How primary care providers talk to patients about alcohol: a qualitative study

Adapting an Alcohol Care Linkage Intervention to US Military Veterans Presenting to Primary Care with Hazardous Drinking and PTSD and/or Depression Symptoms: A Qualitative Study

There is a critical need to improve linkage to alcohol care for veterans in primary care with hazardous drinking and PTSD and/or depression symptoms (A-MH). We adapted an alcohol care linkage intervention, "Connect to Care" (C2C), for this population. We conducted separate focus groups with veterans with A-MH, providers, and policy leaders. Feedback centered on how psychologists and other providers can optimally inform veterans about their care options and alcohol use, and how to ensure C2C is accessible. Participants reported that veterans with A-MH may not view alcohol use as their primary concern but rather as a symptom of a potential co-occurring mental health condition. Veterans have difficulty identifying and accessing existing alcohol care options within the Veterans Health Administration. C2C was modified to facilitate alcohol care linkage for this population specific to their locality, provide concrete support and education, and offer care options to preserve privacy.

Alcohol minimum unit pricing and people experiencing homelessness: A qualitative study of stakeholders' perspectives and experiences

INTRODUCTION

Minimum unit pricing (MUP) may reduce harmful drinking in the general population, but there is little evidence regarding its impact on marginalised groups. Our study is the first to explore the perceptions of MUP among stakeholders working with people experiencing homelessness following its introduction in Scotland in May 2018.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 41 professional stakeholders from statutory and third sector organisations across Scotland. We explored their views on MUP and its impact on people experiencing homelessness, service provision and implications for policy. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants suggested that the introduction of MUP in Scotland had negligible if any discernible impact on people experiencing homelessness and services that support them. Most service providers felt insufficiently informed about MUP prior to its implementation. Participants reported that where consequences for these populations were evident, they were primarily anticipated although some groups were negatively affected. People experiencing homelessness have complex needs in addition to alcohol addiction, and changes in the way services work need to be considered in future MUP-related discussions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that despite initial concerns about potential unintended consequences of MUP, many of these did not materialise to the levels anticipated. As a population-level health policy, MUP is likely to have little beneficial impact on people experiencing homelessness without the provision of support to address their alcohol use and complex needs. The additional needs of certain groups (e.g., people with no recourse to public funds) need to be considered.

Concurrent validity of an estimator of weekly alcohol consumption (EWAC) based on the extended AUDIT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The three-question Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) is frequently used in healthcare for screening and brief advice about levels of alcohol consumption. AUDIT-C scores (0-12) provide feedback as categories of risk rather than estimates of actual alcohol intake, an important metric for behaviour change. The study aimed to (i) develop a continuous metric from the Extended AUDIT-C expressed in United Kingdom (UK) units (8 g pure ethanol), offering equivalent accuracy, and providing a direct estimator of weekly alcohol consumption (EWAC) and (ii) evaluate the EWAC's bias and error using the graduated-frequency (GF) questionnaire as a reference standard of alcohol consumption.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional diagnostic study based on a nationally-representative survey.

SETTINGS

Community dwelling households in England.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 22 404 household residents aged ≥16 years reporting drinking alcohol at least occasionally.

MEASUREMENTS

Computer-assisted personal interviews consisting of (i) AUDIT questionnaire with extended response items (the 'Extended AUDIT') and (ii) GF. Primary outcomes were: mean deviation <1 UK unit (metric of bias); root-mean-square deviation <2 UK units (metric of total error) between EWAC and GF. The secondary outcome was the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for predicting alcohol consumption in excess of 14 and 35 UK units.

FINDINGS

EWAC had a positive bias of 0.2 UK units (95% CI = 0.08, 0.4) compared with GF. Deviations were skewed: whereas the mean error was ±11 UK units/week [9.5, 11.9], in half of participants the deviation between EWAC and GF was between 0 and ±2.1 UK units/week. EWAC predicted consumption in excess of 14 UK units/week with a significantly greater area under the curve (0.918 [0.914, 0.923]) than AUDIT-C (0.870 [0.864, 0.876]) or the full AUDIT (0.854 [0.847, 0.860]).

CONCLUSIONS

A new estimator of weekly alcohol consumption, which uses answers to the Extended AUDIT-C, meets the targeted bias tolerance. It is superior in accuracy to AUDIT-C and the full 10-item AUDIT when predicting consumption thresholds, making it a reliable complement to the Extended AUDIT-C for health promotion interventions.

Patient and provider perspectives on self-administered electronic substance use and mental health screening in HIV primary care

Background

Substance use disorders, depression and anxiety disproportionately affect people with HIV (PWH) and lead to increased morbidity and mortality. Routine screening can help address these problems but is underutilized. This study sought to describe patient and provider perspectives on the acceptability and usefulness of systematic electronic, self-administered screening for tobacco, alcohol, other substance use, and mental health symptoms among patients in HIV primary care.

Methods

Screening used validated instruments delivered pre-appointment by both secure messaging and clinic-based tablets, with results integrated into the electronic health record (EHR). Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 9 HIV primary care providers and 12 patients in the 3 largest HIV primary care clinics in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California health system who participated in a clinical trial evaluating computerized screening and behavioral interventions was conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. A thematic approach was utilized for coding and analysis of interview data using a combination of deductive and inductive methods.

Results

Four key themes were identified: (1) perceived clinical benefit of systematic, electronic screening and EHR integration for providers and patients; (2) usefulness of having multiple methods of questionnaire completion; (3) importance of the patient–provider relationship to facilitate completion and accurate reporting; and (4) barriers, include privacy and confidentiality concerns about reporting sensitive information, particularly about substance use, and potential burden from repeated screenings.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that electronic, self-administered substance use and mental health screening is acceptable to patients and may have clinical utility to providers. While offering different methods of screening completion can capture a wider range of patients, a strong patient–provider relationship is a key factor in overcoming barriers and ensuring accurate patient responses. Further investigation into facilitators, barriers, and utility of electronic screening for PWH and other high-priority patient populations is indicated.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03217058. Registered 13 July 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03217058

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13722-022-00293-7.

Practical Opportunities for Biopsychosocial Education Through Strategic Interprofessional Experiences in Integrated Primary Care

Even with the expansion of primary care teams to include behavioral health and other providers from a range of disciplines, providers are regularly challenged to deliver care that adequately addresses the complex array of biopsychosocial factors underlying the patient's presenting concern. The limits of expertise, the ever-changing shifts in evidence-based practices, and the difficulties of interprofessional teamwork contribute to the challenge. In this article, we discuss the opportunity to leverage the interprofessional team-based care activities within integrated primary care settings as interactive educational opportunities to build competencies in biopsychosocial care among primary care team members. We argue that this approach to learning while providing direct patient care not only facilitates new provider knowledge and skills, but also provides a venue to enhance team processes that are key to delivering integrated biopsychosocial care to patients. We provide three case examples of how to utilize strategic planning within specific team-based care activities common in integrated primary care settings-shared medical appointments, conjoint appointments, and team huddles-to facilitate educational objectives.

Attitudes of Patients and Health Professionals Regarding Screening Algorithms: Qualitative Study

Background

As a preamble to an attempt to develop a tool that can aid health professionals at hospitals in identifying whether the patient may have an alcohol abuse problem, this study investigates opinions and attitudes among both health professionals and patients about using patient data from electronic health records (EHRs) in an algorithm screening for alcohol problems.

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes and opinions of patients and health professionals at hospitals regarding the use of previously collected data in developing and implementing an algorithmic helping tool in EHR for screening inexpedient alcohol habits; in addition, the study aims to analyze how patients would feel about asking and being asked about alcohol by staff, based on a notification in the EHR from such a tool.

Methods

Using semistructured interviews, we interviewed 9 health professionals and 5 patients to explore their opinions and attitudes about an algorithm-based helping tool and about asking and being asked about alcohol usage when being given a reminder from this type of tool. The data were analyzed using an ad hoc method consistent with a close reading and meaning condensing.

Results

The health professionals were both positive and negative about a helping tool grounded in algorithms. They were optimistic about the potential of such a tool to save some time by providing a quick overview if it was easy to use but, on the negative side, noted that this type of helping tool might take away the professionals’ instinct. The patients were overall positive about the helping tool, stating that they would find this tool beneficial for preventive care. Some of the patients expressed concerns that the information provided by the tool could be misused.

Conclusions

When developing and implementing an algorithmic helping tool, the following aspects should be considered: (1) making the helping tool as transparent in its recommendations as possible, avoiding black boxing, and ensuring room for professional discretion in clinical decision making; and (2) including and taking into account the attitudes and opinions of patients and health professionals in the design and development process of such an algorithmic helping tool.

Perceptions of Alcohol Risk Among HIV/Hepatitis C Coinfected Patients

OBJECTIVES

We examined how patient perceptions of alcohol risk, provider discussions about alcohol, and treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) differed among HIV-HCV coinfected patients in primary care.

METHODS

Between April, 2016 and April, 2017, we conducted a screening survey with patients in an HIV primary care clinic in Seattle, Washington, who had chronic HCV coinfection or a history of chronic HCV infection who had successfully cleared their infection with treatment.

RESULTS

Of 225 participants, 84 (37%) were active drinkers (drank ≥2-4 times/mo in past 3 months). Of those with little to no use for ≥3 months, 65 (29%) were former drinkers with a history of alcohol use and 76 were abstainers with no such history. Former drinkers and abstainers were more likely than active drinkers to perceive that any drinking was unsafe (69% vs 58% vs 31%; P < 0.001). Former drinkers were more likely to report a physician's recommendation to stop drinking than active drinkers (63% vs 47%; P = 0.05). The great majority (87%) of former drinkers decided to stop or reduce drinking on their own (most often in response to a nonhealth life event) and only 13% acknowledged doing so on their doctor's prompting. HCV treatment was not associated with former or active drinking status.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the importance of educating not only HIV-HCV patients about the effects of alcohol use but also HIV clinicians about delivering consistent counseling about alcohol avoidance. Understanding the reasons that HIV-HCV coinfected persons make changes in their alcohol use could drive novel interventions that reduce the negative consequences of drinking.

Comparison of Methods for Alcohol and Drug Screening in Primary Care Clinics

IMPORTANCE

Guidelines recommend that adult patients receive screening for alcohol and drug use during primary care visits, but the adoption of screening in routine practice remains low. Clinics frequently struggle to choose a screening approach that is best suited to their resources, workflows, and patient populations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how to best implement electronic health record (EHR)-integrated screening for substance use by comparing commonly used screening methods and examining their association with implementation outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This article presents the outcomes of phases 3 and 4 of a 4-phase quality improvement, implementation feasibility study in which researchers worked with stakeholders at 6 primary care clinics in 2 large urban academic health care systems to define and implement their optimal screening approach. Site A was located in New York City and comprised 2 clinics, and site B was located in Boston, Massachusetts, and comprised 4 clinics. Clinics initiated screening between January 2017 and October 2018, and 93 114 patients were eligible for screening for alcohol and drug use. Data used in the analysis were collected between January 2017 and October 2019, and analysis was performed from July 13, 2018, to March 23, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Clinics integrated validated screening questions and a brief counseling script into the EHR, with implementation supported by the use of clinical champions (ie, clinicians who advocate for change, motivate others, and use their expertise to facilitate the adoption of an intervention) and the training of clinic staff. Clinics varied in their screening approaches, including the type of visit targeted for screening (any visit vs annual examinations only), the mode of administration (staff-administered vs self-administered by the patient), and the extent to which they used practice facilitation and EHR usability testing.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Data from the EHRs were extracted quarterly for 12 months to measure implementation outcomes. The primary outcome was screening rate for alcohol and drug use. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of unhealthy alcohol and drug use detected via screening, and clinician adoption of a brief counseling script.

RESULTS

Patients of the 6 clinics had a mean (SD) age ranging from 48.9 (17.3) years at clinic B2 to 59.1 (16.7) years at clinic B3, were predominantly female (52.4% at clinic A1 to 64.6% at clinic A2), and were English speaking. Racial diversity varied by location. Of the 93,114 patients with primary care visits, 71.8% received screening for alcohol use, and 70.5% received screening for drug use. Screening at any visit (implemented at site A) in comparison with screening at annual examinations only (implemented at site B) was associated with higher screening rates for alcohol use (90.3%-94.7% vs 24.2%-72.0%, respectively) and drug use (89.6%-93.9% vs 24.6%-69.8%). The 5 clinics that used a self-administered screening approach had a higher detection rate for moderate- to high-risk alcohol use (14.7%-36.6%) compared with the 1 clinic that used a staff-administered screening approach (1.6%). The detection of moderate- to high-risk drug use was low across all clinics (0.5%-1.0%). Clinics with more robust practice facilitation and EHR usability testing had somewhat greater adoption of the counseling script for patients with moderate-high risk alcohol or drug use (1.4%-12.5% vs 0.1%-1.1%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this quality improvement study, EHR-integrated screening was feasible to implement in all clinics and unhealthy alcohol use was detected more frequently when self-administered screening was used at any primary care visit. The detection of drug use was low at all clinics, as was clinician adoption of counseling. These findings can be used to inform the decision-making of health care systems that are seeking to implement screening for substance use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02963948.

Factors influencing routine cognitive impairment screening in older at-risk drinkers: Findings from a qualitative study in the United Kingdom

Cognitive Impairment (CI) screening is recommended for those engaged in harmful levels of alcohol use. However, there is a lack of evidence on implementation. This paper explores the barriers and facilitators to CI screening experienced across a service specifically for older drinkers. The findings draw on data gathered as part of an evaluation of a multilevel programme to reduce alcohol-related harm in adults aged 50 and over in five demonstration areas across the United Kingdom. It is based on qualitative interviews and focus groups with 14 service providers and 22 service users. Findings are presented thematically under the section headings: acceptability of screening, interpretation and making sense of screening and treatment options. It is suggested that engagement with CI screening is most likely when its fit with agency culture and its purpose is clear; where service providers have the technical skills to administer and discuss the results of screening with service users; and where those undertaking screening have had the opportunity to reflect on their own experience of being screened. Engagement with CI screening is also most likely where specific intervention pathways and engagement practices can be accessed to respond to assessed need.

Early implementation of screening for substance use in rural primary care: A rapid analytic qualitative study

Background: Few primary care patients are screened for substance use. As part of a phased feasibility study examining the implementation of electronic health record-integrated screening with the Tobacco, Alcohol, and Prescription Medication Screening (TAPS) Tool and clinical decision support (CDS) in rural primary care clinics, focus groups were conducted to identify early indicators of success and challenges to screening implementation. Method: Focus groups (n = 6) were conducted with medical assistants (MAs: n = 3: 19 participants) and primary care providers (PCPs: n = 3: 13 participants) approximately one month following screening implementation in three Federally Qualified Health Centers in Maine. Rapid analysis and matrix analysis using Proctor's Taxonomy of Implementation Outcomes were used to explore implementation outcomes. Results: There was consensus that screening is being used, but use of the CDS was lower, in part due to limited positive screens. Fidelity was high among MAs, though discomfort with the CDS surfaced among PCPs, impacting adoption and fidelity. The TAPS Tool's content, credibility and ease of workflow integration were favorably assessed. Challenges include screening solely at annual visits and self-administered screening for certain patients. Conclusions: Results reveal indicators of implementation success and strategies to address challenges to screening for substance use in primary care.

Fidelity of the delivery of NHS Health Checks in general practice: an observational study

BACKGROUND

The NHS Health Check programme aims to reduce the risk of common preventable diseases by providing risk information and behaviour change advice. Failure to deliver the consultation appropriately could undermine its efficacy. To date, to the authors' knowledge, there are no published data on the fidelity of delivery of NHS Health Checks.

AIM

To assess the fidelity of delivery of NHS Health Checks in general practice.

DESIGN & SETTING

Fidelity assessment of video and audio recordings of NHS Health Check consultations conducted in four GP practices across the East of England.

METHOD

A secondary analysis of 38 NHS Health Check consultations, which were video or audio recorded as part of a pilot study of introducing discussions of cancer risk into NHS Health Checks. Using a checklist based on the NHS Health Check Best Practice Guidance, fidelity of delivery was assessed as the proportion of key elements completed during the consultations.

RESULTS

The mean number of elements of the NHS Health Check completed across all consultations was 14.5/18 (80.6%), with a range of 10 to 17 (55.6% to 94.4%). The mean fidelity for risk assessment, risk communication, and risk management sections was 8.7/10 (87.0%), 4.1/5 (82.0%), and 1.7/3 (56.7%), respectively. Clinically appropriate lifestyle advice was given in 34/38 consultations. Elements with the lowest fidelity were ethnicity assessment (n = 12/38; 31.6%), family history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) assessment (n = 25/38; 65.8%), AUDIT-C communication (n = 13/38; 34.2%), and dementia risk management (n = 6/38; 15.8%).

CONCLUSION

Although fidelity of delivery was high overall, important elements of the NHS Health Check were being regularly omitted. Opportunities for behaviour change, particularly relating to alcohol consumption and dementia risk management, may be being missed.

Insights Provided by Depression Screening Regarding Pain, Anxiety, and Substance use in a Veteran Population

Objective:

We sought to quantify the extent to which a depression screening instrument commonly used in primary care settings provides additional information regarding pain interference symptoms, anxiety, and substance use.

Methods:

Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS) data collected from 2003 through 2015 was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) for associations between positive depression screening result cutoffs and clustering conditions. We assessed the test performance characteristics (likelihood ratio value, positive predictive value, and the percentage of individuals correctly classified) of a positive Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9 & PHQ-2) depression screen for the identification of pain interference symptoms, anxiety, and substance use.

Results:

A total 7731 participants were included in the analyses. The median age was 50 years. The PHQ-9 threshold of ≥20 was strongly associated with pain interference symptoms (OR 21.6, 95% CI 17.5-26.7) and anxiety (OR 72.1, 95% CI 52.8-99.0) and yielded likelihood ratio values of 7.5 for pain interference symptoms and 21.8 for anxiety and positive predictive values (PPV) of 84% and 95%, respectively. A PHQ-9 score of ≥10 still showed significant associations with pain interference symptoms (OR 6.1, 95% CI 5.4-6.9) and symptoms of anxiety (OR 11.3, 95% CI 9.7-13.1) and yet yielded lower likelihood ratio values (4.36 & 8.24, respectively). The PHQ-9 was less strongly associated with various forms of substance use.

Conclusion:

Depression screening provides substantial additional information regarding the likelihood of pain interference symptoms and anxiety and should trigger diagnostic assessments for these other conditions.

Patients' experiences of alcohol screening and advice in primary care: a qualitative study

Background

Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of alcohol screening and brief advice to reduce heavy drinking, implementation in primary healthcare remains limited. The challenges that clinicians experience when delivering such interventions are well-known, but we have little understanding of the patient perspective. We used Normalization Process Theory (NPT) informed interviews to explore patients’ views on alcohol screening and brief advice in routine primary healthcare.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 22 primary care patients who had been screened for heavy drinking and/or received brief alcohol advice were analysed thematically, informed by Normalisation Process Theory constructs (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, reflexive monitoring).

Results

We found mixed understanding of the adverse health consequences of heavy drinking, particularly longer-term risks. There was some awareness of current alcohol guidelines but these were viewed flexibly, depending on the individual drinker and drinking context. Most described alcohol screening as routine, with clinicians viewed as trustworthy and objective. Patients enacted a range of self-regulatory techniques to limit their drinking but perceived such strategies as learned through experience rather than based on clinical advice. However, most saw alcohol advice as a valuable component of preventative healthcare, especially those experiencing co-occurring health conditions.

Conclusions

Despite strong acceptance of the screening role played by primary care clinicians, patients have less confidence in the effectiveness of alcohol advice. Primary care-based alcohol brief advice needs to reflect how individuals actually drink, and harness strategies that patients already commonly employ, such as self-regulation, to boost its relevance.

Association of Alcohol Screening Scores With Adverse Mental Health Conditions and Substance Use Among US Adults

IMPORTANCE

Alcohol screening may be associated with health outcomes that cluster with alcohol use (ie, alcohol-clustering conditions), including depression, anxiety, and use of tobacco, marijuana, and illicit drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the extent to which alcohol screening provides additional information regarding alcohol-clustering conditions and to compare 2 alcohol use screening tools commonly used for this purpose.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This longitudinal cohort study used data from the Veterans Aging Cohort Study. Data were collected at 8 Veterans Health Administration facilities from 2003 through 2012. A total of 7510 participants were enrolled, completed a baseline survey, and were followed up. Veterans with HIV were matched with controls without HIV by age, race, sex, and site of care. Data were analyzed from January 2019 to December 2019.

EXPOSURES

The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) were used to assess alcohol use, with 4 risk groups delineated for each test: score 0 to 7 (reference), score 8 to 15, score 16 to 19, and score 20 to 40 (maximum score) for the full AUDIT and score 0 to 3 (reference), score 4 to 5, score 6 to 7, and score 8 to 12 (maximum score) for the AUDIT-C.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Alcohol-clustering conditions, including self-reported symptoms of depression and anxiety and use of tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, other stimulants, opioids, and injection drugs.

RESULTS

A total of 6431 US patients (6104 [95%] men; median age during survey years 2003-2004, 50 years [range, 28-86 years; interquartile range, 44-55 years]) receiving care in the Veterans Health Administration completed 1 or more follow-up surveys when the AUDIT was administered and were included in the present analyses. Of the male participants, 4271 (66%) were African American, 1498 (24%) were white, and 590 (9%) were Hispanic. The AUDIT and AUDIT-C scores were associated with each alcohol-clustering condition. In particular, an AUDIT score of 20 or higher (vs <8, the reference) was associated with symptoms of depression (odds ratio [OR], 8.37; 95% CI, 6.20-11.29) and anxiety (OR, 8.98; 95% CI, 6.39-12.60) and with self-reported use of tobacco (OR, 14.64; 95% CI, 8.94-23.98), marijuana (OR, 12.41; 95% CI, 8.61-17.90), crack or cocaine (OR, 39.47; 95% CI, 27.38-56.90), other stimulants (OR, 21.31; 95% CI, 12.73-35.67), and injection drugs (OR, 8.67; 95% CI, 5.32-14.13). An AUDIT score of 20 or higher yielded likelihood ratio (sensitivity / 1 - specificity) values greater than 3.5 for depression, anxiety, crack or cocaine use, and other stimulant use. Associations between AUDIT-C scores and alcohol-clustering conditions were more modest.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Alcohol screening can inform decisions about further screening and diagnostic assessment for alcohol-clustering conditions, particularly for depression, anxiety, crack or cocaine use, and other stimulant use. Future studies using clinical diagnoses rather than screening tools to assess alcohol-clustering conditions may be warranted.

Prenatal Alcohol Screening During Pregnancy by Midwives and Nurses

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use during pregnancy can have a variety of harmful consequences on the fetus. Lifelong effects include growth restriction, characteristic facial anomalies, and neurobehavioral dysfunction. This range of effects is known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD). There is no amount, pattern, or timing of alcohol use during pregnancy proven safe for a developing embryo or fetus. Therefore, it is important to screen patients for alcohol use, inform them about alcohol's potential effects during pregnancy, encourage abstinence, and refer for intervention if necessary. However, how and how often nurses and midwives inquire about alcohol drinking during pregnancy or use recommended screening tools and barriers they perceive to alcohol screening has not been well established.

METHODS

This survey was sent to about 6,000 American midwives, nurse practitioners, and nurses who provide prenatal care about their knowledge of the effects of prenatal alcohol exposure, the prevalence of alcohol use during pregnancy, and practices for screening patients' alcohol use. Participants were recruited by e-mail from the entire membership roster of the American College of Nurse-Midwives.

RESULTS

There were 578 valid surveys returned (about 9.6%). Analyses showed that 37.7% of the respondents believe drinking alcohol is safe during at least one trimester of pregnancy. Only 35.2% of respondents reported screening to assess patient alcohol use. Only 23.3% reported using a specific screening tool, and few of those were validated screens recommended for use in pregnant women. Respondents who believe alcohol is safe at some point in pregnancy were significantly less likely to screen their patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents who reported that pregnancy alcohol use is unsafe felt more prepared to educate and intervene with patients regarding alcohol use during pregnancy and FASD than respondents who reported drinking in pregnancy was safe. Perceived alcohol safety and perceived barriers to screening appeared to influence screening practices. Improving prenatal care provider knowledge about the effects of prenatal alcohol exposure and the availability of valid alcohol screening tools will improve detection of drinking during pregnancy, provide more opportunities for meaningful intervention, and ultimately reduce the incidence of FASD.

Predictors of Treatment Referral after AUDIT-C Screening for Heavy Drinking

OBJECTIVES

The Veterans Health Administration has implemented annual screening for heavy drinking during primary care encounters using the 3-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaire and made specialized services available to patients with alcohol use disorders (AUDs). We sought to identify the factors that influence whether a patient who has an elevated AUDIT-C score receives appropriate care in the context of an integrated mental health services program. We focused on higher AUDIT-C scores, as these are seen in individuals who are most likely to have a moderate-to-severe AUD and more severe alcohol-related consequences.

METHODS

Utilizing electronic health record data, we conducted a four-year retrospective study of veterans at high-risk for an AUD, based upon an AUDIT-C score >=8 recorded during a primary care encounter at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center and its community-based outpatient clinics.

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis, the predictors of treatment referral were younger age, being non-white, higher AUDIT-C score, and main campus location. Among patients referred for treatment, younger age and being white were associated with an increased likelihood of completing a pre-treatment assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to increase the consistency of treatment referrals, according to established clinical guidelines, could enhance the effectiveness of AUDIT-C screening during primary care visits. Subgroups of patients who may benefit from such efforts include individuals with high-risk but sub-maximal AUDIT-C scores, older patients, and patients who are seen at community-based outpatient clinics.

Barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of substance use screening in primary care clinics: a qualitative study of patients, providers, and staff

Background

Alcohol and drug use are leading causes of morbidity and mortality that frequently go unidentified in medical settings. As part of a multi-phase study to implement electronic health record-integrated substance use screening in primary care clinics, we interviewed key clinical stakeholders to identify current substance use screening practices, barriers to screening, and recommendations for its implementation.

Methods

Focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with 67 stakeholders, including patients, primary care providers (faculty and resident physicians), nurses, and medical assistants, in two urban academic health systems. Themes were identified using an inductive approach, revised through an iterative process, and mapped to the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework, which guides the implementation of new clinical practices (Graham et al. in J Contin Educ Health Prof 26(1):13–24, 2006).

Results

Factors affecting implementation based on KTA elements were identified from participant narratives. Identifying the problem: Participants consistently agreed that having knowledge of a patient’s substance use is important because of its impacts on health and medical care, that substance use is not properly identified in medical settings currently, and that universal screening is the best approach. Assessing barriers: Patients expressed concerns about consequences of disclosing substance use, confidentiality, and the individual’s own reluctance to acknowledge a substance use problem. Barriers identified by providers included individual-level factors such as lack of clinical knowledge and training, as well as systems-level factors including time pressure, resources, lack of space, and difficulty accessing addiction treatment. Adapting to the local context: Most patients and providers stated that the primary care provider should play a key role in substance use screening and interventions. Opinions diverged regarding the optimal approach to delivering screening, although most preferred a patient self-administered approach. Many providers reported that taking effective action once unhealthy substance use is identified is crucial.

Conclusions

Participants expressed support for substance use screening as a valuable part of medical care, and identified individual-level as well as systems-level barriers to its implementation. These findings suggest that screening programs should clearly communicate the goals of screening to patients and proactively counteract stigma, address staff concerns regarding time and workflow, and provide education as well as treatment resources to primary care providers.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13722-018-0110-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Influence of mental health and alcohol or other drug use risk on adolescent reported care received in primary care settings

Background

To describe patterns of alcohol and other drug (AOD) use risk and adolescent reported primary care (PC) screening and intervention, and examine associations of AOD risk and mental health with reported care received.

Methods

We analyzed data from cross-sectional surveys collected from April 3, 2013 to November 24, 2015 from 1279 diverse adolescents ages 12–18 who reported visiting a doctor at least once in the past year. Key measures were AOD risk using the Personal Experience Screening Questionnaire; mental health using the 5-item Mental Health Inventory; binary measures of adolescent-reported screening and intervention.

Results

Half (49.2%) of the adolescents reported past year AOD use. Of the 769 (60.1%) of adolescents that reported being asked by a medical provider in PC about AOD use, only 37.2% reported receiving screening/intervention. The odds of reported screening/intervention were significantly higher for adolescents with higher AOD risk and lower mental health scores.

Conclusions

Adolescents at risk for AOD use and poor mental health are most likely to benefit from brief intervention. These findings suggest that strategies are needed to facilitate medical providers identification of need for counseling of both AOD and mental health care for at risk youth.

Trials registration

clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT01797835, March 2013.

Use of web-based screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use by older adults

BACKGROUND

While the number of older adults who engage in unhealthy drinking is increasing, few studies have examined the role of online alcohol screening and intervention tools for this population. The objective of this study was to describe characteristics of drinking behaviors among older adults who visited an alcohol screening and intervention website, and compare them to younger adults.

METHODS

We analyzed the responses of visitors to Alcoholscreening.org in 2013 (n=94,221). The prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use, behavioral change characteristics, and barriers to changing drinking were reported by age group (ages 21-49, 50-65, 66-80). Logistic regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with receiving a plan to either help cut back or quit drinking.

RESULTS

Of the entire study sample, 83% of respondents reported unhealthy drinking (exceeding daily or weekly recommended limits) with 84% among 21-49year olds, 79% among 50-65year olds, and 85% among adults over 65. Older adults reported fewer negative aspects of drinking, lower importance to change, highest confidence and fewer barriers to change, compared to younger adults. In the adjusted model, females (AOR=1.45, p<0.001) and older adults (AOR=1.55, p<0.002) were more likely to receive a plan to change drinking behaviors.

DISCUSSION

An online screening and intervention tool identified many older adults with unhealthy alcohol use behaviors and most were receptive to change. Web-based screening and interventions for alcohol use have the potential to be widely used among older adults.

A Brief Smoking Cessation Intervention for Heavy Drinking Smokers: Treatment Feasibility and Acceptability

Approximately 20-25% of regular smokers report heavy drinking. Abstinent smokers are five times as likely to experience a smoking lapse during drinking episodes. Current efforts seek to improve treatments for this subgroup of heavy-drinking smokers. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of addressing alcohol use in a brief, single session smoking cessation intervention (SMK+A) compared to smoking cessation counseling only (SMK); these interventions were grounded in a motivational interview framework and included personalized feedback, decisional balance, quit day setting, and tailored skills building (e.g., breathing techniques, coping with urges, dealing with social pressures) to maintain abstinence. Descriptive outcomes included reported helpfulness of intervention skills, readiness to change scores, and feasibility of participant recruitment and retention. We also assessed 7-day point prevalence of smoking cessation, and smoking and drinking reduction at 1-month follow-up. Participants (N = 22) were community-based treatment-seeking daily smokers (≥5 cigarettes/day) who were also heavy drinkers (≥14 drinks/week for men, ≥ 7 drinks/week for women; or ≥5 drinks on one episode in past week for men, ≥4 for women). Twenty five percent of interested individuals were eligible after initial phone screen, and all randomized participants were retained through follow up. All skills demonstrated high acceptability (i.e., rated between moderately and very helpful), and a significant proportion of participants in each condition reported taking action to reduce cigarette smoking and/or alcohol use at 1-month post-quit. Three participants in each condition (27.3%) attained bioverified (CO ≤ 4 parts per million and cotinine ≤ 3 ng/mL) smoking quit at follow-up. Given the modified intervention's acceptability and flexibility, larger studies may help to elucidate this intervention's effects on readiness to change, smoking cessation, and alcohol reduction.

Sustained effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Counselling for Alcohol Problems, a brief psychological treatment for harmful drinking in men, delivered by lay counsellors in primary care: 12-month follow-up of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Counselling for Alcohol Problems (CAP), a brief intervention delivered by lay counsellors, enhanced remission and abstinence over 3 months among male primary care attendees with harmful drinking in a setting in India. We evaluated the sustainability of the effects after treatment termination, the cost-effectiveness of CAP over 12 months, and the effects of the hypothesized mediator 'readiness to change' on clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Male primary care attendees aged 18-65 years screening with harmful drinking on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) were randomised to either CAP plus enhanced usual care (EUC) (n = 188) or EUC alone (n = 189), of whom 89% completed assessments at 3 months, and 84% at 12 months. Primary outcomes were remission and mean standard ethanol consumed in the past 14 days, and the proposed mediating variable was readiness to change at 3 months. CAP participants maintained the gains they showed at the end of treatment through the 12-month follow-up, with the proportion with remission (AUDIT score < 8: 54.3% versus 31.9%; adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.71 [95% CI 1.32, 2.22]; p < 0.001) and abstinence in the past 14 days (45.1% versus 26.4%; adjusted odds ratio 1.92 [95% CI 1.19, 3.10]; p = 0.008) being significantly higher in the CAP plus EUC arm than in the EUC alone arm. CAP participants also fared better on secondary outcomes including recovery (AUDIT score < 8 at 3 and 12 months: 27.4% versus 15.1%; aPR 1.90 [95% CI 1.21, 3.00]; p = 0.006) and percent of days abstinent (mean percent [SD] 71.0% [38.2] versus 55.0% [39.8]; adjusted mean difference 16.1 [95% CI 7.1, 25.0]; p = 0.001). The intervention effect for remission was higher at 12 months than at 3 months (aPR 1.50 [95% CI 1.09, 2.07]). There was no evidence of an intervention effect on Patient Health Questionnaire 9 score, suicidal behaviour, percentage of days of heavy drinking, Short Inventory of Problems score, WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score, days unable to work, or perpetration of intimate partner violence. Economic analyses indicated that CAP plus EUC was dominant over EUC alone, with lower costs and better outcomes; uncertainty analysis showed a 99% chance of CAP being cost-effective per remission achieved from a health system perspective, using a willingness to pay threshold equivalent to 1 month's wages for an unskilled manual worker in Goa. Readiness to change level at 3 months mediated the effect of CAP on mean standard ethanol consumption at 12 months (indirect effect -6.014 [95% CI -13.99, -0.046]). Serious adverse events were infrequent, and prevalence was similar by arm. The methodological limitations of this trial are the susceptibility of self-reported drinking to social desirability bias, the modest participation rates of eligible patients, and the examination of mediation effects of only 1 mediator and in only half of our sample.

CONCLUSIONS

CAP's superiority over EUC at the end of treatment was largely stable over time and was mediated by readiness to change. CAP provides better outcomes at lower costs from a societal perspective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN76465238.

Evaluation of a Pilot Implementation to Integrate Alcohol-Related Care within Primary Care

Alcohol use is a major cause of disability and death worldwide. To improve prevention and treatment addressing unhealthy alcohol use, experts recommend that alcohol-related care be integrated into primary care (PC). However, few healthcare systems do so. To address this gap, implementation researchers and clinical leaders at Kaiser Permanente Washington partnered to design a high-quality Program of Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-related Care (SPARC). Here, we describe the SPARC pilot implementation, evaluate its effectiveness within three large pilot sites, and describe the qualitative findings on barriers and facilitators. Across the three sites (N = 74,225 PC patients), alcohol screening increased from 8.9% of patients pre-implementation to 62% post-implementation (p < 0.0001), with a corresponding increase in assessment for alcohol use disorders (AUD) from 1.2 to 75 patients per 10,000 seen (p < 0.0001). Increases were sustained over a year later, with screening at 84.5% and an assessment rate of 81 patients per 10,000 seen across all sites. In addition, there was a 50% increase in the number of new AUD diagnoses (p = 0.0002), and a non-statistically significant 54% increase in treatment within 14 days of new diagnoses (p = 0.083). The pilot informed an ongoing stepped-wedge trial in the remaining 22 PC sites.

Comparison of the Substance Use Brief Screen (SUBS) to the AUDIT-C and ASSIST for detecting unhealthy alcohol and drug use in a population of hospitalized smokers

Hospitalized patients have high rates of unhealthy substance use, which has important impacts on health both during and after hospitalization, but is infrequently identified in the absence of screening. The Substance Use Brief Screen (SUBS) was developed as a brief, self-administered instrument to identify use of tobacco, alcohol, illicit drugs, and non-medical use of prescription drugs, and was previously validated in primary care patients. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the SUBS in comparison to longer screening instruments to identify unhealthy and high-risk alcohol and drug use in hospitalized current smokers. Participants were 439 patients, aged 18 and older, who were admitted to either two urban safety-net hospitals in New York City and enrolled in a smoking cessation trial. We measured the performance of the SUBS for identifying illicit drug and non-medical use of prescription drugs in comparison to a modified Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) and its performance for identifying excessive alcohol use in comparison to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C). At the standard cutoff (response other than 'never' indicates a positive screen), the SUBS had a sensitivity of 98% (95% CI 95-100%) and specificity of 61% (95% CI 55-67%) for unhealthy alcohol use, a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI 80-90%) and specificity of 75% (95% CI 78-87%) for illicit drug use, and a sensitivity of 73% (95% CI 61-83%) and specificity of 83% (95% CI 78-87%) for prescription drug non-medical use. For identifying high-risk use, a higher cutoff (response of '3 or more days' of use indicates a positive screen), the SUBS retained high sensitivity (77-90%), and specificity was 62-88%. The SUBS can be considered as an alternative to longer screening instruments, which may fit more easily into busy inpatient settings. Further study is needed to evaluate its validity using gold standard measures in hospitalized populations.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Brief Intervention by Interactive Voice Response

Aims

To determine the effect of an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) brief intervention (BI) to reduce alcohol consumption among adults seeking primary care.

Methods

Patients (N = 1855) with unhealthy drinking were recruited from eight academic internal medicine and family medicine clinics and randomized to IVR-BI (n = 938) versus No IVR-BI control (n = 917). Daily alcohol consumption was assessed at baseline, 3- and 6-months using the Timeline Followback.

Results

The IVR-BI was completed by 95% of the 938 patients randomized to that condition, and 62% of them indicated a willingness to consider a change in their drinking. Participants in both conditions significantly reduced consumption over time, but changes were not different between groups. Regardless of condition, participants with alcohol use disorder (AUD) showed significant decreases in drinking outcomes. No significant changes were observed in patients without AUD, regardless of condition.

Conclusion

Although the IVR intervention was well accepted by patients, there was no evidence that IVR-BI was superior to No IVR-BI for reducing drinking in the subsequent 6 months. Because both the design and the intervention tested were novel, we cannot say definitively why this particular eHealth treatment lacked efficacy. It could be useful to evaluate the effect of the pre-randomization assessment alone on change in drinking. The high treatment engagement rate and successful implementation protocol are strengths, and can be adopted for future trials.

Short summary

We examined the efficacy of a novel BI for patient self-administration by automated telephone. Alcohol consumption decreased over time but there were no between-group changes in consumption. Regardless of treatment condition, participants with alcohol use disorder (AUD) showed significant reduction in drinking but participants without AUD showed no change.

Development and Evaluation of a Short Adverse Childhood Experiences Measure

INTRODUCTION

Clinicians require tools to rapidly identify individuals with significant childhood adversity as part of routine primary care. The goal of this study was to shorten the 11-item Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) measure and evaluate the feasibility and validity of this shortened measure as a screener to identify adults who have experienced significant childhood adversity.

METHODS

Statistical analysis was conducted in 2015. ACE item responses obtained from 2011-2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data were combined to form a sample of 71,413 adults aged ≥18 years. The 11-item Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System ACE measure was subsequently reduced to a two-item screener by maintaining the two dimensions of abuse and household stressors and selecting the most prevalent item within each dimension.

RESULTS

The screener included household alcohol and childhood emotional abuse items. Overall, 42% of respondents and at least 75% of the individuals with four or more ACEs endorsed one or both of these experiences. Using the 11-item ACE measure as the standard, a cut off of one or more ACEs yielded a sensitivity of 99%, but specificity was low (66%). Specificity improved to 94% when using a cut off of two ACEs, but sensitivity diminished (70%). There was no substantive difference between the 11-and two-item ACE measures in their strength of association with an array of health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

A two-item ACE screener appropriate for rapid identification of adults who have experienced significant childhood adversity was developed.

Addressing the intersection between alcohol consumption and antiretroviral treatment: needs assessment and design of interventions for primary healthcare workers, the Western Cape, South Africa

BACKGROUND

At the points where an infectious disease and risk factors for poor health intersect, while health problems may be compounded, there is also an opportunity to provide health services. Where human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and alcohol consumption intersect include infection with HIV, onward transmission of HIV, impact on HIV and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) disease progression, and premature death. The levels of knowledge and attitudes relating to the health and treatment outcomes of HIV and AIDS and the concurrent consumption of alcohol need to be determined. This study aimed to ascertain the knowledge, attitudes and practices of primary healthcare workers concerning the concurrent consumption of alcohol of clinic attendees who are prescribed antiretroviral drugs. An assessment of the exchange of information on the subject between clinic attendees and primary healthcare providers forms an important aspect of the research. A further objective of this study is an assessment of the level of alcohol consumption of people living with HIV and AIDS attending public health facilities in the Western Cape Province in South Africa, to which end, the study reviewed health workers' perceptions of the problem's extent. A final objective is to contribute to the development of evidence-based guidelines for AIDS patients who consume alcohol when on ARVs. The overall study purpose is to optimise antiretroviral health outcomes for all people living with HIV and AIDS, but with specific reference to the clinic attendees studied in this research.

METHODS

Overall the research study utilised mixed methods. Three group-specific questionnaires were administered between September 2013 and May 2014. The resulting qualitative data presented here supplements the results of the quantitative data questionnaires for HIV and AIDS clinic attendees, which have been analysed and written up separately. This arm of the research study comprised two, separate, semi-structured sets of interviews: one face-to-face with healthcare workers at the same primary healthcare clinics from which the clinic attendees were sampled, and the other with administrators from the local government health service via email. The qualitative analysis from the primary healthcare worker interviews has been analysed using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

The key capacity gaps for nurses include the definition of different patterns and volumes of alcohol consumption, resultant health outcomes and how to answer patient questions on alcohol consumption while on antiretroviral treatment. Not only did the counsellors lack knowledge regarding alcohol abuse and its treatment, but they were also they were unclear on their role and rights in relation to their patients. Doctors highlighted the need for additional training for clinicians in diagnosing alcohol use disorders and information on the pharmacological interventions to treat alcoholism.

CONCLUSION

Pertinent knowledge regarding patient alcohol consumption while taking ARVs needs to be disseminated to primary healthcare workers.

Assessing Problematic Substance Use in HIV Care: Which Questions Elicit Accurate Patient Disclosures?

BACKGROUND

Substance use is associated with higher rates of antiretroviral non-adherence and poor HIV outcomes. This study examined how HIV care providers assess substance use, and which questions elicit accurate patient disclosures.

METHODS

We conducted a conversation analysis of audio-recorded encounters between 56 providers and 162 patients living with HIV (PLWH) reporting active substance use in post-encounter interviews (cocaine or heroin use in the past 30 days, > 4 days intoxicated in past 30 days, or AUDIT score ≥ 8). We assessed the frequency of substance use discussion, characterized the types of questions used by providers, and determined the frequency of accurate patient disclosure by question type.

RESULTS

In 55 reports of active substance use, providers already knew about the use (n = 16) or patients disclosed unpromptednn = 39). Among the remaining 155 instances of substance use in which providers had the opportunity to elicit disclosure, 78 reports (50 %) of substance use were not discussed. Of the remaining 77 reports in which the provider asked about substance use, 55 (71 %) patients disclosed and 22 (29 %) did not disclose. Questions were classified as: open-ended (n = 18, "How's the drinking going?"); normalizing (n = 14, "When was the last time you used?"); closed-ended (n = 36, "Have you used any cocaine?"); leading towards non-use (n = 9, "Have you been clean?"). Accurate disclosure followed 100 % of open-ended and normalizing questions, 58 % of closed-ended questions, and 22 % of leading questions. After adjusting for drug type, closed-ended questions were 41 % less likely (p < 0.001), and 'leading' questions 78 % less likely (p = 0.016) than broad and normalizing questions to elicit disclosures.

CONCLUSION

Providers in this sample missed almost half of the opportunities to identify and discuss substance use with PLWH. Providers can increase the probability of patient disclosure by using open-ended or normalizing questions that ask about the "last time" that the patient used drugs or alcohol.

Implementing an mHealth system for substance use disorders in primary care: a mixed methods study of clinicians' initial expectations and first year experiences

Background

Millions of Americans need but don’t receive treatment for substance use, and evidence suggests that addiction-focused interventions on smart phones could support their recovery. There is little research on implementation of addiction-related interventions in primary care, particularly in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) that provide primary care to underserved populations. We used mixed methods to examine three FQHCs’ implementation of Seva, a smart-phone app that offers patients online support/discussion, health-tracking, and tools for coping with cravings, and offers clinicians information about patients’ health tracking and relapses. We examined (a) clinicians’ initial perspectives about implementing Seva, and (b) the first year of implementation at Site 1.

Methods

Prior to staggered implementation at three FQHCs (Midwest city in WI vs. rural town in MT vs. metropolitan NY), interviews, meetings, and focus groups were conducted with 53 clinicians to identify core themes of initial expectations about implementation. One year into implementation at Site 1, clinicians there were re-interviewed. Their reports were supplemented by quantitative data on clinician and patient use of Seva.

Results

Clinicians anticipated that Seva could help patients and make behavioral health appointments more efficient, but they were skeptical that physicians would engage with Seva (given high caseloads), and they were uncertain whether patients would use Seva. They were concerned about legal obligations for monitoring patients’ interactions online, including possible “cries for help” or inappropriate interactions. One year later at Site 1, behavioral health care providers, rather than physicians, had incorporated Seva into patient care, primarily by discussing it during appointments. Given workflow/load concerns, only a few key clinicians monitored health tracking/relapses and prompted outreach when needed; two researchers monitored the discussion board and alerted the clinic as needed. Clinician turnover/leave complicated this approach. Contrary to clinicians’ initial concerns, patients showed sustained, mutually supportive use of Seva, with few instances of misuse.

Conclusions

Results suggest the value of (a) focusing implementation on behavioral health care providers rather than physicians, (b) assigning a few individuals (not necessarily clinicians) to monitor health tracking, relapses, and the discussion board, (c) anticipating turnover/leave and having designated replacements. Patients showed sustained, positive use of Seva.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01963234).

Impact of primary healthcare providers' initial role security and therapeutic commitment on implementing brief interventions in managing risky alcohol consumption: a cluster randomised factorial trial

BACKGROUND

Brief interventions in primary healthcare are cost-effective in reducing drinking problems but poorly implemented in routine practice. Although evidence about implementing brief interventions is growing, knowledge is limited with regard to impact of initial role security and therapeutic commitment on brief intervention implementation.

METHODS

In a cluster randomised factorial trial, 120 primary healthcare units (PHCUs) were randomised to eight groups: care as usual, training and support, financial reimbursement, and the opportunity to refer patients to an internet-based brief intervention (e-BI); paired combinations of these three strategies, and all three strategies combined. To explore the impact of initial role security and therapeutic commitment on implementing brief interventions, we performed multilevel linear regression analyses adapted to the factorial design.

RESULTS

Data from 746 providers from 120 PHCUs were included in the analyses. Baseline role security and therapeutic commitment were found not to influence implementation of brief interventions. Furthermore, there were no significant interactions between these characteristics and allocated implementation groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The extent to which providers changed their brief intervention delivery following experience of different implementation strategies was not determined by their initial attitudes towards alcohol problems. In future research, more attention is needed to unravel the causal relation between practitioners' attitudes, their actual behaviour and care improvement strategies to enhance implementation science.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01501552.

Brief Intervention for Heavy Drinking in Primary Care: Role of Patient Initiation

BACKGROUND

Alcohol brief intervention (BI) in primary care (PC) is effective, but remains underutilized despite multiple efforts to increase provider-initiated BI. An alternative approach to promote BI is to prompt patients to initiate alcohol-related discussions. Little is known about the role of patients in BI delivery.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the characteristics of PC patients who reported initiating BI with their providers, and to evaluate the association between the initiator (patient vs provider) and drinking after a BI.

METHODS

In the context of clinical trial, patients (n = 267) who received BI during a PC visit reported on the manner in which the BI was initiated, readiness to change, demographics, and recent history of alcohol consumption. Drinking was assessed again at 6-months after the BI.

RESULTS

Fifty percent of patients receiving a BI reported initiating the discussion of drinking themselves. Compared with those who reported a provider-initiated discussion, self-initiators were significantly younger (43.7 years vs 47.1 years; P = 0.03), more likely to meet Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) criteria for current major depression (24% vs 14%; P = 0.04), and more likely to report a history of alcohol withdrawal symptoms (68% vs 52%; P < 0.01). Baseline readiness to change, baseline consumption rates, and current DSM-IV alcohol dependence were not different between groups. In the 2 to 3 weeks after BI, self-initiators reported greater decreases in drinks per week (5.7 vs 2.4; P = 0.02), and drinking days per week (1.0 vs 0.3; P = 0.002). At 6-month follow-up, self-initiators showed significantly greater reductions in weekly drinking compared to those whose provider initiated the BI (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient- and provider-initiated BI occurred with equal frequency, and patient-initiated BIs were associated with greater reductions in alcohol use. Future efforts to increase the BI rate in PC should include a focus on prompting patients to initiate alcohol-related discussions.

Validation of an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) version of the alcohol, smoking and substance involvement screening test (ASSIST) in primary care patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To address barriers to implementing the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) in medical settings, we adapted the traditional interviewer-administered (IA) ASSIST to an audio-guided computer assisted self-interview (ACASI) format. This study sought to validate the ACASI ASSIST by estimating the concordance, correlation and agreement of scores generated using the ACASI versus the reference standard IA ASSIST. Secondary aims were to assess feasibility and compare ASSIST self-report to drug testing results.

DESIGN

Participants completed the ACASI and IA ASSIST in a randomly assigned order, followed by drug testing.

SETTING

Urban safety-net primary care clinic in New York City, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 393 adult patients.

MEASUREMENTS

Scores generated by the ACASI and IA ASSIST; drug testing results from saliva and hair samples.

FINDINGS

Concordance between the ACASI and IA ASSIST in identifying moderate-high-risk use was 92-99% for each substance class. Correlation was excellent for global scores [intraclass correlation (ICC) = 0.937, confidence interval (CI) = 0.924-0.948] and for substance-specific scores for tobacco (ICC = 0.927, CI = 0.912-0.940), alcohol (ICC = 0.912, CI = 0.893-0.927) and illicit drugs (ICC = 0.854, CI = 0.854-0.900) and good for prescription drugs (ICC = 0.676, CI = 0.613-0.729). Ninety-four per cent of differences in global scores fell within anticipated limits of agreement. Among participants with a positive saliva test, 74% self-reported use on the ACASI ASSIST. The ACASI ASSIST required a median time of 3.7 minutes (range 0.7-15.4), and 21 (5.3%) participants requested assistance.

CONCLUSIONS

The computer self-administered Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test appears to be a valid alternative to the interviewer-administered approach for identifying substance use in primary care patients.

The Diffusion of Acamprosate for the Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder: Results From a National Longitudinal Study

To consider how the Affordable Care Act may impact the diffusion of acamprosate, an evidence-based treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD), the present study estimated the associations between acamprosate availability, Medicaid revenues, and private insurance revenues. Data were collected from organizational leaders of national samples of 307 specialty treatment centers in 2009-2012 and 372 treatment centers in 2011-2013. Notably, there was not a significant change in the percentage of organizations offering acamprosate over the study period. However, greater reliance on Medicaid and private insurance as sources of revenue was positively associated with the availability of acamprosate. In addition, acamprosate availability was positively associated with access to physicians and the presence of on-site primary medical care, while centers that placed greater emphasis on confrontational group therapy were significantly less likely to offer acamprosate for AUD treatment. To the extent that the ACA is expanding the number of insured individuals enrolled in Medicaid and commercial insurance sold through health insurance exchanges, this study suggests that the ACA may hold promise for expanding the availability of this EBP for AUD treatment. Future research is needed to measure whether this potential impact actually occurs within the specialty treatment system over time.

Specialty substance use disorder services following brief alcohol intervention: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Brief alcohol interventions in medical settings are efficacious in improving self-reported alcohol consumption among those with low-severity alcohol problems. Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment initiatives presume that brief interventions are efficacious in linking patients to higher levels of care, but pertinent evidence has not been evaluated. We estimated main and subgroup effects of brief alcohol interventions, regardless of their inclusion of a referral-specific component, in increasing the utilization of alcohol-related care.

METHODS

A systematic review of English language papers published in electronic databases to 2013. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of brief alcohol interventions in general health-care settings with adult and adolescent samples. We excluded studies that lacked alcohol services utilization data. Extractions of study characteristics and outcomes were standardized and conducted independently. The primary outcome was post-treatment alcohol services utilization assessed by self-report or administrative data, which we compared across intervention and control groups.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs met inclusion criteria and nine were meta-analyzed (n = 993 and n = 937 intervention and control group participants, respectively). In our main analyses the pooled risk ratio (RR) was = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.92-1.28. Five studies compared referral-specific interventions with a control condition without such interventions (pooled RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.81-1.43). Other subgroup analyses of studies with common characteristics (e.g. age, setting, severity, risk of bias) yielded non-statistically significant results.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of evidence that brief alcohol interventions have any efficacy for increasing the receipt of alcohol-related services.

Comparison of provider-documented and patient-reported brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in VA outpatients

BACKGROUND

Performance measures for brief alcohol interventions (BIs) are currently based on provider documentation of BI. However, provider documentation may not be a reliable measure of whether or not patients are offered clinically meaningful BIs. In particular, BI documented with clinical decision support in an electronic medical record (EMR) could appear identical irrespective of the quality of BI provided. We hypothesized that differences in how BI was implemented across health systems could lead to differences in the proportion of documented BI recalled and reported by patients across health systems.

METHODS

Male outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use identified by confidential satisfaction surveys (2009-2012) were assessed for whether they reported receiving BI in the past year (patient-reported BI) and whether they had BI documented in the EMR during the same period (documented BI). We evaluated and compared the prevalence of documented BI to patient-reported BI across 21 VA networks to determine whether documented BI had a variable association with patient-reported BI across the networks.

RESULTS

Of 9896 eligible male outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use, 59.0% (95% CI 57.4-60.5%) reported BI (50.4-64.9% across networks) and 37.4% (95% CI 36.0-38.9%) had BI documented in the EMR (28.0-44.2% across networks). Overall, 72.9% (95% CI 70.8-75.5%) of patients with documented BI also reported BI. The association between documented BI and patient-reported BI did not vary across VA networks in adjusted logistic regression models.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance measures of BI that rely on provider documentation in EMRs appear comparable to patient report for comparing care across VA networks.

Examining the Impact of Separate Components of a Multicomponent Intervention Designed to Reduce At-Risk Drinking Among Older Adults: The Project SHARE Study

BACKGROUND

Health promotion interventions often include multiple components and several patient contacts. The objective of this study was to examine how participation within a multicomponent intervention (Project SHARE) is associated with changes in at-risk drinking among older adults.

METHODS

We analyzed observational data from a cluster-randomized trial of 31 primary care physicians and their patients aged ≥60 years, at a community-based practice with 7 clinics. Recruitment occurred between 2005 and 2007. At-risk drinkers in a particular physician's practice were randomly assigned as a group to usual care (n = 640 patients) versus intervention (n = 546 patients). The intervention included personalized reports, educational materials, drinking diaries, in-person physician advice, and telephone counseling by health educators (HEs). The primary outcome was at-risk drinking at follow-up, defined by scores on the Comorbidity Alcohol Risk Evaluation Tool (CARET). Predictors included whether a physician-patient alcohol risk discussion occurred, HE call occurred, drinking agreement with the HE was made, and patients self-reported keeping a drinking diary as suggested by the HE.

RESULTS

At 6 months, there was no association of at-risk drinking with having had a physician-patient discussion. Compared to having had no HE call, the odds of at-risk drinking at 6 months were lower if an agreement was made or patients reported keeping a diary (odds ratio [OR] 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.90), or if an agreement was made and patients reported keeping a diary (OR 0.52, CI 0.28 to 0.97). At 12 months, a physician-patient discussion (OR 0.61, CI 0.38 to 0.98) or an agreement and reported use of a diary (OR 0.45, CI 0.25) were associated with lower odds of at-risk drinking.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the Project SHARE intervention, discussing alcohol risk with a physician, making a drinking agreement, and/or self-reporting the use of a drinking diary were associated with lower odds of at-risk drinking at follow-up. Future studies targeting at-risk drinking among older adults should consider incorporating both intervention components.

Impact of a multicomponent screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) training curriculum on a medical residency program

BACKGROUND

Substance-related disorders are a growing problem in the United States. The patient-provider setting can serve as a crucial environment to detect and prevent at-risk substance use. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an integrated approach to deliver early intervention and treatment services for persons who have or are at risk for substance-related disorders. SBIRT training components can include online modules, in-person instruction, practical experience, and clinical skills assessment. This paper will evaluate the impact of multiple modes of training on acquisition of SBIRT skills as observed in a clinical skills assessment.

METHODS

Residents were part of an SBIRT training program, from 2009 through 2013, consisting of lecture, role-play, online modules, patient encounters, and clinical skills assessment (CSA). Differences were assessed across satisfactory and unsatisfactory CSA performance.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of the residents satisfactorily completed CSA. Demographics, type of components completed, and number of components completed were similar among residents who demonstrated satisfactory clinical skills compared with those who did not. All components of the training program were accepted equally across specialties and resident matriculation cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The authors conclude that the components employed in SBIRT training do not have to be numerous or of a particular mode of training in order to see observable demonstration of SBIRT skills among medical residents. Thus, residency educators who have limited time or resources may utilize as few as 1 mode of training to effectually disseminate SBIRT skills among health care providers. As SBIRT continues to evolve as a promising tool to address at-risk substance-related disorders, it is critical to train medical residents and other health professionals.

Attitudes and Training Needs of New England HIV Care and Addiction Treatment Providers: Opportunities for Better Integration of HIV and Alcohol Treatment Services

OBJECTIVES

Unhealthy alcohol use is common among HIV-infected patients and contributes to co-morbidities, cognitive decline, unprotected sex, and poor medication adherence. Studies consistently show missed opportunities to address unhealthy alcohol use as part of care. Although treatment of other drug use has been integrated into HIV care in some settings, more information is needed regarding provider attitudes regarding the need for integration of alcohol treatment and HIV care.

METHODS

We surveyed 119 HIV and 159 addiction providers regarding the following domains: existing knowledge, desire for new knowledge (with subdomains relative advantage, compatibility, and complexity of integrating knowledge), and individual and program development needs. Scale scores for each domain were correlated with demographics to identify factors associated with training need.

RESULTS

Both HIV and addiction providers reported agreement with statements of existing knowledge and the need for additional skills. The priority attributed to training, however, was low for both groups. Knowledge and perceived prevalence of HIV and unhealthy alcohol use increased with years of experience. Perceived prevalence correlated with compatibility but not the relative advantage of training.

CONCLUSIONS

Though addressing alcohol use and HIV was acknowledged to be important, the priority of this was low, particularly early career providers. These providers may be important targets for training focusing on motivating coordination of care and skills related to assessment and counseling.

An early evaluation of implementation of brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in the US Veterans Health Administration

AIMS

The US Veterans Health Administration [Veterans Affairs (VA)] used performance measures and electronic clinical reminders to implement brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. We evaluated whether documented brief intervention was associated with subsequent changes in drinking during early implementation.

DESIGN

Observational, retrospective cohort study using secondary clinical and administrative data.

SETTING

Thirty VA facilities.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use [Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C ≥ 5)] in the 6 months after the brief intervention performance measure (n = 22 214) and had follow-up screening 9-15 months later (n = 6210; 28%).

MEASUREMENTS

Multi-level logistic regression estimated the adjusted prevalence of resolution of unhealthy alcohol use (follow-up AUDIT-C <5 with ≥2 point reduction) for patients with and without documented brief intervention (documented advice to reduce or abstain from drinking).

FINDINGS

Among 6210 patients with follow-up alcohol screening, 1751 (28%) had brief intervention and 2922 (47%) resolved unhealthy alcohol use at follow-up. Patients with documented brief intervention were older and more likely to have other substance use disorders, mental health conditions, poor health and more severe unhealthy alcohol use than those without (P-values < 0.05). Adjusted prevalences of resolution were 47% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 42-52%] and 48% (95% CI = 42-54%) for patients with and without documented brief intervention, respectively (P = 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

During early implementation of brief intervention in the US Veterans Health Administration, documented brief intervention was not associated with subsequent changes in drinking among outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use and repeat alcohol screening.

GPs' role security and therapeutic commitment in managing alcohol problems: a randomised controlled trial of a tailored improvement programme

BACKGROUND

General practitioners with more positive role security and therapeutic commitment towards patients with hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption are more involved and manage more alcohol-related problems than others. In this study we evaluated the effects of our tailored multi-faceted improvement implementation programme on GPs' role security and therapeutic commitment and, in addition, which professional related factors influenced the impact of the implementation programme.

METHODS

In a cluster randomised controlled trial, 124 GPs from 82 Dutch general practices were randomised to either the intervention or control group. The tailored, multi-faceted programme included combined physician, organisation, and patient directed alcohol-specific implementation strategies to increase role security and therapeutic commitment in GPs. The control group was mailed the national guideline and patients received feedback letters. Questionnaires were completed before and 12 months after start of the programme. We performed linear multilevel regression analysis to evaluate effects of the implementation programme.

RESULTS

Participating GPs were predominantly male (63%) and had received very low levels of alcohol related education before start of the study (0.4 h). The programme increased therapeutic commitment (p = 0.005; 95%-CI 0.13 - 0.73) but not role security (p = 0.58; 95%-CI -0.31 - 0.54). How important GPs thought it was to improve their care for problematic alcohol consumption, and the GPs' reported proportion of patients asked about alcohol consumption at baseline, contributed to the effect of the programme on therapeutic commitment.

CONCLUSIONS

A tailored, multi-faceted programme aimed at improving GP management of patients with hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption improved GPs' therapeutic commitment towards patients with alcohol-related problems, but failed to improve GPs' role security. How important GPs thought it was to improve their care for problematic alcohol consumption, and the GPs' reported proportion of patients asked about alcohol consumption at baseline, both increased the impact of the programme on therapeutic commitment. It might be worthwhile to monitor proceeding of role security and therapeutic commitment throughout the year after the implementation programme, to see whether the programme is effective on short term but faded out on the longer term.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00298220.

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

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

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment: public health training for primary care

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to elucidate changes in attitudes, experiences, readiness, and confidence levels of medical residents to perform screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) and factors that moderate these changes.

METHODS

A cohort of 121 medical residents received an educational intervention. Self-reported experience, readiness, attitude, and confidence toward SBIRT-related skills were measured at baseline and at follow-up. Analyses were conducted to evaluate the effects of medical specialization.

RESULTS

The intervention significantly increased experience (P<.001), attitude (P<.05), readiness (P<.001), and confidence (P<.001). Residents were more likely to report that their involvement influenced patients' substance use. However, experience applying SBIRT skills varied by country of birth, specialty, and baseline scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested that SBIRT training was an effective educational tool that increased residents' sense of responsibility. However, application of skills might differ by specialization and other variables. Future studies are needed to explore and evaluate SBIRT knowledge obtained, within the context of cultural awareness and clinical skills.

Attitudinal Barriers to Analgesic Use among Patients with Substance Use Disorders

Attitudinal barriers towards analgesic use among primary care patients with chronic pain and substance use disorders (SUDs) are not well understood. We evaluated the prevalence of moderate to significant attitudinal barriers to analgesic use among 597 primary care patients with chronic pain and current analgesic use with 3 subscales from the Barriers Questionaire II: concern about side effects, fear of addiction, and worry about reporting pain to physicians. Concern about side effects was a greater barrier for those with opioid use disorders (OUDs) and non-opioid SUDs than for those with no SUD (OR (95% CI): 2.30 (1.44–3.68), P < 0.001 and 1.64 (1.02–2.65), P = 0.041, resp.). Fear of addiction was a greater barrier for those with OUDs as compared to those with non-opioid SUDs (OR (95% CI): 2.12 (1.04–4.30), P = 0.038) and no SUD (OR (95% CI): 2.69 (1.44–5.03), P = 0.002). Conversely, participants with non-opioid SUDs reported lower levels of worry about reporting pain to physicians than those with no SUD (OR (95% CI): 0.43 (0.24–0.76), P = 0.004). Participants with OUDs reported higher levels of worry about reporting pain than those with non-opioid SUDs (OR (95% CI): 1.91 (1.01–3.60), P = 0.045). Concerns about side effects and fear of addiction can be barriers to analgesic use, moreso for people with SUDs and OUDs.

Access to health care and heavy drinking in patients with diabetes or hypertension: implications for alcohol interventions

Supported by a National Institute of Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse grant, this study examined associations between health care access and heavy drinking in patients with hypertension and diabetes. Using a sample of 7,428 US adults from the 2007 National Health Interview Survey data, multivariate logistic regressions were performed. Better access to health care, as indicated by regular source of care and frequent use of primary care, was associated with reduced odds of heavy drinking. Alcohol interventions may be more effective if targeted at patients with chronic conditions adversely affected by drinking. Future research needs to investigate factors facilitating such interventions.

Challenges to alcohol and other drug discussions in the general practice consultation

BACKGROUND

There is a widely held expectation that GPs will routinely use opportunities to provide opportunistic screening and brief intervention for alcohol and other drug (AOD) abuse, a major cause of preventable death and morbidity.

AIM

To explore how opportunities arise for AOD discussion in GP consultations and how that advice is delivered.

DESIGN

Analysis of video-recorded primary care consultations.

SETTING

New Zealand General Practice.

METHODS

Interactional content analysis of AOD consultations between 15 GP's and 56 patients identified by keyword search from a bank of digital video consultation recordings.

RESULTS

AOD-related words were found in almost one-third (56/171) of the GP consultation transcripts (22 female and 34 male patients). The AOD dialogue varied from brief mention to pertinent advice. Tobacco and alcohol discussion featured more often than misuse of anxiolytics, night sedation, analgesics and caffeine, with only one direct enquiry about other (unspecified) recreational drug use. Discussion was associated with interactional delicacy on the part of both doctor and patient, manifested by verbal and non-verbal discomfort, use of closed statements, understatement, wry humour and sudden topic change.

CONCLUSIONS

Mindful prioritization of competing demands, time pressures, topic delicacy and the acuteness of the presenting complaint can impede use of AOD discussion opportunities. Guidelines and tools for routine screening and brief intervention in primary care do not accommodate this reality. Possible responses to enhance AOD conversations within general practice settings are discussed.

Do attitudes about unhealthy alcohol and other drug (AOD) use impact primary care professionals' readiness to implement AOD-related preventive care?

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

To explore the association between primary care professionals' (PCPs) attitudes towards unhealthy alcohol and other drug (AOD) use (from risky use through dependence) and readiness to implement AOD-related preventive care.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Primary care professionals from five health centres in Sao Paulo were invited to complete a questionnaire about preventive care and attitudes about people with unhealthy AOD use. Logistic regression models tested the association between professional satisfaction and readiness. Multiple Correspondence Analysis assessed associations between stigmatising attitudes and readiness.

RESULTS

Of 160 PCPs surveyed, 96 (60%) completed the questionnaire. Only 25% reported implementing unhealthy AOD use clinical prevention practices; and 53% did not feel ready to implement such practices. Greater satisfaction when working with people with AOD problems was significantly associated with readiness to implement AOD-related preventive care. In Multiple Correspondence Analysis two groups emerged: (i) PCPs ready to work with people with unhealthy AOD use, who attributed to such patients lower levels of dangerousness, blame for their condition and need for segregation from the community (suggesting less stigmatising attitudes); and (ii) PCPs not ready to work with people with unhealthy AOD use, who attributed to them higher levels of dangerousness, blame, perceived level of patient control over their condition and segregation (suggesting more stigmatising attitudes).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

More stigmatising attitudes towards people with unhealthy AOD use are associated with less readiness to implement unhealthy AOD-related preventive care. Understanding these issues is likely essential to facilitating implementation of preventive care, such as screening and brief intervention, for unhealthy AOD use. [Amaral-Sabadini MB, Saitz R, Souza-Formigoni MLO. Do attitudes about unhealthy alcohol and other drug (AOD) use impact primary care professionals' readiness to implement AOD-related preventive care?

Inside the physician's black bag: critical ingredients of brief alcohol interventions

Brief primary care interventions structured around patient workbooks have been shown to be effective in modifying hazardous drinking behavior. However, the critical ingredients of such interventions are not well understood, possibly contributing to their underutilization. Seventeen campus-based clinicians trained in a brief, workbook-based alcohol intervention participated in a qualitative study to identify the most promising clinician-patient interaction components within this shared approach, utilizing a focus group with the clinicians and ranking of the 24 workbook ingredients. Based on the clinicians' collective experience, consensus emerged around the perceived strength of 5 main components: (1) providing a summary of the patient's drinking level, (2) discussing drinking likes and dislikes, (3) discussing life goals, (4) encouraging a risk-reduction agreement, and (5) asking patients to track their drinking (on cards provided for this purpose). This is the first paper to examine primary care physician perspectives on potentially critical components of effective brief alcohol intervention.

Utility of prompting physicians for brief alcohol consumption intervention

A comprehensive prompting strategy designed to maximize the rate of Brief Intervention (BI) for "heavy drinking" was implemented from 2001 to 2003 for a randomized controlled trial of a post-BI treatment enhancement. Thirty-one internists at four outpatient practices in a county of 150,000 in a rural US state documented their BI's using an intervention checklist. The prompting procedures implemented in this study yielded documented BI for 39% of identified cases, but participation rates varied by physician and clinic and over time. The overall rate was lower than expected. Implications and recommendations for future BI research and training are offered; the paper's limitations are discussed.

Interactive voice response technology can deliver alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care

BACKGROUND

Alcohol screening and brief intervention (BI) is an effective primary care preventive service, but implementation rates are low. Automating BI using interactive voice response (IVR) may be an efficient way to expand patient access to needed information and advice.

OBJECTIVE

To develop IVR-based BI and pilot test it for feasibility and acceptability.

DESIGN

Single-group pre-post feasibility study.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care patients presenting for an office visit.

INTERVENTIONS

IVR-BI structured to correspond to the provider BI method recommended by NIAAA: (1) Ask about use; (2) Assess problems; (3) Advise and Assist for change, and (4) Follow up for continued support. Advice was tailored to patient readiness and preferences.

MEASUREMENTS

Utilization rate, call duration, and patients' subjective reports of usefulness, comfort and honesty with the IVR-BI. Pre-post evaluation of motivation to change and change in alcohol consumption as measured by Timeline Follow Back.

RESULTS

Call duration ranged from 3-7 minutes. Subjective reactions were generally positive or neutral. About 40% of subjects indicated IVR-BI had motivated them to change. About half of the patients had discussed drinking with their provider at the visit. These tended to be heavier drinkers with greater concerns about drinking. Patients who reported a provider-delivered BI and called the IVR-BI endorsed greater comfort and honesty with the IVR-BI. On average, a 25% reduction in alcohol use was reported two weeks after the clinic visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Using IVR technology to deliver BI in a primary care setting is feasible and data suggest potential for efficacy in a larger trial.

Use of an electronic clinical reminder for brief alcohol counseling is associated with resolution of unhealthy alcohol use at follow-up screening

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Brief alcohol counseling is a foremost US prevention priority, but no health-care system has implemented it into routine care. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an electronic clinical reminder for brief alcohol counseling ("reminder"). The specific aims were to (1) determine the prevalence of use of the reminder and (2) evaluate whether use of the reminder was associated with resolution of unhealthy alcohol use at follow-up screening.

METHODS

The reminder was implemented in February 2004 in eight VA clinics where providers routinely used clinical reminders. Patients eligible for this retrospective cohort study screened positive on the AUDIT-C alcohol screening questionnaire (February 2004-April 2006) and had a repeat AUDIT-C during the 1-36 months of follow-up (mean 14.5). Use of the alcohol counseling clinical reminder was measured from secondary electronic data. Resolution of unhealthy alcohol use was defined as screening negative at follow-up with a >/=2-point reduction in AUDIT-C scores. Logistic regression was used to identify adjusted proportions of patients who resolved unhealthy alcohol use among those with and without reminder use.

RESULTS

Among 4,198 participants who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use, 71% had use of the alcohol counseling clinical reminder documented in their medical records. Adjusted proportions of patients who resolved unhealthy alcohol use were 31% (95% CI 30-33%) and 28% (95% CI 25-30%), respectively, for patients with and without reminder use (p-value = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

The brief alcohol counseling clinical reminder was used for a majority of patients with unhealthy alcohol use and associated with a moderate decrease in drinking at follow-up.