Intervention For Unhealthy Alcohol Use Research Articles

Practice Facilitation to Address Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Primary Care

Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is the fourth most preventable cause of death in the US. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that primary care clinicians routinely screen all adults 18 years and older for UAU; however, this preventive service is poorly implemented. To determine if practice facilitation improved delivery of the recommended care for UAU compared to usual care. This practice-level cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted across diverse and representative primary care practices throughout Virginia. A total of 76 primary care practices enrolled between October 2019 and January 2023. Practices received immediate (intervention) or 6-month delayed (control) practice facilitation, which included tailored educational sessions, workflow management, and tools for addressing UAU. Outcomes included the increase in recommended screening for UAU, brief interventions, referral for counseling, and medication treatment. Data were collected via medical record review (structured and free text data) and transcripts of practice facilitator sessions and exits interviews. Of the 76 primary care practices enrolled, 32 were randomized to intervention and 35 to control; 11 789 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [16.3] years; 61.1% women) were randomly selected for analysis, with patient demographics similar to Virginia at large. From baseline to 6 months after intervention, screening with a validated instrument increased from 2.1% (95% CI, 0.5%-8.4%) to 35.5% (95% CI, 11.5%-69.9%) in the intervention group compared to 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-1.8%) to 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-5.8%) in the control group (P < .001). Brief office-based interventions for the intervention group increased from 26.2% (95% CI, 14.2%-45.8%) to 62.6% (95% CI, 43.6%-78.3%) vs 45.5% (95% CI, 28.0%-64.1%) to 55.1% (95% CI, 36.5%-72.3%) in the control group (P = .008). Identification of UAU, referral for counseling, and medication treatment had similar changes for both groups. Qualitative analyses of transcripts revealed that few clinicians understood the preventive service prior to practice facilitation, but at the end most felt much more competent and confident with screening and brief intervention for UAU. This cluster randomized clinical trial demonstrated that practice facilitation can help primary care practices to better implement screening and counseling for UAU into their routine workflow. Effective primary care practice implementation interventions such as this can have a profound effect on the health of communities. Given the number of people that the participating practices care for, this intervention resulted in an additional 114 604 patients being screened annually for UAU who would not have been otherwise. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248023.

Training Master of Social Work Students in Brief Intervention for Unhealthy Alcohol Use: Results of a Validated Adherence Assessment.

Many social workers receive limited training in working with clients engaged in unhealthy substance use. As a result, national organizations and agencies such as the Council on Social Work Education and individual social work programs are beginning to address this need by incorporating training into higher education social work programs. The purpose of this study was to examine Master of Social Work (MSW) students' adherence to a brief intervention protocol for unhealthy alcohol use. A total of 91 MSW students consented to the assessment of their digital, audio-recorded class assignment by independent raters. Although 90% of MSW student participants were found to be overall adherent to the protocol, gaps in training quality were also identified. Lessons learned for addressing the gaps are discussed, along with future directions for teaching and learning in social work related to substance use.

Demographic differences in the cascade of care for unhealthy alcohol use: A cross-sectional analysis of data from the 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.

The screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) model is recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to improve recognition of and intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. How SBIRT implementation differs by demographic characteristics is poorly understood. We analyzed data from the 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health from respondents ≥18 years old who used an outpatient clinic and had at least one alcoholic drink within the past year. Respondents were grouped into one of three mutually exclusive groups: "no binge drinking or alcohol use disorder (AUD)," "binge drinking without AUD," or "AUD." Outcome variables were likelihood of screening, brief intervention (BI), referral to treatment (RT), and AUD treatment. The demographic predictors on which outcomes were regressed included gender, age, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, insurance status, and history of military involvement. Consistent with SBIRT guidelines, the entire sample was included in the screening model; screened persons with either binge drinking without AUD or with AUD were included in the BI model; screened persons with AUD were included in the RT model, and persons referred to treatment with AUD were included in the AUD treatment model. Analyses included 120,804 respondents. Women were more likely than men to be screened, but less likely to receive BI or RT. When referred to treatment, women were more likely than men to receive it. Persons aged ≥50 were least likely to be screened about alcohol, but most likely to receive BI, while persons aged 18-25 were least likely to receive BI or AUD treatment. Racial and ethnic minorities were less likely than White persons to be screened; Asians were less likely to receive RT, and Black persons were less likely to receive treatment than White persons. Persons identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual were equally as likely or more likely to receive SBIRT or AUD treatment as those identifying as heterosexual. Persons without insurance were less likely to be screened than those with insurance. Persons with a history of military involvement were more likely to be screened and receive BI and RT than persons who had not served in the military. Demographic disparities in SBIRT implementation exist. Addressing the sources of these disparities and minimizing attrition from care could improve outcomes for persons with unhealthy alcohol use.

Stand Down–Think Before You Drink: protocol for an effectiveness-implementation trial of a mobile application for unhealthy alcohol use with and without peer support

IntroductionMobile apps can increase access to alcohol-related care but only if patients actively engage with them. Peers have shown promise for facilitating patients’ engagement with mobile apps. However, the effectiveness...

Implementing a text-messaging intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in emergency departments: protocol for implementation strategy development and a pilot cluster randomized implementation trial

BackgroundUnhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is a leading cause of premature mortality among adults in the USA. Emergency departments (EDs) are key intervention settings for UAU but often have limited time and resources. One low-burden, scalable approach to address UAU is text-messaging interventions. Despite strong research support and promise for scalability, there is little research on how to implement such interventions in healthcare settings. The process of providers making them available to patients in an efficient way within already busy and overburdened ED workflows and patients adopting them remains a new area of research. The purpose of this three-phase study is to develop and test an implementation strategy for UAU text-messaging interventions in EDs.MethodOur first aim is to examine barriers and facilitators to staff offering and patients accepting a text-messaging intervention in the ED using an explanatory, sequential mixed methods approach. We will examine alcohol screening data in the electronic health records of 17 EDs within a large integrated health system in the Northeast and conduct surveys among chairpersons in each. This data will be used to purposively sample 4 EDs for semi-structured interviews among 20 clinical staff, 20 patients, and 4 chairpersons. Our second aim is to conduct a stakeholder-engaged intervention mapping process to develop a multi-component implementation strategy for EDs. Our third aim is to conduct a mixed method 2-arm cluster randomized pilot study in 4 EDs that serve ~11,000 UAU patients per year to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of the implementation strategy. The Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework will guide study activities.DiscussionLow-burden technology, like text messaging, along with targeted implementation support and strategies driven by identified barriers and facilitators could sustain large-scale ED-based alcohol screening programs and provide much needed support to patients who screen positive while reducing burden on EDs. The proposed study would be the first to develop and test this targeted implementation strategy and will prepare for a larger, fully powered hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial. Findings may also be broadly applicable to implementation of patient-facing mobile health technologies.Trial registrationThis study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05350878) on 4/28/2022.

Improving screening, treatment, and intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care through clinic, practice-based research network, and health plan partnerships: Protocol of the ANTECEDENT study.

BackgroundUnhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, contributing to 95,000 deaths annually. When offered in primary care, screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment (SBIRT), and medication-assisted treatment for alcohol use disorder (MAUD) can effectively address UAU. However, these interventions are not yet routine in primary care clinics. Therefore, our study evaluates tailored implementation support to increase SBIRT and MAUD in primary care.MethodsANTECEDENT is a pragmatic implementation study designed to support 150 primary care clinics in Oregon adopting and optimizing SBIRT and MAUD workflows to address UAU. The study is a partnership between the Oregon Health Authority Transformation Center—state leaders in Medicaid health system transformation—SBIRT Oregon and the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network. We recruited clinics providing primary care in Oregon and prioritized reaching clinics that were small to medium in size (<10 providers). All participating clinics receive foundational support (i.e., a baseline assessment, exit assessment, and access to the online SBIRT Oregon materials) and may opt to receive tailored implementation support delivered by a practice facilitator over 12 months. Tailored implementation support is designed to address identified needs and may include health information technology support, peer-to-peer learning, workflow mapping, or expert consultation via academic detailing. The study aims are to 1) engage, recruit, and conduct needs assessments with 150 primary care clinics and their regional Medicaid health plans called Coordinated Care Organizations within the state of Oregon, 2) implement and evaluate the impact of foundational and supplemental implementation support on clinic change in SBIRT and MAUD, and 3) describe how practice facilitators tailor implementation support based on context and personal expertise. Our convergent parallel mixed-methods analysis uses RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance). It is informed by a hybrid of the i-PARIHS (integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) and the Dynamic Sustainability Framework.DiscussionThis study will explore how primary care clinics implement SBIRT and MAUD in routine practice and how practice facilitators vary implementation support across diverse clinic settings. Findings will inform how to effectively align implementation support to context, advance our understanding of practice facilitator skill development over time, and ultimately improve detection and treatment of UAU across diverse primary care clinics.

Barriers to recruiting primary care practices for implementation research during COVID-19: A qualitative study of practice coaches from the Stop Unhealthy (STUN) Alcohol Use Now trial.

What is known: Unhealthy alcohol use is a significant public health issue, which has been exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use is an evidence-based practice shown to help reduce drinking-related behaviors, yet it remains rare in practice. What this study adds: Using a qualitative approach, we identify barriers and facilitators to recruiting primary care practices into a funded trial that uses practice facilitation to address unhealthy alcohol use. We identify general insights as well as those specific to the COVID-19 pandemic. Barriers are primarily related to competing priorities, incentives, and lack of infrastructure. Facilitators are related to framing of the project and the anticipated level and type of resources needed to address unhealthy alcohol use especially as the pandemic wanes. Implications: Our findings provide information on barriers and facilitators to recruiting primary care practices for behavioral health projects and to implementing these activities. Using our findings, we provide a discussion of suggestions for conducting these types of projects in the future which may be of interest to researchers, practice managers, and providers.

Patient and provider factors associated with receipt and delivery of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care.

Unhealthy alcohol use is a serious and costly public health problem. Alcohol screening and brief interventions are effective in reducing unhealthy alcohol consumption. However, rates of receipt and delivery of brief interventions vary significantly across healthcare settings, and relatively little is known about the associated patient and provider factors. This study examines patient and provider factors associated with the receipt of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in an integrated healthcare system, based on documented brief interventions in the electronic health record. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we retrospectively analyzed 287,551 adult primary care patients (and their 2952 providers) who screened positive for unhealthy drinking between 2014 and 2017. We found lower odds of receiving a brief intervention among patients exceeding daily or weekly drinking limits (vs. exceeding both limits), females, older age groups, those with higher medical complexity, and those already diagnosed with alcohol use disorders. Patients with other unhealthy lifestyle activities (e.g., smoking, no/insufficient exercise) were more likely to receive a brief intervention. We also found that female providers and those with longer tenure in the health system were more likely to deliver brief interventions. These findings point to characteristics that can be targeted to improve universal receipt of brief intervention.

Screening for Young Adults for Illicit Drug Use: A Good Idea Although Evidence Is Lacking.

* Abbreviations: AAP — : American Academy of Pediatrics USPSTF — : US Preventive Services Task Force In the latest review, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concluded that the evidence is “insufficient to assess the balance and benefits and harms of screening for illicit drug use in adolescents” and of “primary care-based behavioral counseling interventions to prevent or reduce illicit drug use” in adolescents and young adults (defined as ages 12–17 and 18–25, respectively).1–3 In these statements, illicit drugs are substances that are illegal drugs or medications used non-medically but do not include alcohol or nicotine. These recommendations were based on 2 new evidence reviews.2,3 The USPSTF had previously concluded the evidence was insufficient for screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use among adolescents.4,5 These statements notwithstanding, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) 2016 policy statement on substance use screening and brief intervention recommends that pediatricians “increase their capacity in substance use detection, assessment, and intervention; and become familiar with adolescent” screening, intervention, and referral practices and “their potential to be incorporated into universal screening and comprehensive care.”6 The AAP also advocates for brief intervention research and for insurers to pay for screening and brief intervention. More importantly, the AAP, in its recommendations for preventive pediatric health care, recommends “tobacco, alcohol or other drug use assessment…with appropriate action to follow, if positive” for adolescents.6 Herein we report how the USPSTF has summarized the … Address correspondence to Richard Saitz, MD, MPH, Department of Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Boston University, 801 Massachusetts Ave, Crosstown 4th Floor, Boston, MA 02118. E-mail: rsaitz{at}bu.edu

Participant engagement in a community based participatory research study to reduce alcohol use among Latino immigrant men.

Although Latino immigrant men experience many health disparities, they are underrepresented in research to understand and address disparities. Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) has been identified to encourage participant engagement and increase representation in health disparities research. The CBPR conceptual model describes how partnership processes and study design impact participant engagement in research. Using this model, we sought to describe how these domains influenced participant engagement in a pilot randomized controlled trial of brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use (n = 121) among Latino immigrant men. We conducted interviews with a sample of study participants (n = 25) and reviewed logs maintained by 'promotores'. We identified facilitators of participant engagement, including the relevance of the study topic, alignment with participants' goals to improve their lives, partnerships with study staff that treated participants respectfully and offered access to resources. Further, men reported that the study time and location were convenient and that they appreciated being compensated for their time. Barriers to participant engagement included survey questions that were difficult to understand and competing demands of work responsibilities. Findings suggest that engaging underserved communities requires culturally responsive and community engagement strategies that promote trust. Future studies should further investigate how CBPR partnership processes can inform intervention research.

Electronic screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care waiting rooms – A pilot project

Background: In primary care, electronic self-administered screening and brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol may overcome some of the implementation barriers of face-to-face intervention. We developed an anonymous electronic self-administered screening brief intervention device for unhealthy alcohol use and assessed its feasibility and acceptability in primary care practice waiting rooms. Two modes of delivery were compared: with or without the presence of a research assistant (RA) to make patients aware of the device’s presence and help users. Using the device was optional. Methods: The devices were placed in 10 participating primary care practices waiting rooms for 6 weeks, and were accessible on a voluntary basis. Number of appointments by each practice during the course of the study was recorded. Access to the electronic brief intervention was voluntary among those who screened positive. Screening and brief intervention rates and characteristics of users were compared across the modes of delivery. Results: During the study, there were 7270 appointments and 1511 individuals used the device (20.8%). Mean age of users was 45.3 (19.5), and 57.9% screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use. Of them, 53.8% accessed the brief intervention content. The presence of the RA had a major impact on the device’s usage (59.6% vs 17.4% when absent). When the RA was present, participants were less likely to screen positive (49.4% vs 60.7%, P = 0.0003) but more likely to access the intervention (62.7% vs 51.4%, P = 0.009). Results from the satisfaction survey indicated that users found the device easy to use (93.5%), questions useful (89–95%) and 77.2% reported that their friends would be willing to use it. Conclusions: This pilot project indicates that the implementation of an electronic screening and brief intervention device for unhealthy alcohol is feasible and acceptable in primary care practices but that, without human support, its use is rather limited.

A systematic review of approaches to improve practice, detection and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use in primary health care: a role for continuous quality improvement

BackgroundUnhealthy alcohol use involves a spectrum from hazardous use (exceeding guidelines but no harms) through to alcohol dependence. Evidence-based management of unhealthy alcohol use in primary health care has been recommended since 1979. However, sustained and systematic implementation has proven challenging. The Continuing Quality Improvement (CQI) process is designed to enable services to detect barriers, then devise and implement changes, resulting in service improvements.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of literature reporting on strategies to improve implementation of screening and interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care (MEDLINE EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Australian Indigenous Health InfoNet). Additional inclusion criteria were: (1) pragmatic setting; (2) reporting original data; (3) quantitative outcomes related to provision of service or change in practice. We investigate the extent to which the three essential elements of CQI are being used (data-guided activities, considering local conditions; iterative development). We compare characteristics of programs that include these three elements with those that do not. We describe the types, organizational levels (e.g. health service, practice, clinician), duration of strategies, and their outcomes.ResultsFifty-six papers representing 45 projects were included. Of these, 24 papers were randomized controlled trials, 12 controlled studies and 20 before/after and other designs. Most reported on strategies for improving implementation of screening and brief intervention. Only six addressed relapse prevention pharmacotherapies. Only five reported on patient outcomes and none showed significant improvement. The three essential CQI elements were clearly identifiable in 12 reports. More studies with three essential CQI elements had implementation and follow-up durations above the median; utilised multifaceted designs; targeted both practice and health system levels; improved screening and brief intervention than studies without the CQI elements.ConclusionUtilizing CQI methods in implementation research would appear to be well-suited to drive improvements in service delivery for unhealthy alcohol use. However, the body of literature describing such studies is still small. More well-designed research, including hybrid studies of both implementation and patient outcomes, will be needed to draw clearer conclusions on the optimal approach for implementing screening and treatment for unhealthy alcohol use. (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42018110475).

Online interventions for problem gamblers with and without co-occurring unhealthy alcohol use: Randomized controlled trial

Background and aimsProblem gambling and unhealthy alcohol use often co-occur. The current trial sought to establish whether adding a brief online intervention for unhealthy alcohol use to an online problem gambling intervention would lead to improvements in gambling and drinking among those with both of these concerns. MethodsParticipants were recruited from across Canada using an advertisement targeting those concerned about their gambling who were interested in online help. No mention of unhealthy alcohol use was made in the advertisement. Participants meeting criteria for problem gambling were randomized to either receive just an online intervention for gambling (G-only) or to receive an online gambling intervention plus a brief personalized feedback intervention for unhealthy alcohol use (G + A). Participants were followed up at 3 and 6 months. ResultsA total of 282 participants were recruited for the trial. Follow-up rates were good (80% and 84% at 3 and 6 months). There were significant reductions in gambling (p < .001) across time but no significant differences (p > .05) between those who received either the G-only or G + A interventions. Further, for those with unhealthy alcohol use (41% of the sample), there were no significant reductions in alcohol consumption (p > .05) across time or differences between condition. Discussion and conclusionThe addition of a brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use to an online intervention for gambling did not appear to improve either gambling or drinking outcomes among people concerned about their gambling. Further research is merited to examine whether a combined intervention (with gambling and drinking components integrated) might result in improved outcomes and whether such an intervention might benefit the subgroup of participants who would specifically seek help for both gambling and alcohol concerns.Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.govNCT03323606; Registration date: October 24, 2017.

Smartphone application for unhealthy alcohol use: Pilot randomized controlled trial in the general population

BackgroundThere is limited evidence of the efficacy of smartphone applications to reduce unhealthy alcohol use. We tested the efficacy of providing access to a smartphone-based brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. MethodsWe conducted a two parallel-group randomized controlled trial with follow-up at 6 months, among 977 individuals with an Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test ≥8 and drinking 15 or more drinks/week. Participants were randomized to receive (or not) access to a smartphone application consisting of personalized feedback, risk assessment and self-monitoring. The primary outcome was the mean number of drinks/week. An intention to treat analysis (ITT) and a per protocol analysis (PP) were conducted. ResultsMean age of participants was 34.2(9.8), 46% were female. The baseline mean number of drinks per week was 28.9(16.7). Results differed by type of analysis: ITT: all 977 participants were included in the analysis. Follow-up rate was 70.7% (n = 691). There was no significant intervention effect: the Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) (95%CI) for number of drinks per week was 0.93(0.84; 1.03). PP: 702 participants were included in the analysis. Follow-up rate was 78.1% (n = 548). There was a significant intervention effect: the IRR for number of drinks per week was 0.88(0.78; 0.99). ConclusionsProviding access to a smartphone-based brief intervention had no impact on drinking at 6 months and does not appear to be an effective intervention in reducing drinking. Those who downloaded the app appear to benefit from it, nevertheless downloads were limited and further development of similar apps should focus on increasing use.

Assessing Brief Intervention for Unhealthy Alcohol Use: A Comparison of Electronic Health Record Documentation and Patient Self-Report

Alcohol screening and brief intervention (BI) are recommended preventive health practices. Veterans Health Administration (VA) uses a performance measure to incentivize BI delivery. Concerns have been raised about the validity of the BI performance measure, which relies on electronic health record (EHR) documentation. Our objective was to assess concordance between EHR-based documentation and patient-reported receipt of BI, and to examine correlates of concordance. Patients with a documented positive screen for unhealthy alcohol use at VA Greater Los Angeles primary care clinics were surveyed (within 15 days on average) in 2013-2014. Documented BI was indicated by an EHR note that the patient was advised to drink within recommended limits or reduce or abstain from drinking. Patient-reported receipt of BI corresponded to an affirmative response to questions on whether a VA provider advised the patient to drink less or abstain. Patient report and documentation were assessed over the same period. Documented and patient-reported receipt of BI had low concordance. Almost all patients who reported receiving BI had documentation of BI (93%; 95% CI [90%, 95%]), but only 63% [59%, 67%] of patients with documented BI reported receiving it. BI concordance was associated with more severe unhealthy alcohol use and drinking-related consequences, mental health comorbidity, and greater readiness-to-change alcohol use. Discrepancies between EHR documentation and patient-reported BI raise concerns about performance measure validity. Patient-reported receipt of BI could be an alternative or complementary measure of BI.

Four-year follow-up of an internet-based brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in young men.

To estimate the long-term efficacy of an internet-based brief intervention (IBI) in decreasing alcohol use among men on (1) number of drinks/week and (2) monthly or more binge drinking prevalence. In addition, overall changes in alcohol use were assessed. Participants in a cohort study were recruited in a two parallel-group randomized controlled trial of an IBI versus no-intervention control condition, showing a positive intervention effect at 6months. As part of the regular cohort assessments, participants were re-assessed 47months after the initial trial, offering an opportunity to determine long-term efficacy. Young Swiss men from the general population. Of 737 randomized trial participants with unhealthy alcohol use (>14 drinks/week or ≥6 drinks/occasion at least monthly, or Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)≥8), 626 completed a cohort assessment at mean±standard deviation (SD)=47.4±2.6) months after their randomized trial baseline assessment. IBI included normative and personalized feedback on alcohol use, risk indicators, information about alcohol and health and recommendations; controls: assessment only. Self-reported number of drinks/week and monthly or more binge drinking prevalence. Comparisons at follow-up were adjusted for baseline drinking. Missing values were replaced with the last observation carried forward. There was no evidence of differences between the IBI and control group on either the number of drinks/week [IBI: 10.8 (14.2); control: 10.7 (14.1), P=0.8] or monthly or more binge drinking prevalence (IBI: 65.1%; control: 63.5%, P=0.5). Although there was no evidence of overall change from baseline in number of drinks/week [9.8 (7.9) at baseline, 10.8 (14.1) at 47months, P=0.051], there was evidence that monthly or more binge drinking prevalence had decreased during the follow-up time (84.9% at baseline, 64.3% at 47months, P<0.001). An internet-based brief intervention directed at unhealthy alcohol use among young men does not appear to reduce drinking over the long-term.

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

BackgroundWhile the number of older adults who engage in unhealthy drinking is increasing, few studies have examined the role of online alcohol screening and intervention tools for this population. The objective of this study was to describe characteristics of drinking behaviors among older adults who visited an alcohol screening and intervention website, and compare them to younger adults. MethodsWe analyzed the responses of visitors to Alcoholscreening.org in 2013 (n=94,221). The prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use, behavioral change characteristics, and barriers to changing drinking were reported by age group (ages 21–49, 50–65, 66–80). Logistic regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with receiving a plan to either help cut back or quit drinking. ResultsOf the entire study sample, 83% of respondents reported unhealthy drinking (exceeding daily or weekly recommended limits) with 84% among 21–49year olds, 79% among 50–65year olds, and 85% among adults over 65. Older adults reported fewer negative aspects of drinking, lower importance to change, highest confidence and fewer barriers to change, compared to younger adults. In the adjusted model, females (AOR=1.45, p<0.001) and older adults (AOR=1.55, p<0.002) were more likely to receive a plan to change drinking behaviors. DiscussionAn online screening and intervention tool identified many older adults with unhealthy alcohol use behaviors and most were receptive to change. Web-based screening and interventions for alcohol use have the potential to be widely used among older adults.

Delivery of screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in an urban academic Federally Qualified Health Center

BackgroundScreening and brief intervention (SBI) for unhealthy drinking has not been widely implemented in primary care partly due to reliance on physicians to perform it.MethodsWe implemented a model of nursing staff-delivered SBI for unhealthy drinking for adult patients receiving primary care at an academically-affiliated Federally Qualified Health Center in the Bronx, NY. Our model consisted of nursing staff screening all patients with the alcohol use disorders identification test consumption questions (AUDIT-C) and, if screening positive, providing BI or referral to specialty services. We developed a clinical decision support tool integrated into the electronic health record to guide nursing staff and record SBI provision. To evaluate this model, we determined overall SBI delivery to patients and factors associated with receiving SBI.ResultsBetween October 2013 and September 2014, 9119 unique adult patients made 24,285 visits. Patients were majority women (67.5%) and Hispanic/Latino (54.5%). Overall, 46.2% were screened, with 19.0–35.8% of eligible patients screened in each month. Increasing age (OR: 0.82 [95% CI 0.80–0.85] for a 10-year increase), female sex (OR: 0.83 [95% CI 0.77–0.91]), and chronic conditions like hypertension (OR: 0.62 [95% CI 0.56–0.70]) and diabetes (OR: 0.66 [95% CI 0.58–0.75]), among others, were associated with a lower odds of being screened. Of all patients screened, 225 (5.3%) screened positive and of those patients, 122 (54.2%) received a BI. Patients with higher AUDIT-C scores were more likely to receive a BI (OR: 1.24 [95% CI 1.04–1.47] for a 1-point increase) and non-English speaking patients were less likely to receive a BI than those who spoke English (OR: 0.42 [95% CI 0.18–0.97]).ConclusionsOur model of SBI resulted in screening of nearly half of all eligible patients and BI provision to over half of those screening positive. Future efforts to improve SBI delivery should focus on groups such as older adults, women, and those with chronic medical conditions.

Alcohol-related and mental health care for patients with unhealthy alcohol use and posttraumatic stress disorder in a National Veterans Affairs cohort

ObjectiveUnhealthy alcohol use and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) frequently co-occur. Patients with both conditions have poorer functioning and worse treatment adherence compared to those with either condition alone. Therefore, it is possible that PTSD, when co-occurring with unhealthy alcohol use, may influence receipt of evidence-based alcohol-related care and mental health care. We evaluated receipt of interventions for unhealthy alcohol use and receipt of mental health follow-up care among patients screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use with and without PTSD in a national sample from the Veterans Health Administration (VA). MethodsNational clinical and administrative data from VA's electronic medical record were used to identify all patients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C score≥5) between 10/1/09–5/30/13. Unadjusted and adjusted Poisson regression models were fit to estimate the relative rate and prevalence of receipt of: brief interventions (advice to reduce or abstain from drinking≤14days after positive screening), specialty addictions treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD; documented visit≤365days after positive screening), pharmacotherapy for AUD (filled prescription≤365days after positive screening), and mental health care ≤14days after positive screening for patients with and without PTSD (documented with ICD-9 CM codes). In secondary analyses, we tested effect modification by both severity of unhealthy alcohol use and age. ResultsAmong 830,825 patients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use, 140,388 (16.9%) had documented PTSD. Of the full sample, 71.6% received brief interventions, 10.3% received specialty AUD treatment, 3.1% received pharmacotherapy for AUD, and 24.0% received mental health care. PTSD was associated with increased likelihood of receiving all types of care. Adjusted relative rates were 1.04 (95% CI 1.03–1.05) for brief interventions, 1.06 (1.05–1.08) for specialty AUD treatment, 1.35 (1.31–1.39) for AUD pharmacotherapy, and 1.82 (1.80–1.84) for mental health care. Alcohol use severity modified effects of PTSD for specialty AUD treatment, AUD pharmacotherapy, and mental health care such that effects were maintained at lower severity but attenuated among patients with severe unhealthy alcohol use. Age modified all effects with the strength of the association between PTSD and care outcomes being strongest for younger (18–29years) and older veterans (65+ years) and weaker or non-significant for middle-aged veterans (30–44 and 45–64years). ConclusionsIn this large national sample of patients with unhealthy alcohol use, PTSD was associated with increased likelihood of receiving alcohol-related and mental health care. PTSD does not appear to be a barrier to care among VA patients with unhealthy alcohol use.

Alcohol brief intervention in primary care: Blood pressure outcomes in hypertensive patients

BackgroundIn clinical trials alcohol brief intervention (BI) in adult primary care has been efficacious in reducing alcohol consumption, but we know little about its impact on health outcomes. Hypertension is a prevalent and costly chronic condition in the U.S. and worldwide, and alcohol use is a modifiable hypertension risk factor. ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of receiving BI for unhealthy drinking on blood pressure (BP) control among adult hypertensive patients by analyzing secondary data from a clustered, randomized controlled trial on alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) implementation by primary care physicians (PCP intervention arm) and non-physician providers and medical assistants (NPP&MA intervention arm) in a large, integrated health care delivery system. DesignObservational, prospective cohort study. Subjects3811 adult hypertensive primary care patients screening positive for past-year heavy drinking at baseline, of which 1422 (37%) had an electronic health record BP measure at baseline and 18-month follow-up. Main outcome measuresChange in BP and controlled BP (systolic/diastolic BP <140/90mmHg). ResultsOverall no significant associations were found between alcohol BI and BP change at 18-month follow-up when analyzing the combined sample of subjects in both intervention arms. However, moderation analyses found that receiving BI for positive past-year unhealthy drinking was positively associated with better BP control at 18months in the PCP intervention arm, and for those with lower heavy drinking frequency and poor BP control at the index screening. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that hypertensive patients may benefit from receiving physician brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care. Findings also highlight potential population-level benefits of alcohol BI if widely applied, suggesting a need for the development of innovative strategies to facilitate SBIRT delivery in primary care settings.