IPH response to the DSD consultation on regulations to prohibit or restrict irresponsible promotions of alcohol in Northern Ireland

IPH responded to the Department for Social Development consultation on the banning of certain promotions that may encourage irresponsible and excessive drinking. The consultation relates to regulations Article 57A(2)(d) of the 1996 Licensing Order “involving the supply of unlimited amounts of intoxicating liquor for a fixed charge (including any charge for entry to the premises)” and Article 31A(2)(d) of the Registration of Clubs Order “restricting the price at which the holder of a licence or the licence holder’s servant or agent may sell on licensed premises a package containing two or more intoxicating liquor products”. IPH welcomes this consultation and supports the Department’s proposals to restrict promotions that involve the supply of unlimited amounts of intoxicating liquor for a fixed charge. IPH welcomes this tangible action linked to the renewed commitment to tackling alcohol-related harms on the island of Ireland set out in the Steering Group Report on a National Substance Strategy (Dept of Health, 2012) and in the New Strategic Direction on Alcohol and Drugs (DHSSPS, 2011). IPH considers that irresponsible alcohol promotions can contribute to this burden of physical and mental ill-health, accidental and non-accidental injury and other harms associated with excessive alcohol consumption in Northern Ireland. As previously stated in the IPH submissions on the introduction of powers to prohibit or restrict irresponsible alcohol promotions (Dec, 2010), IPH considers that the issues of promotion and price are inter-related. The effectiveness of the proposed restrictions could be reinforced by the expeditious introduction of minimum unit pricing of alcohol on an all-island basis.

Model-based appraisal of minimum unit pricing for alcohol in Northern Ireland

In 2009, the Sheffield Alcohol Research Group (SARG) at Sheffield University developed the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model version 2.0 (SAPM) to appraise the potential impact of alcohol policies, including different levels of MUP, for the population of England. In 2013, SARG were commissioned by the DHSSPS and the Department for Social Development to adapt the Sheffield Model to NI in order to appraise the potential impact of a range of alcohol pricing policies. The present report represents the results of this work. Estimates from the Northern Ireland (NI) adaptation of the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model - version 3 - (SAPM3) suggest: 1. Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) policies would be effective in reducing alcohol consumption, alcohol related harms (including alcohol-related deaths, hospitalisations, crimes and workplace absences) and the costs associated with those harms. 2. A ban on below-cost selling (implemented as a ban on selling alcohol for below the cost of duty plus the VAT payable on that duty) would have a negligible impact on alcohol consumption or related harms. 3. A ban on price-based promotions in the off-trade, either alone or in tandem with an MUP policy would be effective in reducing alcohol consumption, related harms and associated costs. 4. MUP and promotion ban policies would only have a small impact on moderate drinkers at all levels of income. Somewhat larger impacts would be experienced by increasing risk drinkers, with the most substantial effects being experienced by high risk drinkers. 5. MUP and promotion ban policies would have larger impacts on those in poverty, particularly high risk drinkers, than those not in poverty. However, those in poverty also experience larger relative gains in health and are estimated to marginally reduce their spending due to their reduced drinking under the majority of policies åÊ

The functional outcome and recovery of patients admitted to an intensive care unit following drug overdose: a follow-up study.

Patients who have overdosed on drugs commonly present to emergency departments, with only the most severe cases requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Such patients typically survive hospitalisation. We studied their longer term functional outcomes and recovery patterns which have not been well described. All patients admitted to the 18-bed ICU of a university-affiliated teaching hospital following drug overdoses between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2006 were identified. With ethical approval, we evaluated the functional outcome and recovery patterns of the surviving patients 31 months after presentation, by telephone or personal interview. These were recorded as Glasgow outcome score, Karnofsky performance index and present work status. During the three years studied, 43 patients were identified as being admitted to our ICU because of an overdose. The average age was 34 years, 72% were male and the mean APACHE II score was 16.7. Of these, 32 were discharged from hospital alive. Follow-up data was attained on all of them. At a median of 31 months follow-up, a further eight had died. Of the 24 surviving there were 13 unemployed, seven employed and four in custody. The median Glasgow outcome score of survivors was 4.5, their Karnofsky score 80. Admission to ICU for treatment of overdose is associated with a very high risk of death in both the short- and long-term. While excellent functional recovery is achievable, 16% of survivors were held in custody and 54% unemployed.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.