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]

Abstract: Background and aims: Emergency department (ED) alcohol‐related presentation data are not routinely collected in Australia and New Zealand. It is likely that previous research has underestimated the numbers of patients presenting with alcohol‐related conditions. This study aimed to quantify the level of alcohol harm presenting to EDs in Australia and New Zealand [Correction added on 23 Jan 2018, after first online publication: The ‘aims’ section was missing and is updated in this version]. Design: Multi‐centre, prospective study. Patients were screened prospectively for alcohol‐related presentations during a 7‐day period in December 2014. Part 1 involved screening to determine alcohol‐positive ED presentations and data collection of patient demographic and clinical information. Part 2 involved a consent‐based survey conducted with patients aged ≥ 14 years to perform Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) scores. Setting: Eight EDs in Australia and New Zealand, representing differing hospital role delineations. Participants: A total of 8652 patients aged ≥ 14 years attended and 8435 (97.5%) were screened. Measurements: The main outcome measure was the proportion of patients who had an alcohol‐related presentation termed ‘alcohol‐positive’, using pre‐defined criteria. It included injuries, intoxication, medical conditions and injuries caused by an alcohol‐affected third party. Secondary outcomes included demographic and clinical information, the type of alcohol‐related presentations and AUDIT scores. Findings: A total of 801 [9.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.9–10.1%] presentations were identified as alcohol‐positive, ranging between 4.9 and 15.2% throughout sites. Compared with alcohol‐negative patients, alcohol‐positive patients were more likely to be male [odds ratio (OR) = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.63–2.21], younger (median age 37 versus 46 years, P < 0.0001), arrive by ambulance (OR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.68–2.25) or police/correctional vehicle (OR = 4.56, 95% CI = 3.05–6.81) and require immediate treatment (OR = 3.20, 95% CI = 2.03–05.06). The median AUDIT score was 16 (interquartile range = 10–24). Conclusions: Almost one in 10 presentations to emergency departments in Australia and New Zealand are alcohol related. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]