Effects of two types of brief intervention and readiness to change on alcohol use in hazardous drinkers. Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner intervention in patients with excessive alcohol consumption. Screening and referral for brief intervention of alcohol-misusing patients in an emergency department: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. A randomized study of secondary prevention of early stage problem drinkers in primary health care. [Multicenter study on the efficacy of advice for the prevention of alcoholism in primary health care]. Brief intervention in a primary care setting for hazardous drinkers. Brief physician advice for alcohol problems in older adults: a randomized community-based trial. Brief physician advice for problem alcohol drinkers. A randomized controlled trial in community-based primary care practices. Brief intervention in alcohol-positive traffic casualties: is it worth the effort? Evaluation of a controlled drinking minimal intervention for problem drinkers in general practice (the DRAMS scheme). Effectiveness of brief intervention on non-dependent alcohol drinkers (EBIAL): a Spanish multi-centre study. Intervention in alcohol abuse among macrocytic patients in general practice. Reducing alcohol consumption. Comparing three brief methods in family practice. Effectiveness of nurse-led brief alcohol intervention: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Women and alcohol abuse in primary care. Identification and intervention. [Effectiveness of brief medical counseling to reduce drinkers' alcohol consumption]. Evaluating the effects of a brief motivational intervention for injured drinkers in the emergency department. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a brief intervention delivered to problem drinkers presenting at an inner-city hospital emergency department. The efficacy of a brief alcohol intervention combined with %CDT feedback in patients being treated for type 2 diabetes and/or hypertension. Controlled evaluation of a general practice-based brief intervention for excessive drinking. Brief intervention for female heavy drinkers in routine general practice: a 3-year randomized, controlled study. Excessive drinking--brief intervention by a primary health care nurse. A randomized controlled trial. Randomized controlled trial of general practitioner intervention in women with excessive alcohol consumption. Screening for problem drinking and counseling by the primary care physician-nurse team. Brief physician- and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinkers: does it work? Alcohol interventions in a trauma center as a means of reducing the risk of injury recurrence. A randomized trial of a brief primary-care-based intervention for reducing at-risk drinking practices.
Brief interventions for hazardous and low-dependent drinkers in the primary care setting have considerable empirical support. The purpose of this study was to (1) evaluate the effects of brief advice (BA) and motivational enhancement (ME) interventions on alcohol consumption. In addition, a hindsight matching design was used to (2) study the moderator effects of patient readiness to change (alcohol use) on alcohol consumption.
                The subjects (N = 301, 70% men) were patients 21 years of age or older who presented for treatment at one of 12 primary care clinics. After screening for eligibility and providing consent to participate in the study, the patients completed a baseline assessment and were randomly assigned to the BA, ME or standard care (SC) interventions condition. Follow-up assessments were completed at 1-, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-months postbaseline assessment.
                Evaluation of the first hypothesis (n = 232 for these analyses) showed that all participants tended to reduce their alcohol use considerably between the baseline and 12-month assessments. In addition, evaluation of the second hypothesis showed a moderator effect of readiness to change in predicting the number of drinks at 12 months, such that the BA intervention seemed more effective for patients relatively low in readiness to change compared to those higher in readiness. Readiness to change did not seem to be related to changes in drinking of participants in the SC or ME conditions.
                The results confirm that, among primary care patients, substantial changes in alcohol consumption are possible. They further suggest that matching studies of patient readiness to change their alcohol use, as well as other variables, are warranted. To determine effectiveness of advice from general practitioners to heavy drinkers to reduce their excessive alcohol consumption (35 U or more a week for men, 21 U or more for women).
                Randomised, controlled double blind trial over 12 months with interim assessment at six months.
                Group practices (n = 47; list size averaging 10,000) recruited from Medical Research Council's general practice research framework, mostly in rural or small urban settings.
                Patients recruited after questionnaire survey. Of total of 2571 (61.2%) of 4203 patients invited for interview who attended, 909 (35.4%) stated that in past seven days they had drunk above the limits set for study and had not received advice; they were randomised to control and treatment groups.
                Patients in treatment group were interviewed by general practitioner (who had had a training session) and received advice and information about how to reduce consumption and also given a drinking diary.
                Study aimed at detecting a reduction in proportion of men with excessive alcohol consumption of 30% in treatment group and 20% in control group (for women 40% and 20%, respectively) with a power of 90% at 5% level of significance. In addition, corroborative measures such as estimation of gamma-glutamyltransferase activity were included.
                At one year a mean reduction in consumption of alcohol of 18.2 (SE 1.5) U/week had occurred in treated men compared with a reduction of 8.1 (1.6) U/week in controls (p less than 0.001). The proportion of men with excessive consumption at interview had dropped by 43.7% in the treatment group compared with 25.5% in controls (p less than 0.001). A mean reduction in weekly consumption of 11.5 (1.6) U occurred in treated women compared with 6.3 (2.0) U in controls (p less than 0.05), with proportionate reductions of excessive drinkers in treatment and control groups of 47.7% and 29.2% respectively. Reduction in consumption increased significantly with number of general practitioner interventions. At one year the mean value for gamma-glutamyltransferase activity had dropped significantly more in treated men (-2.4 (0.9)IU/l) than in controls (+1.1(1.0)IU/l; t = 2.7, p less than 0.01). Reduction in gamma-glutamyltransferase activity tended to increase with number of intervention sessions in men. Changes in gamma-glutamyltransferase activity in women and changes in other indicators in both sexes did not differ significantly between treatment and control groups.
                If the results of this study were applied to the United Kingdom intervention by general practitioners could each year reduce to moderate levels the alcohol consumption of some 250000 men and 67500 women who currently drink to excess. General practitioners and other members of the primary health care team should therefore be encouraged to include counselling about alcohol consumption in their preventive activities. Alcohol misuse is highly prevalent among people attending emergency departments, but the effect of intervention by staff working in these departments is unclear. We investigated the effect of screening and referral of patients found to be misusing alcohol while attending an emergency department.
                We undertook a single-blind pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Patients received either an information leaflet or an information leaflet plus an appointment with an alcohol health worker. Outcome data were collected by patient interview and examination of hospital records at 6 and 12 months.
                599 patients were randomised over a 12-month period. At 6 months, those referred to an alcohol health worker were consuming a mean of 59.7 units of alcohol per week compared with 83.1 units in the control group (t -2.4, p=0.02). At 12 months those referred were drinking 57.2 units per week compared with 70.8 in controls (t -1.7, p=0.09). Those referred to the alcohol health worker had a mean of 0.5 fewer visits to the emergency department over the following 12 months (1.2 compared with 1.7, t -2.0, p=0.046). Differences in quality of life were not found.
                Opportunistic identification and referral for alcohol misuse in an emergency department is feasible, associated with lower levels of alcohol consumption over the following 6 months, and reduces reattendance at the department. Short-term reductions in alcohol consumption associated with referral for brief intervention for alcohol misuse benefit patients and reduce demand for accident and emergency department services. The subjects were recruited from participants in a health examination of random samples of the adult population in Stockholm county. Those aged 18-64 years who admitted a high alcohol consumption (greater than 40 g 100% ethanol/day) among men and greater than 30 g among women) or had an elevated value of serum-gammaglutamyltransferase (GGT) (cut-off point 1.0 microkatal/l for men and 0.6 microkatal/l for women) or had certain other indications of a high alcohol consumption were included. More severe cases, and those with an elevated GGT due to reasons other than alcohol, were excluded. The remaining subjects, 70 men and 13 women, were allocated at random to either an intervention or a comparison group. An elevated GGT was the main inclusion criteria. The subjects in the comparison group were advised by the general practitioner to cut their alcohol consumption, while those in the intervention group made further visits to their general practitioner, who gave general support and used an elevated GGT as an indication of the recent level of alcohol consumption at consecutive visits. There were three visits on average, so we are comparing a group receiving advice with a group receiving further minimal intervention. At the one-year follow-up there were greater, however not significant, reduction in GGT-level, in self-reported alcohol consumption and in a 'problem index' in the minimal intervention group than in the comparison group. The aim of this study was to analyse and to verify the efficacy of systematic advice for alcoholism prevention, assessing the reduction of the number in risk drinkers.
                A multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial was designed, to perform in general practitioner setting, on a sample of risk drinkers (alcohol intake > 280 g weekly, without dependence) sent by random in intervention group (systematic brief advice with support material and a five visit program during a year) and control group (once brief advice and a control in 1 year). The procedure to incorporate in both groups included physical exam, a blood test and the MALT questionnaire. A descriptive and analytic study on included variables was realised, assessing the percentage of drinkers who reduced alcohol intake below risk limit at the end of a year follow up, as well as the reduction intake in each group.
                Of the 139 included males, 75 were in the intervention group and 64 in the control group. The percentage of patients not excluded by MALT > 10, and/or liver disease, that finished the 1 year follow up, was 46%, being the sample average age of 43 +/- 11.8. Patients included in both groups were initially comparable. At the end of a year follow up there were statistically significant differences in: percentage of risk drinkers who decreased alcohol intake below 280 g weekly (82% intervention group; 47% control group); percentage of reduction in GPT, GGT, triglycerides, systolic blood pressure and the MALT questionnaire.
                The efficacy of isolated advice of general practitioner was proved to achieve the alcohol intake reduction below the risk limit accepted in male risk drinkers without alcohol dependence. The systematic follow up during a year significantly improves the results achieved with the isolated advice. The study was designed to test a brief intervention for reducing alcohol consumption among moderate to heavy (hazardous) drinkers in a busy HMO primary care setting.
                In a randomized controlled trial, hazardous drinkers (n = 516) were identified by the AUDIT screening questionnaire. Intervention included brief clinician advice (30 seconds), a 15-minute motivational session by counselors, and printed materials.
                At six-month follow-up, intervention subjects reported fewer total standard drinks in the past three months (176 versus 216, P = .04, one-tailed) and fewer drinking days per week (2.8 versus 3.3, P = .02) than controls, but similar drinks per drinking day (3.3 versus 3.5; P = .13). At 12 months, intervention subjects again reported fewer drinking days per week (2.7 versus 3.1; P = .04) than controls, but similar numbers of standard drinks (157 versus 179; P = .13) and drinks per drinking day (3.6 versus 3.3; P = .20). Intervention subjects were somewhat more likely than controls to report drinking within daily recommended limits (< or = 3 for men, < or = 2 for women) at both six months (79% versus 71%; P = .06) and 12 months (80% versus 73%; P = .07), but did not differ significantly from controls on other drinking outcomes (percent abstinent, frequency of drinking > or = 6 drinks per drinking occasion, estimated peak blood alcohol concentration), or use of medical care in the year following intervention.
                A one-time, brief motivational intervention using minimal clinician time supplemented by trained counselors resulted in a modest reduction in frequency of alcohol consumption in a busy primary care population. Future research should focus on strengthening and maintaining intervention effects. Alcohol use in older adults is common. It is associated with depression, hypertension, diabetes, drug interactions, accidents, and increased rates of emergency department visits and hospitalizations.
                A controlled clinical trial (Project GOAL--Guiding Older Adult Lifestyles) tested the efficacy of brief physician advice in reducing the alcohol use and use of health care services of older adult problem drinkers. Twenty-four community-based primary care practices in Wisconsin (43 family physicians and internists) participated in the trial. Of the 6073 patients screened, 105 men and 53 women met inclusion criteria and were randomized into a control group (n = 71) or an intervention group (n = 87). Intervention group patients received two 10- to 15-minute physician-delivered counseling sessions that included advice, education, and contracting using a scripted workbook. A total of 146 patients (92.4%) participated in the 12-month follow-up procedure.
                No significant differences were found between the control and intervention groups at baseline in alcohol use, age, socioeconomic status, depression, onset of alcohol use, smoking status, activity level, or use of mood-altering drugs. The older adults who received the physician intervention demonstrated a significant reduction in 7-day alcohol use, episodes of binge drinking, and frequency of excessive drinking (P <.005) compared with the control group at 3, 6, and 12 months after the intervention. There was a 34% reduction in 7-day alcohol use, 74% reduction in mean number of binge-drinking episodes, and 62% reduction in the percentage of older adults drinking more than 21 drinks per week in the intervention group compared with the control group. There were no significant changes in health status. Patterns of health care utilization were not extensively analyzed because of the small number of events.
                This study provides the first direct evidence that brief physician advice can decrease alcohol use by older adults in community-based primary care practices. Project TrEAT (Trial for Early Alcohol Treatment) was designed to test the efficacy of brief physician advice in reducing alcohol use and health care utilization in problem drinkers.
                Randomized controlled clinical trial with 12-month follow-up.
                A total of 17 community-based primary care practices (64 physicians) located in 10 Wisconsin counties.
                Of the 17695 patients screened for problem drinking, 482 men and 292 women met inclusion criteria and were randomized into a control (n=382) or an experimental (n=392) group. A total of 723 subjects (93%) participated in the 12-month follow-up procedures.
                The intervention consisted of two 10- to 15-minute counseling visits delivered by physicians using a scripted workbook that included advice, education, and contracting information.
                Alcohol use measures, emergency department visits, and hospital days.
                There were no significant differences between groups at baseline on alcohol use, age, socioeconomic status, smoking status, rates of depression or anxiety, frequency of conduct disorders, lifetime drug use, or health care utilization. At the time of the 12-month follow-up, there were significant reductions in 7-day alcohol use (mean number of drinks in previous 7 days decreased from 19.1 at baseline to 11.5 at 12 months for the experimental group vs 18.9 at baseline to 15.5 at 12 months for controls; t=4.33; P<.001), episodes of binge drinking (mean number of binge drinking episodes during previous 30 days decreased from 5.7 at baseline to 3.1 at 12 months for the experimental group vs 5.3 at baseline to 4.2 at 12 months for controls; t=2.81; P<.001), and frequency of excessive drinking (percentage drinking excessively in previous 7 days decreased from 47.5% at baseline to 17.8% at 12 months for the experimental group vs 48.1% at baseline to 32.5% at 12 months for controls; t=4.53; P<.001). The chi2 test of independence revealed a significant relationship between group status and length of hospitalization over the study period for men (P<.01).
                This study provides the first direct evidence that physician intervention with problem drinkers decreases alcohol use and health resource utilization in the US health care system. This study aimed at testing the effectiveness of a brief motivational intervention (BI) compared with a minimal intervention (MI) for reducing alcohol consumption in adult, alcohol-positive traffic casualties.
                Patients were recruited at the emergency room of a trauma hospital and screened for alcohol by a qualitative saliva test (positive from a blood alcohol concentration of 0.02 g/l). Positive patients (13.3%) who accepted entering the study were randomly allocated into BI and MI. Baseline assessment was the same for all patients. Blind telephone follow-ups were performed at months 3, 6, and 12, and results were analysed by protocol and by intention-to-treat analysis.
                After 1 year of follow-up, 67% of the patients had reduced their consumption, the percentage of heavy drinkers had dropped by 47%, and 62% of baseline AUDIT-C positive patients (hazardous drinkers) had become negative. Binge drinking dropped significantly (P < 0.05). Results at month 12 were in line with the previous ones.
                The effectiveness of BI compared with MI has not been verified, but a significant reduction in consumption has been observed in the whole sample, without significant differences by type of intervention. The persistence and dimension of changes suggest a real effect of both interventions, although the lack of a pure control group does not allow definitive conclusions. Traffic casualties are in a teachable moments to benefit from easy and cheap interventions. Sixteen general practitioners participated in a controlled trial of the Scottish Health Education Group's DRAMS (drinking reasonably and moderately with self-control) scheme. The scheme was evaluated by randomly assigning 104 heavy or problem drinkers to three groups - a group participating in the DRAMS scheme (n = 34), a group given simple advice only (n = 32) and a non-intervention control group (n = 38). Six month follow-up information was obtained for 91 subjects (87.5% of initial sample). There were no significant differences between the groups in reduction in alcohol consumption, but patients in the DRAMS group showed a significantly greater reduction in a logarithmic measure of serum gamma-glutamyl-transpeptidase than patients in the group receiving advice only. Only 14 patients in the DRAMS group completed the full DRAMS procedure. For the sample as a whole, there was a significant reduction in alcohol consumption, a significant improvement on a measure of physical health and well-being, and significant reductions in the logarithmic measure of serum gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase and in mean corpuscular volume. The implications of these findings for future research into controlled drinking minimal interventions in general practice are discussed. The project was designed to compare the effectiveness of brief intervention (BI) versus simple advice (SA) in the secondary prevention of hazardous alcohol consumption.
                A randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up was conducted. A total of 74 community-based primary care practices (328 physicians) located in 13 Spanish autonomous regions were recruited initially. Out of 546 men screened, only 229 were randomized into BI (n = 104) and SA (n = 125); 44.6% of practices finalized the study. The interventions on the BI group consisted of a 15-minute counselling visit carried out by physicians which included: (i) alcohol quantification, (ii) information on safe limits, (iii) advice, (iv) drinking limits agreement, (v) self-informative booklet with drinking diary record and (vi) unscheduled reinforcement visits. The SA group spent 5 minutes which included (i), (ii) and (iii).
                There were no significant differences between both groups at baseline on alcohol use, age, socioeconomic status and CAGE score. After the 12-month follow-up there was a significant decrease in frequency of excessive drinkers (67% of BI group reached targeted consumption, versus 44% of SA; P < 0.001) as well as weekly alcohol intake reduction (BI reached 52 versus 32% in SA; P < 0.001). A trend to improve outcome with the number of reinforcement visits was found with BI. The only predictor of success was the initial alcohol consumption level.
                Brief intervention is more effective than simple advice to reduce alcohol intake on adult men who attend primary care services in Spain. The study examined the effectiveness of routine intervention in alcohol abuse by a general practitioner, with help of a laboratory test. Patients diagnosed as abusers because of high erythrocyte mean cell volume value (MCV) and having no other cause for it were randomly allocated to two groups: 1) an intervention group, comprising 92 patients (69 men and 23 women), who were invited for follow-up at three-monthly intervals for a year; 2) a control (mini-intervention) group, 86 patients (71 men and 15 women), who were followed-up only after 12 months. Follow-up attendance was poor, particularly in the intervention group. In general, MCV-values were unchanged in the groups at the end of the study, though there was a clear trend for the female controls to have lower values (101.9 fl at the start, 98.5 fl at the end, p = 0.06). Altogether 11% (4/38) of the women and 7% (10/140) of the men had clearly reduced their alcohol consumption after one year, and this was also seen in their MCV-values. Mini-intervention, especially in women with an abnormal laboratory value, seems to be, with the help of MCV, at least as effective a way of counselling nonalcoholic abusers as a more systematic intervention. To compare the effects of three brief methods of reducing alcohol consumption among family practice patients.
                Patients randomly assigned to one of three interventions were assessed initially and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up appointments.
                Family practice clinic composed of 12 primary care physicians seeing approximately 6000 adults monthly in a small urban community, population 40,000.
                Through a screening questionnaire, 134 men and 131 women were identified as hazardous drinkers (five or more drinks at least once monthly) during an 11-month screening of 1420 patients. Of 265 patients approached, 180 agreed to participate and 159 (83 men and 76 women) actually participated in the study.
                Three interventions were studied: brief physician advice (5 minutes), two 30-minute sessions with a physician using cognitive behavioural strategies or two 30-minute sessions with a nurse practitioner using identical strategies.
                Quantity and frequency (QF) of drinking were used to assess reduction in hazardous drinking and problems related to drinking over 12 months of follow up.
                No statistical difference between groups was found. The QF of monthly drinking was reduced overall by 66% (among men) and 74% (among women) for those reporting at least one hazardous drinking day weekly at assessment (N = 96). Men reported drinking significantly more than women.
                These results indicated that offering brief, specific advice can motivate patients to reduce their alcohol intake. There was no difference in effect between brief advice from their own physician or brief intervention by a physician or a nurse. This paper reports an evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of nurse-led screening and brief intervention in reducing excessive alcohol consumption among patients in primary health care.
                Excessive alcohol consumption is a major source of social, economic and health problems. However, such consumption is responsive to brief alcohol intervention. To date, brief intervention research in primary health care has focused on general practitioner-led interventions, and there is only circumstantial evidence of effectiveness in nurse-led interventions. However, nurses are increasingly taking a lead in health promotion work in primary care.
                A pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial was carried out between August 2000 and June 2003 to evaluate the effects of a brief intervention compared with standard advice (control condition). A total of 40 general practice clusters (intervention = 21 and control = 19) recruited 127 patients (intervention = 67 and control = 60) to the trial. Excessive consumption was identified opportunistically via the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. After baseline assessment, patients received either a 5-10 minutes brief intervention using the 'Drink-Less' protocol or standard advice (control condition). Follow-up occurred at 6 and 12 months postintervention.
                Analysis of variance weighted for cluster size revealed no statistically significant differences between intervention and control patients at follow up. A majority of patients in both conditions reduced their alcohol consumption between assessment and subsequent measurement. Economic analysis suggested that the brief intervention led to no statistically significant changes in subsequent health service resource use relative to standard treatment.
                The brief intervention evaluated in this trial had no effect over standard advice delivered by nurses in primary health care. However, there was a reduction in excessive drinking across both arms of the trial over time. Due to nurse drop-out, this trial was significantly underpowered. Future research should explore barriers to nurses' involvement in research trials, particularly with an alcohol focus. A larger trial is required to evaluate the effectiveness of nurse-led screening and brief alcohol intervention in primary care. Female problem drinkers are less likely than men to be identified in the primary care setting. The authors studied 24 adult women attending a general, internal medicine clinic to assess the efficiency of self-reports of alcohol consumption when compared with physician identification and other measures and the impact of a brief intervention on alcohol consumption. Despite the high rate of lifetime (79%) and current (67%) alcohol diagnoses, no patient was in alcohol treatment. Physician identification of alcohol problems was least sensitive but most specific, when compared with other measures. Brief intervention, as offered in this study, did not appear to modify alcohol consumption. To evaluate the effectiveness of medical counselling in reducing alcohol consumption in male heavy drinkers.
                A controlled, randomised, simple-blind intervention study.
                Four Primary Care teams in Area 10, Madrid.
                152 men who attended for on-demand treatment from the four teams and whose alcohol consumption was over 21 International Units (IU) a week.
                Brief medical counselling backed up by didactic material. Two questionnaires on alcohol consumption in IU, consumption habits and problems related to alcohol were administered, separated by an interval of between 6 and 18 months. Non-parametric tests for paired samples (McNemar) were applied.
                60% answered the second questionnaire. Neither sociodemographic nor health habit differences were found between those who responded and those who did not, except for social class. There were no appreciable differences between the intervention and control groups. The percentage of drinkers above 35 IU decreased significantly in the intervention group.
                The intervention was clearly effective in reducing the percentage of drinkers whose weekly consumption was over 35 IU. The study aim was to test whether a brief motivational intervention, with or without a booster session, would improve drinking-related outcomes more than standard Emergency Department (ED) treatment.
                The study population consisted of 539 (78% male) injured patients treated in the ED and discharged to the community following their treatment. Injured patients met inclusion criteria if they were assessed as hazardous or harmful drinkers by scoring eight or more on the AUDIT and/or having alcohol in their system at the time of their injury or ED visit. Patients were randomly assigned to either standard care (SC), brief intervention (BI) or brief intervention plus a booster session (BIB). At 1-year follow-up, 447 patients (83% of the sample) were re-interviewed to measure alcohol-related negative consequences, injuries and drinking.
                Patients receiving BIB, but not B1 patients, reduced alcohol-related negative consequences and alcohol-related injuries more than did those in the SC group. All three groups reduced their days of heavy drinking. Patients with histories of hazardous drinking responded to BIB, whether or not they had consumed alcohol prior to their injury.
                Together, these results indicate that the effects of a booster session that is added to a brief intervention in the ED can be helpful to injured patients with a history of hazardous or harmful drinking, irrespective of whether they have consumed alcohol prior to their injury. Alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) has gained widespread acceptance as an effective method for reducing problem drinking in at-risk populations. This study examines the cost and cost-effectiveness of an SBI pilot program delivered in an inner-city hospital emergency department (ED) to a traditionally underserved population.
                A total of 1,036 subjects were screened for problem drinking during their visit to an ED. Eligible participants (N = 294) were randomly assigned to either a brief intervention group or a control group. As the result of attrition, a final sample of 194 (90 brief intervention; 104 control) participants remained at follow-up. The intervention consisted of a brief counseling session and a health information packet. The control group received only the packet. Intervention cost data were collected and analyzed using the Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program. Selected outcomes at the 3-month follow-up included the raw Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score, average weekly number of drinks and engaging in heavy drinking in the past month (>6 drinks on one occasion for men, >4 for women). Outcome differences between the intervention and control groups were estimated with both bivariate and multivariate techniques.
                The average economic cost of the brief intervention was dollars 632 per subject, of which screening (dollars 497) was the largest component. In all cases, intervention subjects had better 3-month outcomes than control subjects, but the differences were not always statistically significant. Cost-effectiveness ratios were relatively small for all three outcomes, suggesting this type of intervention has the potential to be cost-effective under full implementation.
                The preliminary results demonstrate the potential advantage of further research in this area with larger samples and a longer follow-up period. Alcohol biomarkers are being developed to improve a physician's ability to identify and intervene with patients with chronic medical problems adversely affected by heavy alcohol use. This article reports the findings of a brief intervention trial which included feedback to patients of their carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) test results.
                A pilot study was conducted to test the efficacy of brief clinician advice to reduce alcohol use and improve health status in a sample of 151 patients being treated for Type 2 diabetes and hypertension. The intervention included informing patients of their CDT levels. The patients were randomized to a usual care or brief intervention group.
                There were no significant differences at baseline between the two groups in alcohol use, CDT levels, addiction rates, age, gender, socioeconomic status or health status measures. Following brief intervention, significant differences were observed in the intervention group in alcohol use and CDT: The proportion of heavy drinkers at the 12-month follow-up compared with baseline decreased from 35.8% to 24.7% in the intervention group, with no change in the control group (p < .044). CDT levels decreased as well from 2.79% to 2.41% (16% change) in the control group and 3.05% to 2.35% (28% change) in the intervention group, with significantly more intervention-group patients reducing their CDT level by at least 25% (p < .006).
                The study provides new information suggesting brief intervention, combined with feedback on CDT levels, can reduce alcohol use and %CDT in a sample of primary care patients being treated for Type 2 diabetes and hypertension. In a controlled evaluation of general practitioner (GP)-based brief intervention, 378 excessive drinkers identified opportunistically by screening in 40 group practices in metropolitan Sydney were assigned to groups receiving: (i) a five-session intervention by the GP (the Alcoholscreen Program); (ii) a single session of 5 minutes' advice by the GP plus a self-help manual (minimal intervention); (iii) an alcohol-related assessment but no intervention; (iv) neither intervention nor assessment. Among all patients allocated to receive it, the Alcoholscreen Program did not result in a significantly greater reduction in consumption at follow-up than control conditions but patients offered Alcoholscreen reported a significantly greater reduction in alcohol-related problems in the period to 6 months follow-up. A greater proportion of patients who returned for the second Alcoholscreen visit were drinking below recommended levels at follow-up than in the remainder of the sample. There was no evidence that minimal intervention or alcohol-related assessment were effective in reducing alcohol consumption or problems. Implications for further research into GP-based brief interventions are discussed. Today, heavy drinking is a common health hazard among women. The evidence in favor of providing some kind of brief intervention to reduce drinking is quite convincing. However, we do not know if intervention works in a natural environment of routine health care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of long-lasting, brief alcohol intervention counseling for women in a routine general practice setting.
                In five primary care outpatient clinics in a Finnish town, 118 female early-phase heavy drinkers who consulted their general practitioners for various reasons were given brief alcohol intervention counseling. Intervention groups A (n = 40) and B (n = 38) were offered seven and three brief intervention sessions, respectively, over a 3-yr period. The control group C (n = 40) was advised to reduce drinking at baseline. Main outcome measures were self-reported weekly alcohol consumption, carbohydrate-deficient transferrin, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and gamma-glutamyltransferase.
                Depending on the outcome measure and the study group, clinically meaningful reduction of drinking was found in 27% to 75% of the heavy drinkers. Within all the groups, MCV significantly decreased. However, there were no statistically significant differences between study groups A, B, and C in the mean changes between the beginning and endpoint in the main outcome measures.
                The present study indicated that minimal advice, as offered to group C, was associated with reduced drinking as much as the brief intervention, as offered to groups A and B, given over a 3-yr period. Furthermore, in the routine setting of the general practice office, the effectiveness of the brief intervention may not be as good as in special research conditions. The factors possibly reducing the effectiveness in a routine setting are unknown. Thus, different methods of implementing brief intervention need to be evaluated to find better ways to support general practice personnel in their efforts to help heavy-drinking female patients to reduce their drinking. To evaluate the effect of a nurse-conducted intervention on excessive drinkers.
                Randomized, controlled trial.
                Vårby Health Centre, Stockholm.
                The intervention group visited a nurse three times during a 12-month period. The controls met once with a general practitioner (GP).
                Patients were recruited at a health screening on the basis of a raised gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT). Of 2338 subjects, aged 25-54 years, 222 had a screening GGT of > or = 0.9 mukat/l. 100 were randomized to the treatment and 122 to the control group.
                GGT, self-reported alcohol consumption (g/week), sickness allowance and use of health care.
                After 2 years a reduction of GGT from 1.52 to 1.21 mukat/l (p = 0.02) had occurred in the treatment group. The controls increased their mean level of GGT from 1.75 to 2.16 mukat/l. Mean weekly alcohol consumption in the intervention group was reduced from 337 to 228 g/week (p = 0.02). The controls did not quantify their alcohol consumption initially, but reported a reduced weekly consumption at follow-up.
                The intervention had an impact on GGT and self-reported consumption. The controls also reported decreased consumption possibly because their appointment with the GP functioned as a very brief intervention. Seventy two women drinking 21 units (210g) or more of alcohol per week were recruited from an opportunistic screening programme in eight English general practices. The women were randomized into control and treatment groups. Women in the treatment group received ten minutes advice from their general practitioner to reduce alcohol consumption. At one year follow-up, when analyzed by intention to treat, women in the treatment group had reduced their alcohol consumption from an average of 35-24 units per week. Similar reductions were found in the control group (from 37-27 units per week). The lack of evidence for a treatment effect may be explained by contamination of the control group by informal interventions. Present methods to screen for alcohol abuse are generally obtrusive and result in referral to services that deal mainly with alcoholics. These factors deter physicians from identifying alcohol abuse patients at an early stage. In the present study, 81% of all primary care physicians of a single city evaluated (i) the efficiency and the acceptability of a nonobtrusive screening method for the identification of problem drinkers and (ii) the effectiveness of brief cognitive behavioral counseling given by a nurse in a lifestyle context. Patients (n = 15,686) attending the private practices of 42 primary-care physicians were asked four alcohol-neutral trauma questions in the reception area. Physicians asked about alcohol use and alcohol-related problems only to patients with previous trauma. Problem drinkers by defined criteria were offered an appointment with a nurse who, by random assignment, gave either 3-hr of cognitive behavioral counseling over 1 year or simply advised patients to reduce their alcohol intake. The screening method identified 62-85% of expected number of problem drinkers in this population. Following the application of exclusion criteria, 105 problem drinkers were entered in the intervention part of the study. After 1 year, patients who received counseling showed significant reductions in reported alcohol consumption (-70%; p < 0.001), psychosocial problems (-85%; p < 0.001) and serum gamma glutamyl transferase (-32% to -58%; p < 0.02). Physician visits were reduced (-34%; p < 0.02) following counseling. Patients receiving only advice showed neither reductions in psychosocial problems nor in serum gamma glutamyl transferase or physician visits, but reported a 46% reduction (p < 0.01) in alcohol consumption. Data indicate that asking patients about recent trauma is efficient and is well accepted as the first screening instrument in the identification of the problem drinker. Cost of screening per patient is under one dollar. Counseling of 3 hr given by a nurse is markedly superior (p < 0.05) to simple advice in reducing alcohol consumption, objective indicators of alcohol-related morbidity, and the frequency of physician visits. There is a need for primary care providers to have brief effective methods to intervene with high-risk drinkers during a regular outpatient visit.
                To determine whether brief physician- and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling intervention is efficacious as part of routine primary care in reducing alcohol consumption by high-risk drinkers.
                Academic medical center-affiliated primary care practice sites were randomized to special intervention or to usual care. From a screened population of 9772 patients seeking routine medical care with their primary care providers, 530 high-risk drinkers were entered into the study. Special intervention included training providers in a brief (5- to 10-minute) patient-centered counseling intervention, and an office support system that screened patients, cued providers to intervene, and made patient education materials available. The primary outcome measures were change in alcohol use from baseline to 6 months as measured by weekly alcohol consumption and frequency of binge drinking episodes.
                Participants in the special intervention and usual care groups were similar on important background variables and potential confounders except that special intervention participants had significantly higher baseline levels of alcohol usage (P = .01). At 6-month follow-up, in the 91% of the cohort who provided follow-up information, alcohol consumption was significantly reduced when adjusted for age, sex, and baseline alcohol usage (special intervention, -5.8 drinks per week; usual care, -3.4 drinks per week; P = .001).
                This study provides evidence that screening and very brief (5- to 10-minute) advice and counseling delivered by a physician or nurse practitioner as part of routine primary care significantly reduces alcohol consumption by high-risk drinkers. Alcoholism is the leading risk factor for injury. The authors hypothesized that providing brief alcohol interventions as a routine component of trauma care would significantly reduce alcohol consumption and would decrease the rate of trauma recidivism.
                This study was a randomized, prospective controlled trial in a level 1 trauma center. Patients were screened using a blood alcohol concentration, gamma glutamyl transpeptidase level, and short Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (SMAST). Those with positive results were randomized to a brief intervention or control group. Reinjury was detected by a computerized search of emergency department and statewide hospital discharge records, and 6- and 12-month interviews were conducted to assess alcohol use.
                A total of 2524 patients were screened; 1153 screened positive (46%). Three hundred sixty-six were randomized to the intervention group, and 396 to controls. At 12 months, the intervention group decreased alcohol consumption by 21.8+/-3.7 drinks per week; in the control group, the decrease was 6.7+/-5.8 (p = 0.03). The reduction was most apparent in patients with mild to moderate alcohol problems (SMAST score 3 to 8); they had 21.6+/-4.2 fewer drinks per week, compared to an increase of 2.3+/-8.3 drinks per week in controls (p < 0.01). There was a 47% reduction in injuries requiring either emergency department or trauma center admission (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 1.07, p = 0.07) and a 48% reduction in injuries requiring hospital admission (3 years follow-up).
                Alcohol interventions are associated with a reduction in alcohol intake and a reduced risk of trauma recidivism. Given the prevalence of alcohol problems in trauma centers, screening, intervention, and counseling for alcohol problems should be routine. This randomized trial evaluated an intervention for reducing at-risk drinking practices in a sample of 307 patients. Eligible drinking patterns included chronic drinking (> or = 2 drinks per day in the past month), binge drinking (> or = 5 drinks per occasion at least twice in the past month), and drinking and driving (driving after > 2 drinks in the past month). Members of the intervention group received a message from their physician during their regularly scheduled visit, a self-help manual, written personalized feedback, and up to 3 telephone counseling calls. Dropout was significantly higher in the intervention than control group.
Overall, brief interventions lowered alcohol consumption. When data were available by gender, the effect was clear in men at one year of follow up, but not in women. Longer duration of counselling probably has little additional effect. The lack of evidence of any difference in outcomes between efficacy and effectiveness trials suggests that the current literature is relevant to routine primary care. Future trials should focus on women and on delineating the most effective components of interventions.