The effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care settings: a systematic review.

Issues. Numerous studies have reported that brief interventions delivered in primary care are effective in reducing excessive drinking. However, much of this work has been criticised for being clinically unrepresentative. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care and determine if outcomes differ between efficacy and effectiveness trials. Approach. A pre-specified search strategy was used to search all relevant electronic databases up to 2006. We also hand-searched the reference lists of key articles and reviews. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) involving patients in primary care who were not seeking alcohol treatment and who received brief intervention. Two authors independently abstracted data and assessed trial quality. Random effects meta-analyses, subgroup and sensitivity analyses and meta-regression were conducted. Key Findings. The primary meta-analysis included 22 RCT and evaluated outcomes in over 5800 patients. At 1 year follow up, patients receiving brief intervention had a significant reduction in alcohol consumption compared with controls [mean difference: -38 g week(-1), 95%CI (confidence interval): -54 to -23], although there was substantial heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 57%). Subgroup analysis confirmed the benefit of brief intervention in men but not in women. Extended intervention was associated with a non-significantly increased reduction in alcohol consumption compared with brief intervention. There was no significant difference in effect sizes for efficacy and effectiveness trials. Conclusions. Brief interventions can reduce alcohol consumption in men, with benefit at a year after intervention, but they are unproven in women for whom there is insufficient research data. Longer counselling has little additional effect over brief intervention. The lack of differences in outcomes between efficacy and effectiveness trials suggests that the current literature is relevant to routine primary care.

Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations.

Excessive drinking contributes significantly to social problems, physical and psychological illness, injury and death. Hidden effects include increased levels of violence, accidents and suicide. Most alcohol-related harm is caused by excessive drinkers whose consumption exceeds recommended drinking levels, not the drinkers with severe alcohol dependency problems. One way to reduce consumption levels in a community may be to provide a brief intervention in primary care over one to four sessions. This is provided by healthcare workers such as general physicians, nurses or psychologists. In general practice, patients are routinely asked about alcohol consumption during registration, general health checks and as part of health screening (using a questionnaire). They tend not to be seeking help for alcohol problems when presenting. The intervention they are offered includes feedback on alcohol use and harms, identification of high risk situations for drinking and coping strategies, increased motivation and the development of a personal plan to reduce drinking. It takes place within the time-frame of a standard consultation, 5 to 15 minutes for a general physician, longer for a nurse.A total of 29 controlled trials from various countries were identified, in general practice (24 trials) or an emergency setting (five trials). Participants drank an average of 306 grams of alcohol (over 30 standard drinks) per week on entry to the trial. Over 7000 participants with a mean age of 43 years were randomised to receive a brief intervention or a control intervention, including assessment only. After one year or more, people who received the brief intervention drank less alcohol than people in the control group (average difference 38 grams/week, range 23 to 54 grams). For men (some 70% of participants), the benefit of brief intervention was a difference of 57 grams/week, range 25 to 89 grams (six trials). The benefit was not clear for women. The benefits of brief intervention were similar in the normal clinical setting and in research settings with greater resources. Longer counselling had little additional benefit.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

The effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care settings: A systematic review

Numerous studies have reported that brief interventions delivered in primary care are effective in reducing excessive drinking. However, much of this work has been criticised for being clinically unrepresentative. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care and determine if outcomes differ between efficacy and effectiveness trials. Approach. A pre-specified search strategy was used to search all relevant electronic databases up to 2006. The authors also hand-searched the reference lists of key articles and reviews. They included randomised controlled trials (RCT) involving patients in primary care who were not seeking alcohol treatment and who received brief intervention. Two authors independently abstracted data and assessed trial quality. Random effects meta-analyses, subgroup and sensitivity analyses and meta-regression were conducted.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

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.

Reduction of alcohol consumption by brief alcohol intervention in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Numerous trials of the efficacy of brief alcohol intervention have been conducted in various settings among individuals with a wide range of alcohol disorders. Nevertheless, the efficacy of the intervention is likely to be influenced by the context. We evaluated the evidence of efficacy of brief alcohol interventions aimed at reducing long-term alcohol use and related harm in individuals attending primary care facilities but not seeking help for alcohol-related problems. METHODS: We selected randomized trials reporting at least 1 outcome related to alcohol consumption conducted in outpatients who were actively attending primary care centers or seeing providers. Data sources were the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, ETOH database, and bibliographies of retrieved references and previous reviews. Study selection and data abstraction were performed independently and in duplicate. We assessed the validity of the studies and performed a meta-analysis of studies reporting alcohol consumption at 6 or 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: We examined 19 trials that included 5639 individuals. Seventeen trials reported a measure of alcohol consumption, of which 8 reported a significant effect of intervention. The adjusted intention-to-treat analysis showed a mean pooled difference of -38 g of ethanol (approximately 4 drinks) per week (95% confidence interval, -51 to -24 g/wk) in favor of the brief alcohol intervention group. Evidence of other outcome measures was inconclusive. CONCLUSION: Focusing on patients in primary care, our systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that brief alcohol intervention is effective in reducing alcohol consumption at 6 and 12 months.

Identifying the gap between need and intervention for alcohol use disorders in Europe.

AIMS: A literature review of existing research on the prevalence of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and availability of alcohol interventions in Europe was conducted. The review also explored what is known about the gap between need and provision of alcohol interventions in Europe. METHODS: The review search strategy included: (i) descriptive studies of alcohol intervention systems in Europe; (ii) studies of alcohol service provision in Europe; and (iii) studies of prevalence of AUD and alcohol needs assessment in Europe. RESULTS: Europe has a relatively high level of alcohol consumption and the resulting disabilities are the highest in the world. Most research on implementation of alcohol interventions in Europe has been restricted to screening and brief interventions. Alcohol needs assessment methodology has been developed but has not been applied in comparative studies across countries in Europe. CONCLUSIONS: This review points to key gaps in knowledge related to alcohol interventions in Europe. There is a lack of comparative data on variations in alcohol treatment systems across European countries and there is also a lack of comparative data on the prevalence of alcohol use disorders across European countries and the relative gap between need and access to treatment. The forthcoming Alcohol Measures for Public Health Research Alliance (AMPHORA) research project work package on 'Early identification and treatment' aims to address these gaps.

Brief alcohol intervention as pragmatic intervention: Who is voluntarily taking an offered intervention?

Brief alcohol interventions (BAI) have shown the potential to decrease problematic alcohol use among adolescents and young adults. Most of the BAI studies have been efficacy trials designed to achieve high internal validity but have raised questions regarding the feasibility of large-scale implementation. Providing interventions for those voluntarily wanting them might offer an alternative, and studies using this design would be more similar to effectiveness studies. The present research compares randomly selected 20-year-old men who took part in a scientific trial (efficacy) with those who voluntarily sought an intervention (effectiveness). Sampling took place during army recruitment procedures that are mandatory for all males in Switzerland. At-risk drinking (20+ drinks per week, or more than one risky drinking occasion of 6+ drinks per month) was determined a posteriori; there was no screening. There were a higher percentage of at-risk drinkers in the volunteer arm at baseline, but at-risk drinkers did not differ from those in the trial arm on any of the assessed alcohol measures. This suggests that offering BAI on a large-scale, voluntary basis may reach at-risk drinkers as effectively as do more scientifically oriented trials, without needing to adhere to screening and stringent research procedures. Nevertheless, BAI was more effective for at-risk drinkers who were invited for trial participation versus those who volunteered. This could be due to behavior that is already consolidated and is difficult to change. Lacking further modifications, real-world implementations of BAI for young men may be less effective than randomized controlled trials designed to test the efficacy of BAI.

The consumption of alcohol by Australian adolescents: A comparison of revenue and expenditure

Aims: To estimate (i) Australian government taxation revenue collected from the consumption of alcohol by adolescents and (ii) the amount spent by the government on interventions aimed at educating adolescents about the potential dangers of alcohol use. Design: Secondary data analysis. Setting: Australia. Findings: Australian adolescents (aged between 12 and 17 years, inclusive) spent approximately $217 million on alcoholic beverages in 2002, netting the Australian government approximately $112 million in tax revenue. This resulted in an average of $195 earned in tax per adolescent drinker. It is estimated that the Government spent approximately $17 million on adolescent drinking interventions in 2002, equating to an expenditure of about $10.51 per adolescent on the delivery of alcohol interventions. For every dollar spent on alcohol interventions aimed at adolescents, it is estimated that the government receives around $7 in alcohol tax revenue. Conclusions: A substantial disparity exists between the amount of tax revenue received by the Australian Government from adolescent drinkers and the overall amount spent in attempting to prevent and relieve some of the problems associated with adolescent problem drinking. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Do brief alcohol motivational interventions work like we think they do?

BACKGROUND: Questions remain about how brief motivational interventions (BMIs) for unhealthy alcohol use work, and addressing these questions may be important for improving their efficacy. Therefore, we assessed the effects of various characteristics of BMIs on drinking outcomes across 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: Audio recordings of 314 BMIs were coded. We used the global rating scales of the Motivational Interviewing Skills Code (MISC) 2.1: counselor's acceptance, empathy, and motivational interviewing (MI) spirit, and patient's self-exploration were rated. MI proficiency was defined as counselor's rating scale scores ≥5. We also used the structure, confrontation, and advice subscale scores of the Therapy Process Rating Scale and the Working Alliance Inventory. We examined these process characteristics in interventions across 1 U.S. RCT of middle-aged medical inpatients with unhealthy alcohol use (n = 124) and 2 Swiss RCTs of young men with binge drinking in a nonclinical setting: Swiss-one (n = 62) and Swiss-two (n = 128). We assessed the associations between these characteristics and drinks/d reported by participants 3 to 6 months after study entry. RESULTS: In all 3 RCTs, mean MISC counselor's rating scales scores were consistent with MI proficiency. In overdispersed Poisson regression models, most BMI characteristics were not significantly associated with drinks/d in follow-up. In the U.S. RCT, confrontation and self-exploration were associated with more drinking. Giving advice was significantly associated with less drinking in the Swiss-one RCT. Contrary to expectations, MI spirit was not consistently associated with drinking across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Across different populations and settings, intervention characteristics viewed as central to efficacious BMIs were neither robust nor consistent predictors of drinking outcome. Although there may be alternative reasons why the level of MI processes was not predictive of outcomes in these studies (limited variability in scores), efforts to understand what makes BMIs efficacious may require attention to factors beyond intervention process characteristics typically examined.

Do brief alcohol motivational interventions work like we think they do?

BACKGROUND: Questions remain about how brief motivational interventions (BMIs) for unhealthy alcohol use work, and addressing these questions may be important for improving their efficacy. Therefore, we assessed the effects of various characteristics of BMIs on drinking outcomes across 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: Audio recordings of 314 BMIs were coded. We used the global rating scales of the Motivational Interviewing Skills Code (MISC) 2.1: counselor's acceptance, empathy, and motivational interviewing (MI) spirit, and patient's self-exploration were rated. MI proficiency was defined as counselor's rating scale scores ≥5. We also used the structure, confrontation, and advice subscale scores of the Therapy Process Rating Scale and the Working Alliance Inventory. We examined these process characteristics in interventions across 1 U.S. RCT of middle-aged medical inpatients with unhealthy alcohol use (n = 124) and 2 Swiss RCTs of young men with binge drinking in a nonclinical setting: Swiss-one (n = 62) and Swiss-two (n = 128). We assessed the associations between these characteristics and drinks/d reported by participants 3 to 6 months after study entry. RESULTS: In all 3 RCTs, mean MISC counselor's rating scales scores were consistent with MI proficiency. In overdispersed Poisson regression models, most BMI characteristics were not significantly associated with drinks/d in follow-up. In the U.S. RCT, confrontation and self-exploration were associated with more drinking. Giving advice was significantly associated with less drinking in the Swiss-one RCT. Contrary to expectations, MI spirit was not consistently associated with drinking across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Across different populations and settings, intervention characteristics viewed as central to efficacious BMIs were neither robust nor consistent predictors of drinking outcome. Although there may be alternative reasons why the level of MI processes was not predictive of outcomes in these studies (limited variability in scores), efforts to understand what makes BMIs efficacious may require attention to factors beyond intervention process characteristics typically examined.

Does change talk during brief motivational interventions with young men predict change in alcohol use?

Client change talk (CT) during motivational interviewing and brief motivational interventions (BMIs) have been described as predictors of behavior change, but these links have not been clearly evaluated in research on young people. Within 127 BMIs with 20-year-old men with at-risk alcohol consumption, each CT utterance was categorized and given a strength rating using the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code 2.1. Several ways of categorizing and measuring CT were tested using stepwise regression procedures. Overall CT measures were not significantly related to changes in drinking at 6-month follow-up. Regarding CT sub-dimensions, the frequency of ability/desire/need to change and of ability/desire/need not to change, as well as the average strength of ability/desire/need, predicted significant change in the expected direction. CT length was not significantly linked to outcome. The frequency and strength with which some CT sub-dimensions are expressed during BMI seemed to be important predictors of change in drinking among young men and might thus be especially important for clinicians to notice.