2% of those who received a prescription had no AUDIT-C score. In multivariate analysis, receiving a script (OR = 3.29, 95% CI 2.25-4.77) was predicted by AUDIT-C screening, male gender (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.55-3.29), middle age (35-54 years; OR = 14.41, 95% CI 5.99-47.31) and urban service (OR = 2.87, 95% CI 1.61-5.60).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Work is needed to increase the prescription of relapse prevention medicines when dependence is detected. Potential barriers to prescription and appropriate ways to overcome these need to be identified.

Preoperative cannabis use does not increase opioid utilization following primary total hip arthroplasty in a propensity matched analysis

PURPOSE

The recreational and medical use of cannabis is being legalized worldwide. Its use has been linked to an increased risk of developing opioid use disorders. As opioids continue to be prescribed after total hip arthroplasty (THA), the influence that preoperative cannabis use may have on postoperative opioid consumption remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between preoperative cannabis use and opioid utilization following primary THA.

METHODS

We identified all patients over the age of 18 who underwent unilateral, primary THA for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis at a single institution from February 2019 to April 2021. Our cohort was grouped into current cannabis users (within 6 months of surgery) and those who reported never using cannabis. One hundred and fifty-six current users were propensity score matched 1:6 with 936 never users based on age, sex, BMI, history of chronic pain, smoking status, history of anxiety/depression, ASA classification and type of anesthesia. Outcomes included inpatient and postdischarge opioid use in morphine milligram equivalents.

RESULTS

Total inpatient opioid utilization, opioids refilled, and total opioids used within 90 postoperative days were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSION

In propensity score matched analyses, preoperative cannabis use was not independently associated with an increase in inpatient or outpatient, 90-days opioid consumption following elective THA.

Effects of service-wide support on regularity of alcohol screening of clients in Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Health Services: a cluster randomised trial

Background

We have previously shown that service-wide support can increase the odds of alcohol screening in any 2-month period in a cluster randomized trial of service-wide support to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS). Here we report an exploratory analysis on whether the resulting pattern of screening was appropriate. Aim: we assess whether that increase in screening was associated with: (i) increased first-time screening, (ii) increased annual screening, (iii) whether frequently screened clients fell into one of four risk categories as defined by national guidelines.

Methods

Setting and participants: 22 ACCHS; randomized to receive the support model in the treatment (‘early-support’) arm over 24-months or to the waitlist control arm. Intervention: eight-component support, including training, sharing of experience, audit-and-feedback and resource support. Analysis: records of clients with visits before and after start of implementation were included. Multilevel logistic modelling was used to compare (i) the odds of previously unscreened clients receiving an AUDIT-C screen, (ii) odds of clients being screened with AUDIT-C at least once annually. We describe the characteristics of a sub-cohort of clients who received four or more screens annually, including if they were in a high-risk category.

Results

Of the original trial sample, 43,054 met inclusion criteria, accounting for 81.7% of the screening events in the overall trial. The support did not significantly increase the odds of first-time screening (OR  = 1.33, 95% CI 0.81–2.18, p  = 0.25) or of annual screening (OR  = 0.99, 95% CI 0.42–2.37, p = 0.98). Screening more than once annually occurred in 6240 clients. Of the 841 clients with four or more screens annually, over 50% did not fall into a high-risk category. Females were overrepresented. More males than females fell into high-risk categories.

Conclusion

The significant increase in odds of screening observed in the main trial did not translate to significant improvement in first-time or annual screening following implementation of support. This appeared to be due to some clients being screened more frequently than annually, while more than half remained unscreened. Further strategies to improve alcohol screening should focus on appropriate screening regularity as well as overall rates, to ensure clinically useful information about alcohol consumption.

Trial Registration ACTRN12618001892202, retrospectively registered 16 November 2018 https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12618001892202.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13722-022-00294-6.