Care For Alcohol Use Disorders Research Articles

Voucher-based contingency management to promote treatment engagement in comorbid alcohol use disorder and alcohol-related liver disease: A pilot theory-informed qualitative study with service users.

Effective interventions for the management of alcohol-related liver disease (ARLD) remain a gap in clinical practice, and patients' engagement with alcohol services is suboptimal. Based upon the principles of operant conditioning, contingency management (CM) is a psychosocial intervention th at involves gradual, increasing incentives upon completion of treatment-related goals such as treatment attendance. A pilot feasibility trial was conducted with 30 adult patients recruited from an inpatient clinical setting. Consecutive sampling was used to recruit patients presenting comorbid alcohol use disorder (AUD) and ARLD. Participants were randomized to integrated liver care (ILC), receiving hepatology and AUD care, or ILC with a voucher-based CM intervention (intervention arm). A longitudinal qualitative approach was adopted to explore anticipated (Stage 1) and experienced acceptability (Stage 2). The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) guided semi-structured in-depth interviews and deductive analysis. Thirty participants were enrolled in the pilot trial, and interviews were conducted with 24 participants at Stage 1 and seven at Stage 2. Over half of the cohort (54.2%, n = 13) presented decompensated liver disease, and an average of 179 units of alcohol were consumed per week. Overall positive views toward voucher-based CM were noted, and explanatory data emerged across five TFA domains (intervention coherence, ethicality, self-efficacy, perceived effectiveness, and affective attitude). The core aspects of the voucher-based CM intervention matched participants' preferences and needs. Participants regarded CM as having a symbolic value and strengthening the therapeutic alliance with healthcare providers. The data support the scope of voucher-based CM intervention to promote engagement with treatment services, and its potential to address the gaps in the care continuum in ARLD. The findings are of practical significance for developing person-centered, tailored interventions for this clinical population. The outcomes of this investigation can inform decision-making among stakeholders and healthcare providers and improve health outcomes for this clinical population.

Integrated and collaborative care across the spectrum of alcohol-associated liver disease and alcohol use disorder.

The public health impact of alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), a serious consequence of problematic alcohol use, and alcohol use disorder (AUD) is growing, with ALD becoming a major cause of alcohol-associated death overall and the leading indication for liver transplantation in the United States. Comprehensive care for ALD often requires treatment of AUD. Although there is a growing body of evidence showing that AUD treatment is associated with reductions in liver-related morbidity and mortality, only a minority of patients with ALD and AUD receive this care. Integrated and collaborative models that streamline both ALD and AUD care for patients with ALD and AUD are promising approaches to bridge this treatment gap and rely on multidisciplinary and interprofessional teams and partnerships. Here, we review the role of AUD care in ALD treatment, the effects of AUD treatment on liver-related outcomes, the impact of comorbid conditions such as other substance use disorders, obesity, and metabolic syndrome, and the current landscape of integrated and collaborative care for ALD and AUD in various treatment settings. We further review knowledge gaps and unmet needs that remain, including the role of precision medicine, the application of harm reduction approaches, the impact of health disparities, and the need for additional AUD treatment options, as well as further efforts to support implementation and dissemination.

Management of alcohol-associated liver disease and alcohol use disorder in liver transplant candidates and recipients: Challenges and opportunities.

Alcohol-associated liver disease poses a significant global health burden, with rising alcohol consumption and prevalence of alcohol use disorder (AUD) contributing to increased morbidity and mortality. This review examines the challenges and opportunities in the care of candidates and recipients of liver transplant (LT) with AUD. Despite advancements in posttransplant patient survival, the risk of disease recurrence and alcohol relapse remains substantial. Several challenges have been identified, including (1) rising disease burden of alcohol-associated liver disease, variable transplant practices, and systemic barriers; (2) disparities in mental health therapy access and the impact on transplant; (3) variable definitions, underdiagnosis, and stigma affecting access to care; and (4) post-LT relapse, its risk factors, and consequential harm. The review focuses on the opportunities to improve AUD care for candidates and recipients of LT through effective biochemical monitoring, behavioral and pharmacologic approaches, creating Centers of Excellence for post-LT AUD care, advocating for policy reforms, and ensuring insurance coverage for necessary services as essential steps toward improving patient outcomes. The review also highlights unmet needs, such as the scarcity of addiction specialists, and calls for further research on personalized behavioral treatments, digital health, and value-based care models to optimize AUD care in the LT setting.

Using a cascade of care framework to identify gaps in access to medications for alcohol use disorder in British Columbia, Canada.

Despite the significant burden of alcohol use disorder (AUD) and availability of safe and effective medications for AUD (MAUD), population-level estimates of access and engagement in AUD-related care are limited. The aims of this study were to generate a cascade of care for AUD in British Columbia (BC), Canada, and to estimate the impacts of MAUD on health outcomes. This was a retrospective population-based cohort study using linked administrative health data. British Columbia, Canada, 2015-2019. Using a 20% random sample of BC residents, we identified 7231 people with moderate-to-severe alcohol use disorder (PWAUD; overall prevalence = 0.7%). We developed a six-stage AUD cascade (from diagnosis to ≥6months retention in MAUD) among PWAUD. We evaluated trends over time and estimated the impacts of access to MAUD on AUD-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits and death. Between 2015 and 2019, linkage to AUD-related care decreased (from 80.4% to 46.5%). However, rates of MAUD initiation (11.4% to 24.1%) and retention for ≥1 (7.0% to 18.2%), ≥3 (1.2% to 4.3%) or ≥6months (0.2% to 1.6%) increased significantly. In adjusted analyses, access to MAUD was associated with reduced odds of experiencing any AUD-related adverse outcomes, with longer retention in MAUD showing a trend to greater odds reduction: adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) ranging from 0.59 (0.48-0.71) for MAUD retention <1month to 0.37 (0.21-0.67) for ≥6months retention. Access to medications for alcohol use disorder among people with moderate-to-severe alcohol use disorder in British Colombia, Canada increased between 2015 and 2019; however, initiation and retention remained low. There was a trend between longer retention in medications for alcohol use disorder and greater reductions in the odds of experiencing alcohol use disorder-related adverse outcomes.

Management of alcohol use disorder in patients with chronic liver disease.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) rates have risen dramatically in the United States, resulting in increasing rates of alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), but many patients struggle to access alcohol use treatment. AUD treatment improves outcomes, including mortality, and represents the most urgent means by which care can be improved for those with liver disease (including ALD and others) and AUD. AUD care for those with liver disease involves 3 steps: detecting alcohol use, diagnosing AUD, and directing patients to alcohol treatment. Detecting alcohol use can involve questioning during the clinical interview, the use of standardized alcohol use surveys, and alcohol biomarkers. Identifying and diagnosing AUD are interview-based processes that should ideally be performed by a trained addiction professional, but nonaddiction clinicians can use surveys to determine the severity of hazardous drinking. Referral to formal AUD treatment should be made, especially where more severe AUD is suspected or identified. Therapeutic modalities are numerous and include different forms of one-on-one psychotherapy, such as motivational enhancement therapy or cognitive behavior therapy, group therapy, community mutual aid societies (such as Alcoholics Anonymous), inpatient addiction treatment, and relapse prevention medications. Finally, integrated care approaches that build strong relationships between addiction professionals and hepatologists or medical providers caring for those with liver disease are crucial to improving care for this population.

Alcohol use disorder treatment delivered outside hepatology clinic.

Alcohol use disorder treatment delivered outside hepatology clinic.

AUD Treatment Rose During Early Pandemic

AUD Treatment Rose During Early Pandemic

Closing the treatment gap for alcohol use disorders in low- and middle-income countries.

The alcohol-attributable disease burden is greater in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as compared to high-income countries. Despite the effectiveness of interventions such as health promotion and education, brief interventions, psychological treatments, family-focused interventions, and biomedical treatments, access to evidence-based care for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) in LMICs is limited. This can be explained by poor access to general health and mental health care, limited availability of relevant clinical skills among health care providers, lack of political will and/or financial resources, historical stigma and discrimination against people with AUDs, and poor planning and implementation of policies. Access to care for AUDs in LMICs could be improved through evidence-based strategies such as designing innovative, local and culturally acceptable solutions, health system strengthening by adopting a collaborative stepped care approach, horizontal integration of care into existing models of care (e.g., HIV care), task sharing to optimise limited human resources, working with families of individuals with AUD, and leveraging technology-enabled interventions. Moving ahead, research, policy and practice in LMICs need to focus on evidence-based decision-making, responsiveness to context and culture, working collaboratively with a range of stakeholders to design and implement interventions, identifying upstream social determinants of AUDs, developing and evaluating policy interventions such as increased taxation on alcohol, and developing services for special populations (e.g., adolescents) with AUDs.

A Community-Based Therapeutic Education Programme for People with Alcohol Use Disorder in France: A Qualitative Study (ETHER).

Therapeutic patient education (TPE) aims to help people with chronic disease strengthen their empowerment and psychosocial skills to better manage their condition. Although TPE has great potential for addiction medicine, studies on its benefits for reducing alcohol-related harms and increasing empowerment are sparse. We conducted a qualitative study of people with alcohol use disorder (AUD) who participated in the community-based TPE programme Choizitaconso to assess their perceptions and experiences of it. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 participants who had completed the TPE programme at least six months previously. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using a sequential thematic analysis. We identified four general themes: (1) the context of participation: the TPE programme could be a strategy to facilitate engagement in AUD care; (2) representations and experiences: the programme helped to “normalize” participants’ relationship with alcohol use by increasing empowerment; (3) TPE strengths: improved knowledge about alcohol use, self-image, weight loss, self-stigma reduction; (4) TPE limitations: difficulty putting learning into practice after the programme ended. The Choizitaconso programme met participants’ health and psychosocial expectations, strengthening their empowerment and reducing self-stigma, thereby facilitating engagement in AUD care.

Efficacy and comparative effectiveness of telephone and smartphone remote continuing care interventions for alcohol use disorder: a randomized controlled trial.

Management of alcohol use disorder (AUD) could be enhanced by effective remote treatments. This study tested whether supplementing intensive outpatient programs (IOPs) with continuing care delivered via (1) telephone, (2) smartphone or (3) their combination improves outcomes relative to (4) IOP only. Continuing care conditions were also compared. Randomized controlled trial of four groups with 3-, 6-, 9-, 12- and 18-month follow-ups. University research center in Philadelphia, PA, USA. Participants (n= 262) met DSM-V criteria for AUD, were largely male (71%) and African American (82%). Telephone monitoring and counseling (TMC; n= 59), addiction comprehensive health enhancement support system (ACHESS; n= 68) and TMC + ACHESS (n= 70) provided for 12 months. The control condition received IOP only (TAU; n= 65). The primary outcome was percentage of days heavy drinking (PDHD) in months 1-12. Secondary outcomes were any drinking, any drug use, drinking consequences and quality of life. Mean PDHD in months 1-12 was 10.29 in TAU, 5.41 in TMC, 6.80 in ACHESS and 5.99 in TMC + ACHESS. PDHD was lower in TMC [Cohen's d = 0.35, P = 0.018, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (-1.42, -0.20)], ACHESS [d = 0.31, P = 0.031, 95% CI = (-1.27, -0.06)] and TMC + ACHESS [d = 0.36, P = 0.009, 95% CI = (-1.40, -0.20)] than in TAU. Differences between TMC + ACHESS, TMC and ACHESS were small (d ≤ 0.06) and non-significant. Findings were inconclusive as to whether or not the treatment conditions differed on PDHD at 18 months. A significant effect was obtained on any drinking, which was higher in months 1-12 in TAU than in TMC [odds ratio (OR) = 3.02, standard error (SE) = 0.43, 95% CI = (1.30, 6.99), P = 0.01] and TMC + ACHESS [OR = 2.43, SE = 0.39, 95% CI = (1.12, 5.27), P = 0.025). No other significant effects were obtained on other secondary outcomes during or after treatment. A telephone-delivered intervention and a smartphone-delivered intervention, alone and in combination, provided effective remote continuing care for alcohol use disorder. The combination of both interventions was not superior to either alone and effects did not persist post-treatment.

Alcohol use disorder treatment and outcomes among hospitalized adults with alcoholic hepatitis

Purpose: The burden of alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) in the United States (US) has continued to worsen in the background of rising rates of alcohol use disorder. Patients with ALD present to care at a late stage, often with the sequela of liver decompensation, such as gastrointestinal bleeding and infection. ALD is now the leading indication for liver transplantation. We aimed to measure the quality of care delivered to hospitalized patients with alcoholic hepatitis (AH) across 3 domains: 1) alcohol-use disorder (AUD) care, 2) inpatient cirrhosis care, and 3) alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) care—and observe associations between quality of care and outcomes. Methods: We included hospital encounters between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2019 to a large, diverse integrated health system for AH with active alcohol use within the prior 60 days. The diagnosis of AH was determined based on previously published clinical and laboratory criteria. Quality indicator (QI) pass rates were calculated as the proportion of patients eligible for each indicator who received the QI within the timeframe specified. We then evaluated the association between the receipt of all QIs and 6-month mortality, as well as AUD-specific QIs and 30-day readmission. Results: Of the 179 patients, the median age was 47 years-old, 59.2% were male and 49.2% were non-Hispanic White. The median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium score was 25, while the median discriminant function was 33. Patients were followed for an average of 21 months. Overall, 14% of patients died during the index hospitalization while 17.3% died following discharge and 24.8% were re-admitted within 30-days. QI pass-rates were variable across the different domains. Few patients received AUD care—pass rates for receipt of pharmacotherapy and behavioral therapy at 6 months were only 19.1% and 35.1%, respectively. There was a significant association between receiving behavioral therapy and 6-month mortality—3% vs 18%, p = 0.05. Conclusion: The quality of care received during hospital encounters for AH is variable, and AUD-specific therapy is low. Future quality of care initiatives are warranted to link patients to AUD treatment to ensure optimal care and maximize patients survival in this at-risk population.

Predictors of Five-Year Readmission to an Inpatient Service among Patients with Alcohol Use Disorders: Report from a Low-Middle Income Country

ABSTRACT Background Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a relapsing-remitting disease that accounted for a sizable proportion of all-cause adult inpatient stays. Objectives To determine the predictors of any and multiple readmissions to inpatient care for AUD within 5 years of the index admission. Methods This retrospective, register-based cohort study assessed consecutive patients with AUD admitted to a publicly-funded inpatient service between January 2007 and December 2014. Binary logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors for readmissions based on relevant demographic, clinical, and treatment variables that showed significant differences (p < 0.05) on univariate analysis. Results Among 938 patients (age 35.9 ± 10.3 years; duration of alcohol use 159.6 ± 104.5 months; dual diagnosis 19%; comorbidity of substance use disorder 49.3%; medical disorder 34.8%, 299 (31.9%) and 115 (12.3%) had any and multiple readmissions, respectively. Comorbid “severe mental illness” (Odds ratio [OR] 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-3.57) and urban residence (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.13-2.18) increased the odds of any readmission; “Improved” status at discharge (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.72) during index hospitalization reduced odds of readmission. Additionally, any medical or psychiatric comorbidities increased (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.26-3.97), and comorbid substance use disorder decreased (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.89) risk of multiple readmissions. Conclusions Clinicians could identify patients at-risk for any and multiple readmissions during the index hospitalization. A policy aimed at reducing the risk of rehospitalization, healthcare cost, and stigma should pay attention to the predictors of readmission. Such policy should further benefit resource-limited settings.

A cascade of care for alcohol use disorder: Using 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data to identify gaps in past 12-month care.

Although effective treatments exist, alcohol use disorder (AUD) is undertreated. We used a cascade of care framework to understand gaps in care for persons with AUD. Using 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data, we evaluated the following steps in the cascade of care: (1) adult prevalence of AUD; (2) proportion of adults with AUD who utilized health care in the past 12months; (3) proportion with AUD screened about their alcohol use; (4) proportion with AUD who received a brief intervention about their alcohol misuse; (5) proportion with AUD who received information about treatment for alcohol misuse; and (6) proportion with AUD who received treatment. Analyses were stratified by AUD severity. Of the 214,505 persons included in the sample, the weighted prevalence of AUD was 7.8% (95% CI 7.6-8.0%). Cascades of care showed the majority of individuals with AUD utilized health care in the past 12 months [81.4% (95% CI 80.7-82.1%)] and were screened about alcohol use [69.9% (95% CI 68.9-70.8%)]. However, only a minority of individuals received subsequent steps of care, including 11.6% (95% CI 11.0-12.2%) who reported receiving a brief intervention, 5.1% (95% CI 4.6-5.6%) who were referred to treatment, and 5.8% (95% CI 5.4-6.3%) who received treatment. Similar patterns were observed when cascades of care were stratified by AUD severity. Persons with AUD commonly utilize health care and are often screened about alcohol use, but few receive treatment. Healthcare settings-particularly primary care settings-represent a prime opportunity to implement AUD treatment to improve outcomes in this high-risk population.

Comparison of European Clinical Guidelines on the Management of Alcohol Use Disorders

Background: Alcohol is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the European region, and tackling the harmful use of alcohol is a public health priority. Most countries in the region have national strategies for treating alcohol use disorders (AUD), but there is significant between-country variation. Objectives: This study aimed to compare clinical guidelines for the management of AUD from countries of the European region and to determine whether countries’ relative wealth or quality of their health systems had affected the guidelines. Methods: A survey was conducted of 24 countries. The survey encompassed how AUD clinical guidelines were researched, the range and expertise of contributors, which topics of AUD treatment were included, the definition of a “standard drink” used, and the publishing, funding, endorsement, and dissemination of the guideline. Results: Twenty-one of the 24 countries surveyed had a clinical guideline for AUD. All guidelines were underpinned by a literature review, and psychiatrists were the professional group most commonly involved in producing them. Most of the guidelines covered typical cornerstones of AUD care such as treatment of alcohol dependence, pharmacotherapy for relapse prevention, and detoxification. Definitions of a “standard drink” ranged from 8 to 20 grams of ethanol. Governments or governmental bodies were the main publishers and funders of guidelines, and the vast majority of guidelines were freely available online. There were no statistically significant effects of GDP, GDP per capita, or World Health Organization’s World Health Report rankings on whether countries were more likely to have an AUD clinical guideline, to have performed a systematic literature review, or to have involved service users in producing their guideline. Conclusions: The results of this survey reflect widespread good practice in producing AUD clinical guidelines across European countries. Regional research collaborations could offer significant time and cost savings in producing the evidence base from which guidelines are then written.

Evidence based models of care for the treatment of alcohol use disorder in primary health care settings: a systematic review

BackgroundPharmacological and behavioural treatments for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are effective but the uptake is limited. Primary care could be a key setting for identification and continuous care for AUD due to accessibility, low cost and acceptability to patients.We aimed to synthesise the literature regarding differential models of care for the management of AUD in primary health care settings.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of articles published worldwide (1998-present) using the following databases; Medline, PsycINFO, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase. The Grey Matters Tool guided the grey literature search. We selected randomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of a primary care model in the management of AUD. Two researchers independently assessed and then reached agreement on the included studies. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2.0 for the critical appraisal.ResultsEleven studies (4186 participants) were included. We categorised the studies into ‘lower’ versus ‘higher’ intensity given the varying intensity of clinical care evaluated across the studies. Significant differences in treatment uptake were reported by most studies. The uptake of AUD medication was reported in 5 out of 6 studies that offered AUD medication. Three studies reported a significantly higher uptake of AUD medication in the intervention group. A significant reduction in alcohol use was reported in two out of the five studies with lower intensity of care, and three out of six studies with higher intensity of care.ConclusionOur results suggest that models of care in primary care settings can increase treatment uptake (e.g. psychosocial and/or pharmacotherapy) although results for alcohol-related outcomes were mixed. More research is required to determine which specific patient groups are suitable for AUD treatment in primary health care settings and to identify which models and components are most effective.Trial RegistrationPROSPERO: CRD42019120293.

Adaptation and piloting of an integrated intervention model for alcohol use disorders in primary healthcare in rural Tanzania: a study protocol

IntroductionIntegration of evidence-based interventions for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) into primary healthcare has potential to increase coverage and reduce population burden. However, these interventions are rarely implemented in low- and...

The Changing Landscape of Alcohol Use and Alcohol Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic - Perspectives of Early Career Professionals in 16 Countries.

: Alcohol use is a major risk factor for infectious disease and reduction of harms associated with alcohol consumption are essential during times of humanitarian crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. As a network of early career professionals working in the area of addiction medicine, we provide our views with regards to national actions related to reducing alcohol-related harm and providing care for people with alcohol use disorder during COVID-19. We believe that COVID-19 related measures have affected alcohol consumption in the majority of countries represented in this commentary. Examples of these changes include changes in alcohol consumption patterns, increases in cases of alcohol withdrawal syndrome, disruptions in access to medical care for alcohol use disorder and increases in illegal production of alcohol. Our members urge that treatment for acute and severe conditions due to substance use should be considered as essential services in times of humanitarian crises like COVID-19.

Medication Utilization for Alcohol Use Disorder in a Commercially Insured Population.

Examine patterns of alcohol use disorder (AUD) medication use and identify factors associated with prescription fill among commercially insured individuals with an index AUD visit. Using 2008-2018 claims data from a large national insurer, estimate days to first AUD medication using cause-specific hazards approach to account for competing risk of benefits loss. Aged 17-64 with ≥ 1 AUD visit. Days to AUD medication fill. A total of 13.3% of the 151,128 with an index visit filled an AUD prescription after that visit, while 69.8% lost benefits before filling and 17.0% remained enrolled but did not fill (median days observed = 305). Almost half (46.3%) of those who filled a prescription received substance use disorder (SUD) inpatient care within 7days before the fill, and 63.4% received SUD outpatient care. Likelihood of medication use was higher for those aged 26-35, 36-45, and 46-55years relative to 56-64years (e.g., 26-35: hazard ratio = 1.29 [95% confidence interval 1.23-1.36]); those diagnosed with moderate/severe AUD (2.05 [1.98-2.12]), co-occurring opioid use disorder (OUD) (1.33 [1.26-1.39]), or severe mental illness (1.31 [1.27-1.35]); those with a chronic alcohol-related diagnosis (1.08 [1.04-1.12]); and those whose index visit was in an inpatient/emergency department (1.27 [1.23-1.31]) or intermediate care setting (1.13 [1.07-1.20]) relative to outpatient. Likelihood of use was higher in later years relative to 2008 (e.g., 2018:2.02 [1.89-2.15]) and higher for those who received the majority of AUD care in a practice with a psychiatrist/addiction medicine specialist (1.13 [1.10-1.16]). Likelihood of use was lower for those diagnosed with a SUD other than AUD or OUD (0.88 [0.85-0.92]), those with an acute alcohol-related condition (0.79 [0.75-0.84]), and males (0.71 [0.69-0.73]). While AUD medication use increased and was more common among individuals with greater severity, few patients who could benefit from medications are using them. More efforts are needed to identify and treat individuals in non-acute care settings earlier in their course of AUD.

Brief motivational therapy versus enhanced usual care for alcohol use disorders in primary care in Chile: study protocol for an exploratory randomized trial

BackgroundHarmful alcohol use is a leading cause of global disability and death. However, increased detection and brief intervention capacity of more severe alcohol use disorders has not been accompanied by increased availability of treatment services. Incorporating treatment for such disorders into primary care is of paramount importance for improving access and health outcomes. This study aims to estimate the effectiveness of a Brief Motivational Treatment (BMT) applied in primary care for treatment of these disorders.MethodsA parallel-group, single-blinded, severity-stratified, randomized clinical trial will test the superiority of BMT over enhanced usual care. Eligible participants will be those seeking treatment and who fulfill DSM-V criteria for alcohol use disorder and criteria for harmful alcohol use. With an estimated a loss to follow-up of 20%, a total of 182 participants will be recruited and equally randomized to each treatment group. The intervention group will receive an adaptation of the motivational enhancement therapy, as manualized in Project MATCH. This treatment consists of four 45-min sessions provided by a general psychologist with at least 3 years of primary care experience. The primary outcome is the change from baseline in the drinks per drinking day during the last 90 days, which will be captured using the Timeline Follow Back method. Secondary outcomes will describe the changes in alcohol use pattern, motivational status, and severity of the disorder.All participants will be analyzed according to the group they were allocated, regardless of the treatment actually received. Mean differences (MD) will be computed for continuous outcomes and relative risks (RR) and RR reductions (RRR) for dichotomous results. Linear models will deliver the subgroup analyses. Missingness is assumed to be associated with the baseline alcohol use pattern and severity, so a multiple imputation method will be used to handle missing data.DiscussionThis trial aims to test the superiority of BMT over enhanced usual care with a reasonable superiority margin, over which the BMT could be further considered for incorporation into PC in Chile. Its pragmatic approach ultimately aims to inform policymakers about the benefit of including a brief psychosocial treatment into PC.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04345302. Registered on 28 April 2020

Screening and care for alcohol use disorder in France: expectations, barriers and levers using a mixed-methods approach

BackgroundThe widespread under-screening and under-treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD) contributes to its health and socioeconomic burden. We conducted a mixed-methods (qualitative and qualitative) study in people with alcohol use disorder (PWAUD) to explore their expectations, as well as barriers and levers to AUD care.MethodsIndividuals with AUDIT > 15 (N = 179) were interviewed using computer-assisted interviews in several medical and non-medical sites (e.g., bars) (quantitative substudy). We also conducted semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 36 PWAUD (qualitative substudy). Using logistic regression, we explored factors associated with having previously received/sought care for AUD. Three major themes were identified in the qualitative textual analysis using a descending hierarchical classification.ResultsNot socializing with heavy drinkers (AOR [95%CI]:3.84[1.66–8.85]), regular smoking (9.72[3.91–24.15]) and feeling discriminated against (2.35[1.10–5.05]) were independent levers to having sought/received care for AUD, while being aged < 50 and employment were independent barriers. The five predominant themes in PWAUD discourses emerging from the textual analysis were: drinking context, medical care, alcohol treatment, tobacco/addiction and family. When triangulating results from the logistic regression and the textual analysis, two barriers (social drinking and difficulties with the medical care system), and two levers (family influence and tobacco addiction), emerged.ConclusionThese results underline the need for interventions targeting families and the social network to increase awareness about AUD and related care. Simplified and novel comprehensive care trajectories are urgently needed to reduce the clinical and public health burden of AUD.