Reliability and validity of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) imbedded within a general health risk screening questionnaire: results of a survey in 332 primary care patients.

BACKGROUND: Self-administered, general health risk screening questionnaires that are administered while patients wait in the doctor's office may be a reasonable and timesaving approach to address the requirements of preventive medicine in a typical 10-min medical visit. The psychometric characteristics of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) incorporated within a health questionnaire (H-AUDIT) have not been examined. METHODS: The reliability and validity of the self-administered AUDIT were compared between the H-AUDIT and the AUDIT used as a single scale (S-AUDIT) in 332 primary care patients. RESULTS: No major demographic or alcohol use characteristics were found between the 166 subjects who completed the H-AUDIT and the 166 individuals who completed the S-AUDIT. The test-retest reliability of the 166 subjects who completed the H-AUDIT [estimated by Spearman correlation coefficient at a 6-week interval (0.88), internal consistency (total correlation coefficients for all items ranged from 0.38 to 0.69; Cronbach alpha index 0.85), and the sensitivity and specificity of the H-AUDIT were used to identify at-risk drinkers' areas under receiver operating characteristic (0.77) and alcohol-dependent subjects' areas under receiver operating characteristic (0.89)] was similar to the same measurements obtained with the 166 individuals who completed the S-AUDIT. CONCLUSIONS: The AUDIT incorporated in a health risk screening questionnaire is a reliable and valid self-administered instrument to identify at-risk drinkers and alcohol-dependent individuals in primary care settings.

Laparoscope use and surgical site infections in digestive surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical site infection (SSI) rates in open or laparoscopic appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and colon surgery. To investigate the effect of laparoscopy on SSI in these interventions. BACKGROUND: Lower rates of SSI have been reported among various advantages associated with laparoscopy when compared with open surgery, particularly in cholecystectomy. However, biases such as the lack of postdischarge follow-up and confounding factors might have contributed to the observed differences between the 2 techniques. METHODS: This observational study was based on prospectively collected data from an SSI surveillance program in 8 Swiss hospitals between March 1998 and December 2004, including a standardized postdischarge follow-up. SSI rates were compared between laparoscopic and open interventions. Factors associated with SSI were identified by using logistic regression models to adjust for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: SSI rates in laparoscopic and open interventions were respectively 59/1051 (5.6%) versus 117/1417 (8.3%) in appendectomy (P = 0.01), 46/2606 (1.7%) versus 35/444 (7.9%) in cholecystectomy (P < 0.0001), and 35/311 (11.3%) versus 400/1781 (22.5%) in colon surgery (P < 0.0001). After adjustment, laparoscopic interventions were associated with a decreased risk for SSI: OR = 0.61 (95% CI 0.43-0.87) in appendectomy, 0.27 (0.16-0.43) in cholecystectomy, and 0.43 (0.29-0.63) in colon surgery. The observed effect of laparoscopic techniques was due to a reduction in the rates of incisional infections, rather than in those of organ/space infections. CONCLUSION: When feasible, a laparoscopic approach should be preferred over open surgery to lower the risks of SSI.