Alcohol Screening And Brief Intervention Research Articles

Contextual factors associated with successful alcohol screening and brief intervention implementation and sustainment in adult primary care

IntroductionHazardous drinking is a public health problem affecting approximately 20 % of the U.S. primary care population. Clinical trials have documented the efficacy and effectiveness of Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention (ASBI), yet widespread implementation remains elusive, and questions remain regarding optimal implementation and sustainment strategies. Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) implemented systematic ASBI in adult primary care in mid-2013. We used 8 years of electronic health record (EHR) data, combined with surveys which captured primary care provider perceptions organized into PRISM (Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model) implementation framework domains (Intervention, External Environment, Implementation Infrastructure, and Recipients), to characterize ASBI implementation and sustainment and test how various factors are associated with ASBI rates. MethodsUsing EHR data, we calculated yearly screening rates of adults with a primary care visit, and brief intervention (BI) rates among those with a positive hazardous drinking screen, (exceeding the age and sex-specific daily and weekly low-risk NIH guidelines (≤3 per day and ≤ 7 per week for women and older men; ≤4 per day and ≤ 14 per week for men 18–65)), across KPNC, from 2014 to 2021. We collected web-based survey data, informed by the PRISM domains, from primary care providers (n = 796; 35.5 % RR) to assess perceptions on ASBI implementation and sustainability. ResultsBetween 1/1/2014 and 12/31/21 there were 5,072,270 completed screenings and 624,167 BIs. After adjusting for patient panel characteristics, we found that facilities with higher Implementation Infrastructure domain scores, indicating more robust implementation capacity, had higher screening and BI rates; facilities with higher Intervention domain scores, indicating positive perceptions of SBIRT evidence, and facilities with higher Recipients domain scores, indicating perceived organizational robustness, clinician culture and management support; and greater perceived patient needs and their likely benefit from SBIRT, had higher BI rates. ConclusionsResults provide information on factors which may facilitate successful ASBI implementation and sustainability and could inform future ASBI implementation efforts in healthcare system settings. In particular, efforts toward bolstering an organization's implementation infrastructure capacity, prior to embarking on implementation of a systematic ASBI program, could potentially help pave the way for successful implementation.

Answering a Call to Action: Reducing Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Using a Healthcare Champion Model.

Prenatal alcohol exposure and fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs) remain critical public health issues. Alcohol use in pregnancy is a leading preventable cause of birth defects, developmental disabilities, and learning disabilities. Alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is effective at reducing excessive alcohol use. However, this clinical preventive service remains critically underutilized in primary care. In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention called for the creation of FASD Champion programs to promote clinician education about FASDs. Six professional health organizations and groups providing reproductive and child health services set out to create FASD Champion programs. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists FASDs Prevention Program was created to focus on reducing alcohol-exposed pregnancies. The American Academy of Pediatrics' Champion program maintains the goal of improving health outcomes for children with FASDs by improving pediatricians' diagnostic capacity. The American Academy of Family Physicians has prioritized training family physician champions to improve the delivery of alcohol SBI among adult patients. The University of Alaska Anchorage has partnered with the National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health, the American College of Nurse-Midwives, and the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric, and Neonatal Nurses to assure advanced practice registered nurses and midwives have the knowledge and skills to prevent alcohol-exposed pregnancies and FASDs. The American Association of Medical Assistants has prioritized expanding the knowledge and skills of medical assistants related to promoting alcohol-free pregnancies. Finally, the Champions program at the University of Texas at Austin was established to train health social workers in alcohol SBI. Through the advocacy, education, and mission of these 6 health sectors in collaboration with national organizations and educational institutions, the evidence-based approach of alcohol SBI is being disseminated throughout the United States to reduce the harmful effects of prenatal alcohol exposure.

Cross-Site Evaluation of Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention Implementation Programs in Healthcare Systems Serving Individuals of Reproductive Age.

With US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funding, from 2018 to 2022, 4 large healthcare systems (n = 53 health centers across 7 states) serving people of reproductive age trained staff and provided implementation support for alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI). This cross-site evaluation explores each healthcare system's implementation approach to implement SBI, reduce excessive alcohol use, and prevent prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE) and fetal alcohol spectrum disorders. The SBIRT (Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment) Program Matrix framed the multilevel strategies to implement alcohol SBI programs from 2018 to 2022. Qualitative and quantitative data sources examined outcomes, guided by one logic model, through systems-level process data and provider-level performance metrics. Data analyses utilized frequencies and means for quantitative data and themes for qualitative data according to an established framework. Successful approaches within systems included using electronic health records, flexible implementation and workflow protocols, customized training and technical assistance programs, quality assurance feedback loops, and stakeholder buy-in. Centralized management structures were efficient in standardizing implementation across health centers. Decentralized management structures used tailored approaches, enhancing provider/staff SBI acceptance. Across systems, 1259 staff (eg, clinicians, medical assistants) were trained to provide alcohol SBI services and reported pre-post training increases in self-efficacy in performing brief intervention; skills in PAE counseling; and confidence in screening. Fifty-three (48 providing data) health centers implemented alcohol SBI, screening 106 826 patients over the study period with most of the 10 087 patients who screened positive for excessive alcohol use receiving a BI. Maximizing the use of technology, employing flexibility in program delivery, and institutionalizing processes and protocols improved workflow, efficiency, and program reach. Ongoing partnership and stakeholder communication identify areas for ongoing improvement, engagement, and best practices for sustainability around substance use screening, which are essential with increases in substance use since the pandemic.

Identifying Patients at Risk for Alcohol-Exposed Pregnancies: The Importance of Addressing Multiple Risk Factors.

The increasing prevalence of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders is a critical public health issue. Two behaviors, consuming alcohol and using less effective pregnancy prevention, may result in alcohol-exposed pregnancies (AEPs) in individuals who can become pregnant. In the context of alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) services, cutoff scores on widely used alcohol risk assessments (eg, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, U.S. version [USAUDIT]) may fail to identify individuals whose relatively low alcohol consumption may still put them at risk for an AEP due to their pregnancy prevention method. To identify this gap in alcohol SBI service delivery, we examined data from 2 reproductive healthcare systems implementing alcohol SBI, to explore the prevalence of individuals who met both of the following risk conditions: reported any alcohol use on the USAUDIT and a pregnancy prevention method less than 88% effective. Electronic health records for individuals aged 18 to 49 presenting for preventive care in 2021 were analyzed. Of 11 567 screened, 7638 reported some alcohol use, but screened at a lower-risk level and were not flagged to receive an alcohol-focused brief intervention (BI). Of these, 1477 were using a method of pregnancy prevention that was less than 88% effective. In addition, 118 of the 1676 who screened positive on the USAUDIT were using less effective contraception and did not receive a BI. In summary, the number of individuals at risk of an AEP who did not receive an alcohol BI was 1595 (13.8%) of the total patients screened for at-risk alcohol use. There is a need for system modifications to assess multiple behaviors simultaneously and alert providers when a combination of behaviors increases a specific health risk, such as an AEP. Tailored alcohol BIs that include the risks/benefits of various pregnancy prevention methods to reduce AEPs provide opportunities to enhance the reach of standard alcohol SBI services.

Content Validity and Cognitive Testing in the Development of a Motivational Interviewing Self-Assessment Questionnaire.

To develop and content validate a self-assessment questionnaire on motivational interviewing (MI) practice as the first stages in forming the questionnaire to be used in cross-sectional studies involving practitioners conducting the MI-based alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI). A comprehensive mixed methods approach included a literature review, 3 rounds of expert panel (EP) opinions (n=10), cognitive testing (CT) with 10 MI-based ASBI practitioners, and questionnaire piloting with 31 MI-based ASBI practitioners. Based on the EP opinions in the second round, content validity indices (CVIs) and the modified kappa coefficient (k*) were calculated, focusing on the relevance and understandability of questions and comprehensiveness and meaningfulness of the response options. This analysis was performed in 2020, at the conclusion of the national "Together for a Responsible Attitude Towards Alcohol Consumption" ("Skupaj za odgovoren odnos do pitja alkohola", SOPA) project's pilot implementation. On a scale level, CVI values based on universal agreement for the entire questionnaire were high for 3/4 categories (S-CVI-UA>0.80), and CVI values based on average agreement were high across all categories (S-CVI-Ave>0.90). At the item level, CVI values (I-CVI) were never <0.50 (automatic item rejection), and the modified kappa value (k*) indicated poor validity for two items in the understandability category (k*=0.33). All problematic parts of the questionnaire were further tested and successfully modified based on the results of CT, and accepted in the third round of testing. The final version of the questionnaire demonstrated appropriate content validity for use in studies among Slovenian MI-based ASBI practitioners and is now ready for further psychometric testing.

Alcohol Use, Screening, and Brief Intervention Among Pregnant Persons — 24 U.S. Jurisdictions, 2017 and 2019

Alcohol use during pregnancy is a major preventable cause of adverse alcohol-related outcomes, including birth defects and developmental disabilities.* Alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) is an evidence-based primary care tool that has been shown to prevent or reduce alcohol consumption during pregnancy; interventions have resulted in an increase in the proportion of pregnant women reporting abstinence (odds ratio=2.26; 95% CI = 1.43-3.56) (1). Previous national estimates have not characterized ASBI in populations of pregnant persons. Using 2017 and 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data, CDC examined prevalence of ASBI and characteristics of pregnant persons and nonpregnant women aged 18-49 years (reproductive-aged women) residing in jurisdictions that participated in the BRFSS ASBI module. During their most recent health care visit within the past 2 years, approximately 80% of pregnant persons reported being asked about their alcohol use; however, only 16% of pregnant persons who self-reported current drinking at the time of the survey (at least one alcoholic beverage in the past 30 days) were advised by a health care provider to quit drinking or reduce their alcohol use. Further, the prevalence of screening among pregnant persons who did not graduate from high school was lower than that among those who did graduate from high school or had at least some college education. This gap between screening and brief intervention, along with disparities in screening based on educational level, indicate missed opportunities to reduce alcohol use during pregnancy. Strategies to enhance ASBI during pregnancy include integrating screenings into electronic health records, increasing reimbursement for ASBI services, developing additional tools, including electronic ASBI, that can be implemented in a variety of settings (2,3).

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

Background and aimsAlcohol use increases throughout adolescence. Emergency department (ED) attendance is an opportunity for alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI), which is effective for adults. This trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of ASBI compared with screening alone (SA) in high‐risk adolescents.Design, Setting and ParticipantsMulti‐centre, three‐group, single‐blind, individually randomized trial with follow‐ups after 6 and 12 months in 10 ED settings in England. From October 2014 to May 2015 we screened 3327 adolescents aged 14 to 18 years, of whom 756 (22.7%) scored at least 3 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: consumption (AUDIT‐C) and consented to participate in this trial. Mean age was 16.1 years; 50.2% were female and 84.9% were white.InterventionsInterventions were personalized feedback and brief advice (PFBA), personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention (eBI) and SA.MeasuresThe primary outcome was the weekly alcohol consumed in standard UK units (8 g ethanol) at 12 months post‐randomization, derived from extended AUDIT‐C. Economic outcomes included quality of life and service use, from perspectives of both the National Health Service and personal social services (NHS&PSS) and society.FindingsAt 12 months, mean weekly consumption was 2.99 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.38–3.70] standard units for the SA group, 3.56 (95% CI = 2.90, 4.32) for PFBA and 3.18 (95% CI = 2.50, 3.97) for eBI, showing no significant differences. The PFBA group consumed mean 0.57 (−0.36, 1.70) units more than SA; and eBIs consumed 0.19 (−0.71, 1.30) more. Bayes factors suggested lack of effectiveness explained non‐significance. From the NHS&PSS perspective, economic analysis showed that PFBA and eBI were not cost‐effective compared with SA: PFBA yielded incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of £6213 (−£736 843, £812 884), with the intervention having 54% probability of being cost‐effective compared with SA at the £20 000 WTP threshold.ConclusionsIn emergency departments in England, neither personalized feedback and brief advice nor personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention showed evidence of being effective or cost‐effective when compared with screening alone in reducing alcohol consumption among adolescents.

Effectiveness of an Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention for Low-Income Clients Drinking at a High-Risk Level in Social Service Settings in Korea

The present study was the first to investigate the effectiveness of an alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) for high-risk drinkers of low socioeconomic status in the Korean community social service setting. A total of 153 clients of social service agencies participated in this study. Clients in the experimental group received interventions which were composed of screening for alcohol problems and brief motivational interventions. Clients in the comparison group received only the alcohol problems screening. The amount of alcohol consumption as the primary outcome variable was measured one time before intervention and three times after intervention. When analyses were conducted separately for participants from self-sufficiency centers and community welfare centers, there was a significant time and group interaction effect. The weekly alcohol consumption of the experimental group was gradually reduced over time. However, the amount of the comparison group was reduced at the 1-month follow-up but was increased at the eight-week and 12-week follow-ups. Overall, study findings yielded partial support for the effectiveness of ASBI. ASBI was effective in reducing alcohol consumption among clients from self-sufficiency centers. Future studies need to confirm the effectiveness of an ASBI more rigorously and conduct qualitative studies to further understand personal experiences of participants.

Efficacy of a theory-driven program to implement alcohol screening and brief interventions in primary health-care: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Screening and brief interventions (SBI) in primary health-care practices (PHCP) are effective in reducing reported alcohol consumption, but have not been routinely implemented. Most programs seeking to improve implementation rates have lacked a theoretical rationale. This study aimed to test whether a theory-based intervention for PHCPs could significantly increase alcohol SBI delivery. Two-arm, cluster-randomized controlled, parallel, 12-month follow-up, trial. PHCPs in Portugal. Staff from 12 PHCPs (n = 222, 81.1% women): nurses (35.6%), general practitioners (28.8%), receptionists (26.1%) and family medicine residents (9.5%); patients screened for alcohol use: intervention n = 8062; controls n = 58. PHCPs were randomized to receive a training and support program (n = 6; 110 participants) tailored to the barriers and facilitators for implementing alcohol SBIs following the principles of the Behavior Change Wheel/Theoretical Domains Framework approach, or to a waiting-list control (n = 6; 112 participants). Training was delivered over the first 12 weeks of the trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of eligible patients screened (unit of analysis: patient list). Secondary outcomes included the brief intervention (BI) rate per screen-positive patient and the population-based BI rate (unit of analysis: patient list), and changes in health providers' perceptions of barriers to implementation and alcohol-related knowledge (unit of analysis: health provider). The implementation program had a significant effect on the screening activity in the intervention practices compared with control practices at the 12-month follow-up (21.7% vs. 0.16%, intention-to-treat analysis, p = 0.003). Although no significant difference was found on the BI rate per screen-positive patient (intervention 85.7% vs. control 63.6%, p = 0.55, Bayes factor = 0.28), the intervention was effective in increasing the population-based BI rate (intervention 0.69% vs. control 0.02%, p = 0.006). Health providers in the intervention arm reported fewer barriers to SBI implementation and higher levels of alcohol-related knowledge at 12-month follow-up than those in control practices. A theory-based implementation program, which included training and support activities, significantly increased alcohol screening and population-based brief intervention rates in primary care.

Critical Role of General Practitioners in Preventing Readmission Following Emergency Department Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention Management of Alcohol-Related Problems.

Introduction/Objectives:Alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) strategies are useful in general practice (GP) but their effectiveness in the emergency department (ED) is unclear. We evaluated the effect of ED-based ASBI on re-admissions.Methods:453 ED subjects exceeding the threshold score on the three-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (females 3+: males 4+) were randomized. We conducted telephone follow-up at 1 and 3 months and recorded hospital events 6 months pre- and post-enrolment.Results:Median weekly alcohol use was 20 standard drinks (interquartile range (IQR) 9-45) on enrolment. After 3 months, 247 (55%) were able to be re-interviewed. Median alcohol use was 10 drinks (IQR 4-26). Six months later, subjects receiving ED-ASBI without GP follow-up had significantly greater risk of re-admission compared with those having GP follow-up (OR 1.68, 95%CI 1.06-2.65; P = .028).Conclusions:ASBI reduces the likelihood of ED re-presentation only in subjects who have GP follow-up. The study has been registered as a clinical trial (Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12617001254381).

Feasibility of alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary health care in Kazakhstan: study protocol of a pilot cluster randomised trial

BackgroundIdentifying and addressing heavy drinking represents a major public health priority worldwide. Whilst the majority of alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) research has been conducted in western, high-income countries, evidence is growing that ASBI can also impact positively on heavy drinkers in low- and middle-income country populations. This mixed methods study aims to assess the feasibility of conducting a fully randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of ASBI in primary care in Kazakhstan and explore the feasibility and acceptability of implementing ASBI in this setting from patients’ and physicians’ perspectives.MethodsSix primary health care units in the region of Pavlodar will be cluster randomised to either an intervention (WHO manualised 5 min alcohol brief intervention plus alcohol leaflet) or control group (simple feedback plus alcohol leaflet). Primary feasibility measures will be rates of participation at baseline and retention of eligible patients at the 3-month follow-up point. Patient/physician questionnaires and physician focus groups will assess additional dimensions of feasibility, as well as acceptability, according to the RE-AIM framework: Reach (rates of eligible patients screened/received advice); Effectiveness (change in AUDIT-C score); Adoption (rate/representativeness of participating physicians); Implementation (quality of ASBI/barriers and facilitators to delivery); and Maintenance (potential sustainability of intervention).DiscussionThis is the first trial of the feasibility and acceptability of ASBI in Kazakhstan. As the planning and assessment of implementation determinants is based on the RE-AIM framework, the project outcomes will be relevant for the future development, tailoring and implementation of ASBI in Kazakhstan.Trial registrationDRKS, DRKS00015882, Registered 17 December 2018.

A Web-Based Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention Training Module Within Physician Assistant Programs in the Midwest to Increase Knowledge, Attitudes, and Confidence: Evaluation Study.

BackgroundPreventing and reducing risky alcohol use and its side effects remains a public health priority. Discussing alcohol use with patients can be difficult; dedicated training for health care providers is needed to facilitate these conversations. A Web-based alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI), comprising didactic and skills application training, was designed for physician assistant students.ObjectiveThis paper details experiences and outcomes in developing an alcohol SBI training curriculum and coordinating virtual encounters with standardized patients. We also explain challenges faced with developing an alcohol SBI training and a Web-based learning management site to fit the needs of 5 different physician assistant programs.MethodsTraining development comprised 3 phases—precourse, development, and implementation. The precourse phase included developing the initial training curriculum, building a website, and testing with a pilot group. The development phase refined the training curriculum based on user feedback and moved into a three-component module: didactic training module, guided interactive encounter with a simulated patient, and live encounter with a standardized patient. A learning management system website was also created. In the implementation phase, 5 physician assistant schools incorporated the Web-based training into curricula. Each school modified the implementation method to suit their organizational environment. Evaluation methods included pre- and postchange over time on trainee attitudes, knowledge, and skills (confidence) on talking to patients about alcohol use, trainee self-reported proficiency on the standardized patient encounter, standardized patient evaluation of the trainee proficiency during the alcohol use conversation, user evaluation of the type of technology mode for the standardized patient conversation, and overall trainee satisfaction with the Web-based training on alcohol SBI.ResultsFinal evaluation outcomes indicated a significant (P<.01) change over time in trainee knowledge and skills (confidence) in the conduct of the alcohol SBI with a standardized patient, regardless of the program implementation method. Trainees were generally satisfied with the Web-based training experience and rated the use of the videoconference medium as most useful when conducting the alcohol SBI conversation with the standardized patient. Training that included a primer on the importance of screening, individual participation in the Web-based didactic alcohol SBI modules, and virtual encounters with standardized patients through a university-based simulation center was the most widely accepted. Successful implementation included program investment and curriculum planning. Implementation barriers involved technical challenges with standardized patient encounters and simulation center logistics, and varying physician assistant school characteristics.ConclusionsDevelopment and implementation of Web-based educational modules to educate health care professionals on alcohol SBI is effective, easy to reproduce, and readily accessible. Identifying challenges affecting development, implementation, and utilization of learned techniques in practice, enhances facilitation of learning and training efficacy. As the value of technology-based learning becomes more apparent, reports detailing what has worked versus what has not may help guide the process.

Addressing alcohol misuse in primary care.

Alcohol misuse (AM) among young adults remains a public health issue that is underaddressed in primary care. Despite well-supported recommendations to screen and offer brief interventions for AM, most primary care providers do not address the issue. Increasing rates of alcohol-related incidents and lack of a standardized alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) program were identified in a private university health center. Nurse practitioners, staff nurses, and physicians received education on alcohol SBI. Young adult students visiting a college health center were administered the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption electronically followed by a brief motivational intervention if they screened positive using embedded Electronic Health Record templates. Preimplementation/postimplementation chart audit and surveys were used to evaluate effectiveness. Following staff education, a standardized alcohol SBI program was implemented in a private university health center. Increased alcohol screening and intervention rates, as well as increased knowledge about AM, and reduced alcohol use among participants were identified. Through staff education and by embedding standard alcohol SBI templates, more at-risk young adults were identified and rendered alcohol interventions during routine visits. This replicable program can improve outcomes related to AM in the primary care setting.

Brief alcohol intervention for risky drinking in young people aged 14–15 years in secondary schools: the SIPS JR-HIGH RCT

BackgroundAdverse effects from young people’s alcohol consumption manifest in a range of physical and psychosocial factors, including neurological issues, cognitive impairment and risk-taking behaviours. The SIPS JR-HIGH pilot trial showed alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) to be acceptable to young people and schools in the north-east of England.ObjectivesTo conduct a two-arm, individually randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ASBI for risky drinking in young people aged 14–15 years in the school setting, to monitor the fidelity of ASBI and to explore the barriers to, and facilitators of, implementation with staff, young people and parents.DesignA baseline survey with a 12-month follow-up. Interviews with 30 school staff, 21 learning mentors and nine teachers, and 33 young people and two parents.SettingThirty state schools in four areas of England: north-east, north-west, Kent and London.ParticipantsYear 10 school pupils who consented to the study (aged 14–15 years, recruited between November 2015 and June 2016), school-based staff and parents of the young people who took part in the study.InterventionsYoung people who screened positively on a single alcohol screening question and consented were randomised to the intervention or control arm (blinded). The intervention was a 30-minute one-to-one structured brief intervention with a trained learning mentor and an alcohol leaflet. The control group received a healthy lifestyle leaflet (no alcohol information).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was total alcohol consumed in the last 28 days. Secondary outcomes related to risky drinking, general psychological health, sexual risk-taking, energy drink consumption, age of first smoking, quality of life, quality-adjusted life-years, service utilisation and demographic information.ResultsA total of 4523 young people completed the baseline survey, with 1064 screening positively (24%) and 443 being eligible to take part in the trial. Of those 443, 233 (53%) were randomised to the control arm and 210 were randomised to the intervention arm. Of the 443, 374 (84%) were successfully followed up at 12 months (intervention,n = 178; control,n = 196). The results were that the intervention showed no evidence of benefit for any alcohol-related measure when compared with the control arm. At 12 months we found a reduction from 61.9% to 43.3% using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test cut-off point of 8 and cut-off point of 4 (69.0% to 60.7%). These results were not significant. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the average net cost saving of the brief intervention was £2865 (95% confidence interval –£11,272 to £2707) per year compared with usual practice, with the intervention showing a 76% probability of being cost saving compared with usual practice. The interview findings showed that school was an acceptable setting to carry out ASBI among staff and young people.LimitationsRecruitment of parents to take part in interviews was poor. Only 18 ASBI sessions were recorded, making it difficult to assess internal validity.ConclusionsAlthough the intervention was ineffective in reducing risky drinking in young people aged 14–15 years, it was well received by the young people and school staff who participated.Future workUniform reporting of the outcomes used for ASBI would generate more robust conclusions on the effectiveness of ASBI in the future. Pilot feasibility studies should include more than one geographical area. Future work on involving parents is needed.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN45691494.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full inPublic Health Research; Vol. 7, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Time-Conscious Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention for Students, Nurses, and Nurse Leaders.

Alcohol is the third leading cause of death and a preventable risk factor contributing to more than 200 diseases and conditions. Unquestionably, health care practitioners should routinely screen and give patients brief feedback on alcohol consumption related to health outcomes; however, they rarely ask patients about alcohol use. Alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI), a public health model of prevention and identification of at-risk alcohol use, has not been widely disseminated. The nursing profession, the largest and most trusted sector of the health care workforce, is perfectly poised to close this gap. This article describes the development of a two-university, grant-funded collaborative online educational program with unique and time-conscious simulation and testing components to increase the knowledge and skills of nurses. The goal of the program is to promote alcohol SBI as a standard of practice in all settings. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2018;49(10):467-473.

Pharmacy-based alcohol-misuse services: current perspectives.

ContextGlobally, the use of alcohol is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity. Opportunistic screening and brief interventions (SBIs) have been shown to be effective in reducing alcohol consumption in certain primary care settings and provide a means of reaching some of those who do not seek treatment for alcohol-related problems. Further, community pharmacies have the potential to reach consumers at an early stage of their alcohol use and incorporate intervention and advice into their role in providing medications.AimThe purpose of this review was to inform pharmacists and stakeholders of the evidence base for SBI in community pharmacy settings. To date, there has been limited research on the effectiveness of alcohol SBI in community pharmacies, with a systemic review only identifying two randomized trials.MethodsThis narrative review reports on the period 2007–2017, covering feasibility studies, pilot programs, and surveys of consumers and pharmacy staff attitudes relating to alcohol SBI in this setting. Studies were identified via MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and reference lists of relevant publications.FindingsThe findings indicated that the provision of community pharmacy alcohol SBI requires training in communication and intervention skills and in some cases increasing confidence and alcohol-related knowledge. Consumers were generally receptive to the SBI approach but requested private areas for delivery of such.ConclusionThe high prevalence of “at risk” alcohol use in many countries and the low level of treatment seeking by this group means that novel approaches to engage opportunistically with these people is imperative in reducing alcohol-related harms. However, before committing routine health funding, these novel approaches need rigorous evaluation.

'DrinkThink' alcohol screening and brief intervention for young people: a qualitative evaluation of training and implementation.

BackgroundAlcohol Screening and Brief Intervention (ASBI) helps reduce risky drinking in adults, but less is known about its effectiveness with young people. This article explores implementation of DrinkThink, an ASBI co-produced with young people, by health, youth and social care professionals trained in its delivery.MethodsA qualitative evaluation was conducted using focus groups with 33 staff trained to deliver DrinkThink, and eight interviews with trained participants and service managers. These were recorded, transcribed and a thematic analysis undertaken.ResultsDrinkThink was not delivered fully by health, youth or social care agencies. The reasons for this varied by setting but included: the training staff received, a working culture that was ill-suited to the intervention, staff attitudes towards alcohol which prioritized other health problems presented by young people, over alcohol use.ConclusionsImplementation was limited because staff had not been involved in the design and planning of DrinkThink. Staffs’ perceptions of alcohol problems in young people and the diverse cultures in which they work were subsequently not accounted for in the design. Co-producing youth focused ASBIs with the professionals expected to deliver them, and the young people whom they target, may ensure greater success in integrating them into working practice.

Alcohol screening and brief interventions for adults and young people in health and community-based settings: a qualitative systematic literature review

BackgroundSystematic reviews of alcohol screening and brief interventions (ASBI) highlight the challenges of implementation in healthcare and community-based settings. Fewer reviews have explored this through examination of qualitative literature and fewer still focus on interventions with younger people.MethodsThis review aims to examine qualitative literature on the facilitators and barriers to implementation of ASBI both for adults and young people in healthcare and community-based settings. Searches using electronic data bases (Medline on Ovid SP, PsychInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science, and EMBASE), Google Scholar and citation searching were conducted, before analysis.ResultsFrom a total of 239 papers searched and screened, 15 were included in the final review; these were selected based on richness of content and relevance to the review question. Implementation of ASBI is facilitated by increasing knowledge and skills with ongoing follow-up support, and clarity of the intervention. Barriers to implementation include attitudes towards alcohol use, lack of structural and organisational support, unclear role definition as to responsibility in addressing alcohol use, fears of damaging professional/ patient relationships, and competition with other pressing healthcare needs.ConclusionsThere remain significant barriers to implementation of ASBI among health and community-based professionals. Improving the way health service institutions respond to and co-ordinate alcohol services, including who is most appropriate to address alcohol use, would assist in better implementation of ASBI. Finally, a dearth of qualitative studies looking at alcohol intervention and implementation among young people was noted and suggests a need for further qualitative research.

Are Brief Alcohol Interventions Adequately Embedded in UK Primary Care? A Qualitative Study Utilising Normalisation Process Theory.

Despite substantial evidence for their effectiveness, the adoption of alcohol screening and brief interventions (ASBI) in routine primary care remains inconsistent. Financial incentive schemes were introduced in England between 2008 and 2015 to encourage their delivery. We used Normalisation Process Theory-informed interviews to understand the barriers and facilitators experienced by 14 general practitioners (GPs) as they implemented ASBI during this period. We found multiple factors shaped provision. GPs were broadly cognisant and supportive of preventative alcohol interventions (coherence) but this did not necessarily translate into personal investment in their delivery (cognitive participation). This lack of investment shaped how GPs operationalised such “work” in day-to-day practice (collective action), with ASBI mostly delegated to nurses, and GPs reverting to “business as usual” in their management and treatment of problem drinking (reflexive monitoring). We conclude there has been limited progress towards the goal of an effectively embedded preventative alcohol care pathway in English primary care. Future policy should consider screening strategies that prioritise patients with conditions with a recognised link with excessive alcohol consumption, and which promote more efficient identification of the most problematic drinkers. Improved GP training to build skills and awareness of evidence-based ASBI tools could also help embed best practice over time.

Emergency physician screening and management of trauma patients with alcohol involvement

Background:Alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) in trauma patients has been reported in literature to be effective in changing harmful drinking patterns and injury recurrence. Despite good evidence that SBI can benefit patients and provide a more holistic care, it is not routinely implemented in acute medical settings in Australia, in particular emergency departments (EDs).Objective:This paper aims to assess the knowledge, confidence, and practice of alcohol SBI in trauma patients by emergency physicians throughout Australia and New Zealand through an online survey.Methods:Major EDs in Australia and Zealand were approached to participate in an online survey. Results from the survey were analyzed using simple descriptive summary statistics.Results:Fifty-eight physicians participated in the online survey. Almost all physicians reported at least 10% of all patients managed in ED had traumatic injuries and 35% had alcohol involvement. About 66% were consultant physicians and 84% had 5 or more years of practice. Sixty-four percent agreed to have adequate training in SBI, 22% had adequate time and resources, 47% would like more training in patient screening, and 72% were more likely to deliver SBI in 5 min. Limited time and resources were seen as major barriers. It was found that better understating of SBI may lead to higher confidence and more practice, or vice versa.Conclusion:High proportion of participants in this survey felt under-equipped to deliver SBI due to time limitation, perceived lack of resources, unsuitable environment, and supportive staff. There exists an opportunity to develop a shortened and efficient SBI program that can improve utilization of SBI in an emergency setting.