Alcohol Brief Intervention Research Articles

Feasibility and acceptability of a novel, computerized screening and brief intervention (SBI) for alcohol and sweetened beverage use in pregnancy.

BackgroundRecommended screening and brief intervention (SBI) for alcohol use during pregnancy is impeded by high patient loads and limited resources in public health settings. We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability and validity of a new self-administered, single-session, bilingual, computerized Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) program for alcohol and sugar sweetened beverage (SSB) use in pregnancy.MethodsWe developed and tested the computerized SBI program at a public health clinic with 290 pregnant women. Feasibility, acceptability, and validity measures were included in the program which had several modules, including those on demographics, health and beverage use. Time to complete the program and user experience items were used to determine program feasibility and acceptability. Validity analyses compared proportions of prenatal alcohol use identified by the program versus in-person screening by clinic staff.ResultsMost program users (87%, n = 251) completed the entire program; 91% (n = 263) completed the key screening and brief intervention modules. Most users also completed the program in ten to fifteen minutes. Program users reported that the program was easy to use (97%), they learned something new (88%), and that they would share what they learned with others (83%) and with their doctors or clinic staff (76%). Program acceptability did not differ by age, education, or type of beverage intervention received. The program identified alcohol use in pregnancy among 21% of users, a higher rate than the 13% (p < .01) found via screening by clinic staff.ConclusionsComputerized Screening and Brief Intervention for alcohol and SSB use in public health clinics is feasible and acceptable to English and Spanish speaking pregnant women and can efficiently identify prenatal alcohol use.

Internet applications for screening and brief interventions for alcohol in primary care settings - implementation and sustainability.

Screening and brief interventions head the list of effective evidence-based interventions for the prevention and treatment of alcohol use disorders in healthcare settings. However, healthcare professionals have been reluctant to engage with this kind of activity both because of the sensitive nature of the subject and because delivery is potentially time-consuming. Digital technologies for behavioral change are becoming increasingly widespread and their low delivery costs make them highly attractive. Internet and mobile technologies have been shown to be effective for the treatment of depression, anxiety, and smoking cessation in healthcare settings, and have the potential to add substantial value to the delivery of brief intervention for alcohol. Online alcohol questionnaires have been shown to elicit reliable responses on alcohol consumption and compared with conventional prevention techniques, digital alcohol interventions delivered in various settings have been found to be as effective in preventing alcohol-related harms. The last decade has seen the emergence of a range of approaches to the implementation in health care settings of referral to Internet-based applications for screening and brief interventions (eSBI) for alcohol. Research in this area is in its infancy, but there is a small body of evidence providing early indications about implementation and sustainability, and a number of studies are currently underway. This paper examines some of the evidence emerging from these and other studies and assesses the implications for the future of eSBI delivery in primary care settings.

Effectiveness of brief school-based interventions for adolescents: a meta-analysis of alcohol use prevention programs.

To conduct a meta-analysis summarizing the effectiveness of school-based brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) among adolescents and to examine possible iatrogenic effects due to deviancy training in group-delivered interventions, a systematic search for eligible studies was undertaken, current through December 31, 2012. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they used an experimental/quasi-experimental design; focused on school-based BAIs; enrolled adolescent participants; and reported an alcohol-related outcome measure. Studies were coded for key variables, and outcome effect sizes were analyzed as standardized mean differences adjusted for small samples (Hedges' g). Analyses were conducted using inverse-variance weighted mixed-effects meta-regression models. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Across all 17 studies eligible for inclusion, school-based BAIs were associated with significant improvements among adolescents, whereby adolescents in the BAI groups reduced their alcohol consumption relative to the control groups (= 0.34, 95 % CI [0.11, 0.56]). Subgroup analyses indicated that whereas individually-delivered BAIs were effective (= 0.58, 95 % CI [0.23, 0.92]), there was no evidence that group-delivered BAIs were associated with reductions in alcohol use (= -0.02, 95 % CI [-0.17, 0.14]). Delivery format was confounded with program modality, however, such that motivational enhancement therapy was the most effective modality, but was rarely implemented in group-delivered interventions. Some school-based BAIs are effective in reducing adolescent alcohol consumption, but may be ineffective if delivered in group settings. Future research should explore whether group-delivered BAIs that use motivational enhancement therapy components may yield beneficial outcomes like those observed in individually-delivered programs.

Alcohol brief interventions in general practice

Harmful levels of alcohol consumption are a longstanding but continually growing health concern affecting individuals, and consequently populations. Through personalised advice, alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) target drinking habits, which are deemed damaging to health. They are not targeted at dependent drinkers for whom a more intensive and specialist service would be better suited. In response to recent shifts in public-health strategy away from ABIs, and the publication of new trials into their effectiveness, this article evaluates the value of ABIs through the review of eleven relevant studies. Findings suggest that hazardous drinkers did reduce their drinking patterns following ABI, but not more so than control participants who were given standard treatment. The evolution of standard treatment to include thorough screening, non-personalised advice and sometimes literature on alcohol intake delivers an intervention, that is effective in reducing drinking. Therefore, future research and practice should focus on screening methods and quality of standard care rather than on brief interventions.

Alcohol brief interventions practice following training for multidisciplinary health and social care teams: a qualitative interview study.

Introduction and AimsFew studies of the implementation of alcohol brief interventions (ABI) have been conducted in community settings such as mental health, social work and criminal justice teams. This qualitative interview study sought to explore the impact of training on ABI delivery by staff from a variety of such teams.Design and MethodsFifteen semi-structured telephone interviews were carried out with trained practitioners and with managers to explore the use of, perceived need for and approaches to ABI delivery and recording with clients, and compatibility of ABIs with current practice. Interviews were analysed thematically using an inductive approach.ResultsVery few practitioners reported delivery of any ABIs following training primarily because they felt ABIs to be inappropriate for their clients. According to practitioners, this was either because they drank too much or too little to benefit. Practitioners reported a range of current activities relating to alcohol, and some felt that their knowledge and confidence were improved following training. One practitioner reported ABI delivery and was considered a training success, while expectations of ABIs did not fit with current practice including assessment procedures for the remainder.Discussion and ConclusionsIdentified barriers to ABI delivery included issues relating to individual practitioners, their teams, current practice and the ABI model. They are likely to be best addressed by strategic team- and setting-specific approaches to implementation, of which training is only one part. [Fitzgerald N, Molloy H, MacDonald F, McCambridge J. Alcohol brief interventions practice following training for multidisciplinary health and social care teams: A qualitative interview study. Drug Alcohol Rev 2015;34:185–93]

Mechanisms of action of brief alcohol interventions remain largely unknown - a narrative review.

A growing body of evidence has shown the efficacy of brief intervention (BI) for hazardous and harmful alcohol use in primary health care settings. Evidence for efficacy in other settings and effectiveness when implemented at larger scale are disappointing. Indeed, BI comprises varying content; exploring BI content and mechanisms of action may be a promising way to enhance efficacy and effectiveness. Medline and PsychInfo, as well as references of retrieved publications were searched for original research or review on active ingredients (components or mechanisms) of face-to-face BIs [and its subtypes, including brief advice and brief motivational interviewing (BMI)] for alcohol. Overall, BI active ingredients have been scarcely investigated, almost only within BMI, and mostly among patients in the emergency room, young adults, and US college students. This body of research has shown that personalized feedback may be an effective component; specific MI techniques showed mixed findings; decisional balance findings tended to suggest a potential detrimental effect; while change plan exercises, advice to reduce or stop drinking, presenting alternative change options, and moderation strategies are promising but need further study. Client change talk is a potential mediator of BMI effects; change in norm perceptions and enhanced discrepancy between current behavior and broader life goals and values have received preliminary support; readiness to change was only partially supported as a mediator; while enhanced awareness of drinking, perceived risks/benefits of alcohol use, alcohol treatment seeking, and self-efficacy were seldom studied and have as yet found no significant support as such. Research is obviously limited and has provided no clear and consistent evidence on the mechanisms of alcohol BI. How BI achieves the effects seen in randomized trials remains mostly unknown and should be investigated to inform the development of more effective interventions.

The efficacy-effectiveness distinction in trials of alcohol brief intervention.

Three recent sets of null findings from trials of alcohol brief intervention (BI) have been disappointing to those who wish to see a reduction in alcohol-related harm through the widespread dissemination of BI. Saitz (7) has suggested that these null findings result from a failure to translate the effects of BI seen in efficacy trials, which are thought to contribute mainly to the beneficial effects of BI shown in meta-analyses, to effectiveness trials conducted in real-world clinical practice. The present article aims to: (i) clarify the meaning of the terms “efficacy” and “effectiveness” and other related concepts; (ii) review the method and findings on efficacy-effectiveness measurement in the 2007 Cochrane Review by Kaner and colleagues; and (iii) make suggestions for further research in this area. Conclusions are: 1) to avoid further confusion, terms such as “efficacy trial”, “effectiveness trial”, “clinical representativeness”, etc. should be clearly defined and carefully used; 2) applications of BI to novel settings should begin with foundational research and developmental studies, followed by efficacy trials, and political pressures for quick results from premature effectiveness trials should be resisted; 3) clear criteria are available in the literature to guide progress from efficacy research, through effectiveness research, to dissemination in practice; 4) to properly interpret null findings from effectiveness studies, it is necessary to ensure that interventions are delivered as intended; 5) in future meta-analyses of alcohol BI trials, more attention should be paid to the development and application of a psychometrically robust scale to measure efficacy-effectiveness or clinical representativeness; 6) the null findings under consideration cannot be firmly attributed to a failure to translate effects from efficacy trials to real-world practice, because it is possible that the majority of trials included in meta-analyses on which the evidence for the beneficial effects of alcohol BI was based tended to be effectiveness rather than efficacy trials; and 7) a hypothesis to explain the null findings in question is that they are due to lack of fidelity in the implementation of BI in large, organizationally complex, cluster randomized trials.

Interpreting null findings from trials of alcohol brief interventions.

The effectiveness of alcohol brief intervention (ABI) has been established by a succession of meta-analyses but, because the effects of ABI are small, null findings from randomized controlled trials are often reported and can sometimes lead to skepticism regarding the benefits of ABI in routine practice. This article first explains why null findings are likely to occur under null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) due to the phenomenon known as “the dance of the p-values.” A number of misconceptions about null findings are then described, using as an example the way in which the results of the primary care arm of a recent cluster-randomized trial of ABI in England (the SIPS project) have been misunderstood. These misinterpretations include the fallacy of “proving the null hypothesis” that lack of a significant difference between the means of sample groups can be taken as evidence of no difference between their population means, and the possible effects of this and related misunderstandings of the SIPS findings are examined. The mistaken inference that reductions in alcohol consumption seen in control groups from baseline to follow-up are evidence of real effects of control group procedures is then discussed and other possible reasons for such reductions, including regression to the mean, research participation effects, historical trends, and assessment reactivity, are described. From the standpoint of scientific progress, the chief problem about null findings under the conventional NHST approach is that it is not possible to distinguish “evidence of absence” from “absence of evidence.” By contrast, under a Bayesian approach, such a distinction is possible and it is explained how this approach could classify ABIs in particular settings or among particular populations as either truly ineffective or as of unknown effectiveness, thus accelerating progress in the field of ABI research.

Effectiveness of alcohol brief interventions in general practice.

Harmful levels of alcohol consumption are a longstanding but continually growing health concern affecting individuals, and consequently populations. Through personalised advice, alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) target drinking habits, which are deemed damaging to health. They are not targeted at dependent drinkers for whom a more intensive and specialist service would be better suited. In response to recent shifts in public-health strategy away from ABIs, and the publication of new trials into their effectiveness, this article evaluates the value of ABIs through the review of elevenrelevant studies. Findings suggest that hazardous drinkers did reduce their drinking patterns following ABI, but not more so than control participants who were given standard treatment. The evolution of standard treatment to include thorough screening, non-personalised advice and sometimes literature on alcohol intake delivers an intervention, that is effective in reducing drinking. Therefore, future research and practice should focus on screening methods and quality of standard care rather than on brief interventions.

The two forms of alcohol brief intervention: an uneasy coalition.

The two forms of alcohol brief intervention: an uneasy coalition.

Lost in translation: The perils of implementing alcohol brief intervention when there are gaps in evidence and its interpretation.

McCambridge & Rollnick remind us how little we know about alcohol brief interventions (BI) in primary care despite half a century of study: they have modest efficacy for reducing consumption [1]. Limited evidence and simulations suggest effects on harder outcomes, which has led some to conclude it is among the most effective preventive services [2,3]. It is tempting to believe that we can address unhealthy alcohol use with a seemingly simple solution. Governments and health systems have tried [4,5]. But BI implementation studies (effectiveness studies)[6–8] find BI is often not done and, if it is, doesn't affect drinking, unlike BI in trials in which researchers have substantial control over implementation (efficacy studies). This finding may be due to lack of fidelity, or to failure to implement interventions supported by the best evidence—e.g. multiple (not single) interventions [2]. Since BI effect sizes are small (e.g. 3 drinks per week), even small decrements when translating BI to practice threaten loss of efficacy. And efficacy depends on selecting patients who drink enough but not too much (studies exclude risky drinkers who drink very heavily [9]). Two trials with discordant efficacy results differed in the narrowness of entry criteria [10,11]) which is problematic for a purportedly universal preventive intervention. Other areas of medicine have addressed the loss of efficacy in translation from research to practice . Anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation can reduce the risk for stroke. But if the dose is too high or too low, efficacy is lost. Specialized clinics maximize efficacy by getting the dose right. In the alcohol BI field, evidence on lack of efficacy and loss in translation has been ignored (presumably to avoid any threat to dissemination efforts) at the cost of missed opportunities to improve effectiveness, and wasted efforts [5,6]. McCambridge & Rollnick [1] suggest brief models of motivational interviewing (MI) and pharmacotherapy could have efficacy for more severe problems in primary care. We should test these hypotheses. We should not assume evidence for BI in contexts where preventive care is not being sought or patients are seeking help for drinking will translate to screening and BI and primary care. The application of at least two conceptual frameworks can confuse interpretation of the research—1) BI as a preventive service and 2) BI as a treatment. These two circumstances are very different and require different evidence. The former should be tested by comparing screening and BI to no screening but this trial has never been done). The evidence for efficacy of BI in a context where patients are aware of the connection between their drinking and health (trauma centers, general hospitals, and emergency departments) is decidedly mixed [5]. Lack of efficacy may indicate that a `teachable moment' is less important than a `learnable moment'. Change as a result of a health consequence the patient recognizes as caused by their drinking (without help of a BI) may be a much more powerful and likely cause of change than a single BI by a counselor with no ongoing relationship. Context matters. McCambridge & Rollnick [1] advocate studies of the content of BI 1) to discover more efficacious interventions, and 2) to understand the essential elements that practitioners must learn. Some work suggests that adaptations of MI don't work like we think they do [12] which has implications for what is taught and implemented. It may be that BI may not be able to be delivered widely while retaining efficacy. Skill acquisition and retention requires substantial and ongoing training [13] of the sort that is not easily done in primary care, and perhaps some practitioners can't learn it. We should still try to discover efficacious approaches and disseminate them. But dissemination to date has proceeded without sufficient understanding of the elements necessary for the efficacy of BI and how to retain them in practice. Just as we would not abandon heart surgery as too difficult, we should not disseminate if we do not know which techniques are most efficacious, or if it were ineffective unless delivered by expert practitioners. Alcohol screening and BI deserves similar study so that its practice can reflect beliefs about its promise.

Effectiveness of nurse-practitioner-delivered brief motivational intervention for young adult alcohol and drug use in primary care in South Africa: a randomized clinical trial.

To assess the effectiveness of brief motivational intervention for alcohol and drug use in young adult primary care patients in a low-income population and country. A randomized controlled trial in a public-sector clinic in Delft, a township in the Western Cape, South Africa recruited 403 patients who were randomized to either single-session, nurse practitioner-delivered Brief Motivational Intervention plus referral list or usual care plus referral list, and followed up at 3 months. Although rates of at-risk alcohol use and drug use did not differ by treatment arm at follow-up, patients assigned to the Brief Motivational Intervention had significantly reduced scores on ASSIST (Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test) for alcohol-the most prevalent substance. Brief Motivational Intervention may be effective at reducing at-risk alcohol use in the short term among low-income young adult primary care patients; additional research is needed to examine long-term outcomes.

Alcohol brief interventions in Scottish antenatal care: a qualitative study of midwives' attitudes and practices.

BackgroundInfants exposed to alcohol in the womb are at increased risk of experiencing health problems. However, mixed messages about the consequences of prenatal alcohol consumption have resulted in inconsistent attitudes and practices amongst some healthcare practitioners. Screening and alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) can reduce risky drinking in various clinical settings. Recently, a program of screening and ABIs have been implemented in antenatal care settings in Scotland. However, current evidence suggests that midwives’ involvement in alcohol brief interventions activities is patchy. This study explored midwives’ attitudes and practices regarding alcohol screening and ABIs in order to understand why they are relatively underutilized in antenatal care settings compared to other clinical settings.MethodsThis was a qualitative study, involving semi-structured interviews with 15 midwives and a focus group with a further six midwifery team leaders (21 participants in total) in Scotland. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsMidwives were positive about their involvement in the screening and ABI program. However, they were not completely convinced about the purpose and value of the screening and ABIs in antenatal care. In the midst of competing priorities, the program was seen as having a low priority in their workload. Midwives felt that the rapport between them and pregnant women was not sufficiently established at the first antenatal appointment to allow them to discuss alcohol issues appropriately. They reported that many women had already given up drinking or were drinking minimal amounts prior to the first antenatal appointment.ConclusionsMidwives recognised the important role they could play in alcohol intervention activities in antenatal care. As the majority of women stop consuming alcohol in pregnancy, many will not need an ABI. Those who have not stopped are likely to need an ABI, but midwives were concerned that it was this group that they were most likely to alienate by discussing such concerns. Further consideration should be given to pre-pregnancy preventative measures as they are more likely to reduce alcohol-exposed pregnancies.

Injury-Related Consequences of Alcohol Misuse Among Injured Patients Who Received Screening and Brief Intervention for Alcohol: A Latent Class Analysis

ABSTRACT. Background: Screening and brief alcohol intervention has demonstrated efficacy in improving drinking and other risk behaviors for some patient populations. However, it is not clear that brief interventions are helpful to all injured patients who drink at risk levels. This paper identifies latent classes of intervention recipients based on injury-related consequences and risks of alcohol misuse and then determines which profiles experienced the greatest improvements in drinking. Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted using data from injured patients (N = 737) who reported heavy drinking and received a brief alcohol intervention in a Level I trauma center. Latent class analysis was used to determine patient profiles, and 7 indicators commonly associated with alcohol-related injury from the Short Inventory of Problems+6 were used to determine the latent class measurement model. Covariates were regressed onto the model to assess factors related to class membership, and drinking outcomes were analyzed to examine improvements in drinking. Results: Five classes emerged from the data. The classes that reported the greatest improvements in drinking following discharge were those characterized by multiple alcohol-related risks and those characterized by a history of alcohol-related accidents and injuries. Attributing the current injury to drinking was a significant predictor of class membership among those classes that reported higher levels of improvement. Conclusions: This study provides tentative evidence that subclasses exist among heavy drinking injured patients who received a brief intervention in a Level I trauma center, and some subclasses experience greater drinking improvements than others. Further research is required to substantiate the findings of this secondary analysis.

Minimal Effect of Web-Based Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention in University Students

Misuse of alcohol is common among college students. Web-based screening and brief interventions have shown promise but have not been studied in large, generalizable settings. Investigators e-mailed invitations containing Web links to questionnaires about alcohol use to about 15,000 non-Maori New Zealand university students; …

The early history of ideas on brief interventions for alcohol

AimsThis study explores the early development of brief interventions for alcohol using a history of ideas approach with a particular focus on intervention content.MethodsThe source publications of the key primary studies published from approximately 1962 to 1992 were examined, followed by a brief review of the earliest reviews in this field. These studies were placed in the context of developments in alcohol research and in public health.ResultsAfter early pioneering work on brief interventions, further advances were not made until thinking about alcohol problems and their treatment, most notably on controlled drinking, along with wider changes in public health, created new conditions for progress. There was then a golden era of rapid advance in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when preventing the development of problem drinking became important for public health reasons, in addition to helping already problematic drinkers. Many research challenges identified at that time remain to be met. The content of brief interventions changed over the period of study, although not in ways well informed by research advances, and there were also obvious continuities, with a renewed emphasis on the facilitation of self-change being one important consequence of the development of internet applications.ConclusionsIdeas about brief interventions have changed in important ways. Brief interventions have been studied with different populations of drinkers, with aims embracing both individual and population-level perspectives, and without well-specified contents. The brief intervention field is an appropriate target for further historical investigations, which may help thinking about addressing alcohol and other problems.

Cost-effectiveness of a programme of screening and brief interventions for alcohol in primary care in Italy

BackgroundAs alcohol-related health problems continue to rise, the attention of policy-makers is increasingly turning to Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) programmes. The effectiveness of such programmes in primary healthcare is well evidenced, but very few cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted and none which specifically consider the Italian context.MethodsThe Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model has been used to model the cost-effectiveness of government pricing and public health policies in several countries including England. This study adapts the model using Italian data to evaluate a programme of screening and brief interventions in Italy. Results are reported as Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) of SBI programmes versus a ‘do-nothing’ scenario.ResultsModel results show such programmes to be highly cost-effective, with estimated ICERs of €550/Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained for a programme of SBI at next GP registration and €590/QALY for SBI at next GP consultation. A range of sensitivity analyses suggest these results are robust under all but the most pessimistic assumptions.ConclusionsThis study provides strong support for the promotion of a policy of screening and brief interventions throughout Italy, although policy makers should be aware of the resource implications of different implementation options.

Prospective associations among approach coping, alcohol misuse and psychiatric symptoms among veterans receiving a brief alcohol intervention

Brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) target alcohol consumption and may exert secondary benefits including reduced depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms among non-veteran and veteran populations. This study examined whether approach coping, alcohol misuse, and an interaction of these two factors prior to the administration of a BAI (i.e., baseline) would predict depression and PTSD symptoms 6-months post BAI (i.e., follow-up). Veterans (N=166) received a BAI after screening positive for alcohol misuse during a primary care visit and completed assessments of alcohol misuse, approach coping, and depression and PTSD symptoms at baseline and follow-up. Baseline substance misuse, but not approach coping, significantly predicted depression and PTSD symptoms at follow-up. Approach coping moderated associations between baseline alcohol misuse and psychiatric symptoms: Veterans reporting more alcohol misuse and more (relative to less) approach coping at baseline evidenced fewer psychiatric symptoms at follow-up after accounting for symptoms assessed at baseline.

Comparison of categorical alcohol dependence versus a dimensional measure for predicting weekly alcohol use in heavy drinkers

BackgroundThe DSM specifies categorical criteria for psychiatric disorders. In contrast, a dimensional approach considers variability in symptom severity and can significantly improve statistical power. The current study tested whether a categorical, DSM-defined diagnosis of Alcohol Dependence (AD) was a better fit than a dimensional dependence measure for predicting change in alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers following a brief alcohol intervention (BI). DSM-IV and DSM-5 alcohol use disorder (AUD) measures were also evaluated. MethodsParticipants (N=246) underwent a diagnostic interview after receiving a BI, then reported daily alcohol consumption using an Interactive Voice Response system. Dimensional AD was calculated by summing the dependence criteria (mean=4.0; SD=1.8). The dimensional AUD measure was a summation of positive Alcohol Abuse plus AD criteria (mean=5.8; SD=2.5). A multi-model inference technique was used to determine whether the DSM-IV categorical diagnosis or dimensional approach would provide a more accurate prediction of first week consumption and change in weekly alcohol consumption following a BI. ResultsThe Akaike information criterion (AIC) for the dimensional AD model (AIC=7625.09) was 3.42 points lower than the categorical model (AIC=7628.51) and weight of evidence calculations indicated there was 85% likelihood that the dimensional model was the better approximating model. Dimensional AUD models fit similarly to the dimensional AD model. All AUD models significantly predicted change in alcohol consumption (p's=.05). ConclusionA dimensional AUD diagnosis was superior for detecting treatment effects that were not apparent with categorical and dimensional AD models.

Web-based brief interventions for young adolescent alcohol and drug abusers - a systematic review

BackgroundAdolescents’ use of alcohol, cannabis and other psychoactive substances has significantly increased in European countries. Parallel to this web-based screening and brief intervention have been disseminated. An important question is if it is based on evidence for effect? Therefore, the aim of this review is to evaluate the evidence for effect. MethodA systematic literature search was performed on randomised trials in the following databases: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE – supplemented by hand search. The target group of young adolescents was defined as 16 to 18 years old.ResultsOverall, 35 papers were identified as randomised trials on web-based screening and/or intervention concerning alcohol and drug among young people; however the only identifiable randomised trial to evaluate the young adolescents was a published protocol describing an ongoing study.ConclusionYoung adolescents might benefit from web-based screening and brief intervention on alcohol and drugs; however an effects remains to be established in high quality studies. (Less)