Search

Background The primary goals in conducting clinical trials of treatments for alcohol use disorders ( AUDs) are to identify efficacious treatments and determine which treatments are most efficacious for which patients. Accurate reporting of study design features and results is imperative to enable readers of research reports to evaluate to what extent a study has achieved these goals. Guidance on quality of clinical trial reporting has evolved substantially over the past 2 decades, primarily through the publication and widespread adoption of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. However, there is room to improve the adoption of those standards in reporting the design and findings of treatment trials for AUD. Methods This paper provides a narrative review of guidance on reporting quality in AUD treatment trials. Results Despite improvements in the reporting of results of treatment trials for AUD over the past 2 decades, many published reports provide insufficient information on design or methods. Conclusions The reporting of alcohol treatment trial design, analysis, and results requires improvement in 4 primary areas: (i) trial registration, (ii) procedures for recruitment and retention, (iii) procedures for randomization and intervention design considerations, and (iv) statistical methods used to assess treatment efficacy. Improvements in these areas and the adoption of reporting standards by authors, reviewers, and editors are critical to an accurate assessment of the reliability and validity of treatment effects. Continued developments in this area are needed to move AUD treatment research forward via systematic reviews and meta-analyses that maximize the utility of completed studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Over the past 60 years, the view that 'alcoholism' is a disease for which the only acceptable goal of treatment is abstinence has given way to the recognition that alcohol use disorders ( AUDs) occur on a continuum of severity, for which a variety of treatment options are appropriate. However, because the available treatments for AUDs are not effective for everyone, more research is needed to develop novel and more efficacious treatments to address the range of AUD severity in diverse populations. Here we offer recommendations for the design and analysis of alcohol treatment trials, with a specific focus on the careful conduct of randomized clinical trials of medications and nonpharmacological interventions for AUDs. Methods This paper provides a narrative review of the quality of published clinical trials and recommendations for the optimal design and analysis of treatment trials for AUDs. Results Despite considerable improvements in the design of alcohol clinical trials over the past 2 decades, many studies of AUD treatments have used faulty design features and statistical methods that are known to produce biased estimates of treatment efficacy. Conclusions The published statistical and methodological literatures provide clear guidance on methods to improve clinical trial design and analysis. Consistent use of state-of-the-art design features and analytic approaches will enhance the internal and external validity of treatment trials for AUDs across the spectrum of severity. The ultimate result of this attention to methodological rigor is that better treatment options will be identified for patients with an AUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Despite harmful drinking causing a significant burden on global health, there is a large treatment gap, especially in low- and middle-income countries. A major barrier to care is the lack of adequately skilled human resources to deliver contextually appropriate treatments. This paper describes the systematic process used to develop Counselling for Alcohol Problems ( CAP), a brief psychological treatment (PT) for delivery by lay counselors in routine primary care settings to men with harmful drinking in India. Methods CAP was developed using a methodology involving 3 sequential steps: (i) identifying potential treatment strategies; (ii) developing a theoretical framework for the treatment; and (iii) evaluating the acceptability and feasibility of the treatment. Results CAP is a 3-phase treatment delivered over 1 to 4 sessions based on a motivational interviewing ( MI) stance and involves the following strategies: assessment and personalized feedback, family engagement, drink refusal skills, skills to address drinking urges, problem-solving skills and handling difficult emotions, and relapse prevention and management. Data from a case series were used to inform several adaptations to enhance the acceptability of CAP to the recipients and feasibility of delivery by lay counselors of the treatment, for example expansion of the target group to include alcohol-dependent patients and the extension of the delivery settings to include home-based delivery. There was preliminary evidence of the effectiveness of CAP. Conclusions CAP is an acceptable brief PT for harmful drinking delivered by lay counselors in primary care whose effectiveness is currently being tested in a randomized controlled trial based in primary care in Goa, India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several clinical trials have evaluated naltrexone as a treatment for alcohol use disorders (AUDs), but few have focused on women. The aim of this review was to systematically review and summarize the evidence regarding the impact of naltrexone compared to placebo for attenuating alcohol consumption in women with an AUD. A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Alcohol Studies Database to identify relevant peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials ( RCTs) published between January 1990 and August 2016. Seven published trials have evaluated the impact of naltrexone on drinking outcomes in women distinct from men; 903 alcohol-dependent or heavy drinking women were randomized to receive once daily oral or depot (injectable) naltrexone or placebo with/without behavioral intervention. Two studies examining the quantity of drinks per day observed trends toward reduction in drinking quantity among women who received naltrexone versus placebo. The 4 studies examining the frequency of drinking had mixed results, with 1 study showing a trend that favored naltrexone, 2 showing a trend that favored placebo, and 1 that showed no difference. Two of the 3 studies examining time to relapse observed trends that tended to favor naltrexone for time to any drinking and time to heavy drinking among women who received naltrexone versus placebo. While the growing body of evidence suggests a variety of approaches to treat AUD, the impact of naltrexone to combat AUD in women is understudied. Taken together, the results suggest that naltrexone may lead to modest reductions in quantity of drinking and time to relapse, but not on the frequency of drinking in women. Future research should incorporate sophisticated study designs that examine gender differences and treatment effectiveness among those diagnosed with an AUD and present data separately for men and women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The construct of relapse is used widely in clinical research and practice of alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment. The purpose of this study was to test the predictive validity of commonly appearing definitions of AUD relapse in the empirical literature. Methods Secondary analyses of data from Project MATCH and COMBINE were conducted using 7 definitions of 'relapse' based on drinking quantity within a single drinking episode: any drinking; at least 4/5 drinks for women/men; at least 4.3/7.1 drinks for women/men; at least 6/7 drinks for women/men; at least 6 drinks; at least 7/9 drinks for women/men; and at least 8/10 drinks for women/men. Relapse was used to predict alcohol consumption, related consequences, and nonconsumption outcomes (quality of life, psychosocial functioning) at the end of treatment and up to 1 year posttreatment. Results Regression analyses indicated within-treatment relapse definitions significantly predicted end-of-treatment alcohol consumption and alcohol-related consequences. Heavy drinking definitions were generally more predictive than the any drinking definition, but no single heavy drinking definition was consistently a better predictor of outcomes. Relapse definitions were less predictive of longer-term alcohol-related outcomes and both shorter- and longer-term nonconsumption outcomes, including health and psychosocial functioning. Conclusions One particular definition of relapse did not consistently stand out as the best predictor. Advances in AUD research may require reconceptualization of relapse as a multifaceted dynamic process and may consider a wider range of relevant behaviors (e.g., health and psychosocial functioning) when examining the change process in individuals with AUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Relapse is common in alcohol-dependent individuals and can be triggered by alcohol-related cues in the environment. It has been suggested that these individuals develop cognitive biases, in which cues automatically capture attention and elicit an approach action tendency that promotes alcohol seeking. The study aim was to examine whether cognitive bias modification ( CBM) training targeting approach bias could be delivered during residential alcohol detoxification and improve treatment outcomes. Methods Using a 2-group parallel-block (ratio 1:1) randomized controlled trial with allocation concealed to the outcome assessor, 83 alcohol-dependent inpatients received either 4 sessions of CBM training where participants were implicitly trained to make avoidance movements in response to pictures of alcoholic beverages and approach movements in response to pictures of nonalcoholic beverages, or 4 sessions of sham training (controls) delivered over 4 consecutive days during the 7-day detoxification program. The primary outcome measure was continuous abstinence at 2 weeks postdischarge. Secondary outcomes included time to relapse, frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption, and craving. Outcomes were assessed in a telephonic follow-up interview. Results Seventy-one (85%) participants were successfully followed up, of whom 61 completed all 4 training sessions. With an intention-to-treat approach, there was a trend for higher abstinence rates in the CBM group relative to controls (69 vs. 47%, p = 0.07); however, a per-protocol analysis revealed significantly higher abstinence rates among participants completing 4 sessions of CBM relative to controls (75 vs. 45%, p = 0.02). Craving score, time to relapse, mean drinking days, and mean standard drinks per drinking day did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusions This is the first trial demonstrating the feasibility of CBM delivered during alcohol detoxification and supports earlier research suggesting it may be a useful, low-cost adjunctive treatment to improve treatment outcomes for alcohol-dependent patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule- IV ( AUDADIS- IV) and AUDADIS-5 are diagnostic interviews used in major epidemiological and other studies of alcohol use disorder ( AUD). Much of what we know regarding the prevalence of AUD in the United States is based upon this interview. However, past research and meta-analytic evidence suggest that differential operationalization of the AUD criteria across instruments can lead to differential endorsement of symptoms and resulting AUD diagnosis rates. In particular, studies employing the AUDADIS are observed to have markedly higher endorsement rates of withdrawal than other large epidemiological studies. One explanation for this is that when assessing withdrawal, the AUDADIS combines effects from the morning after drinking with those from the days following, thereby conflating hangover and withdrawal. Methods This study addresses whether this operationalization confounds rates of endorsement when compared to simpler, less ambiguous hangover or withdrawal stems. To this aim, 497 college student drinkers were randomized into 1 of 3 stem conditions: (i) hangover ( n = 164), (ii) withdrawal ( n = 167), or (iii) combined AUDADIS- IV ( n = 166). Results Across conditions, participants were more likely to report the occurrence of each withdrawal symptom in the combined stem condition than in the explicit withdrawal stem condition, but not in the explicit hangover stem condition. Within the combined stem condition, probed symptoms were more likely to be reported as a result of a hangover. Conclusions The AUDADIS potentially results in false positives for withdrawal, arguably a pathognomonic symptom of alcoholism and, in turn, likely affects rates of the diagnosis of AUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]