Search

Background: Policy changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have impacted on alcohol control. This study describes the development and application of a classification scheme to map alcohol policy changes during the first three-months of the COVID-19 pandemic in five countries and/or subnational jurisdictions., Method: A pre-registered systematic review of policy decisions from March to May 2020, in Australia/New South Wales, Canada/Ontario, Chile, Italy and the United Kingdom. One author extracted the data for each jurisdiction using a country-specific search strategy of government documents. We coded policy changes using an adapted WHO classification scheme, whether the policy was expected to tighten or loosen alcohol control, have mainly immediate or delayed impact on consumption and harm and impact the general population versus specific populations. We present descriptive statistics of policy change., Results: We developed a classification scheme with four levels. Existing policy options were insufficient to capture policy changes in alcohol availability, thus we added seventeen new sub-categories. We found 114 alcohol control policies introduced across the five jurisdictions, covering five (out of ten) WHO action areas. The majority aimed to change alcohol availability, by regulating the operation of alcohol outlets. All countries introduced closures to on-premise alcohol outlets and, except Chile, allowed off-sales via take away or home delivery. We also observed several pricing policies introducing subsidies to support the alcohol industry. Seventy-four percent of policy changes were expected to tighten alcohol control and 12.3 % to weaken control. Weakening policy changes were mostly related to retail mode switching or expansion (allowing take away or home delivery)., Conclusion: Alcohol control policies during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic were targeted primarily at alcohol availability and about one tenth might weaken alcohol control. Temporary changes to alcohol retail during the COVID-19 pandemic, if made permanent, could significantly expand alcohol availability., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Sebastián Peña, Claire Wilkinson, Catherine Paradis, Liz Barrett, Francisca Román, Paula Sierralta, Sadie Boniface, Pablo Norambuena, Niamh Fitzgerald: declare no conflicts of interest. Giovanni Aresi has been the principal investigator of a research project funded by the European Foundation for Alcohol Research between 2015 and 2017., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Acamprosate is an effective and cost-effective medication for alcohol relapse prevention but poor adherence can limit its full benefit. Effective interventions to support adherence to acamprosate are therefore needed., Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of Medication Management, with and without Contingency Management, compared to Standard Support alone in enhancing adherence to acamprosate and the impact of adherence to acamprosate on abstinence and reduced alcohol consumption., Design: Multicentre, three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled clinical trial., Setting: Specialist alcohol treatment services in five regions of England (South East London, Central and North West London, Wessex, Yorkshire and Humber and West Midlands)., Participants: Adults (aged 18 years or more), an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems , Tenth Revision, diagnosis of alcohol dependence, abstinent from alcohol at baseline assessment, in receipt of a prescription for acamprosate., Interventions: (1) Standard Support, (2) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management provided by pharmacists via a clinical contact centre (12 sessions over 6 months), (3) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management plus Contingency Management that consisted of vouchers (up to £120) to reinforce participation in Medication Management. Consenting participants were randomised in a 2 : 1 : 1 ratio to one of the three groups using a stratified random permuted block method using a remote system. Participants and researchers were not blind to treatment allocation., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome: self-reported percentage of medication taken in the previous 28 days at 6 months post randomisation. Economic outcome: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, a five-level version, used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years, with costs estimated using the Adult Service Use Schedule., Results: Of the 1459 potential participants approached, 1019 (70%) were assessed and 739 (73 consented to participate in the study, 372 (50%) were allocated to Standard Support, 182 (25%) to Standard Support with Medication Management and 185 (25%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. Data were available for 518 (70%) of participants at 6-month follow-up, 255 (68.5%) allocated to Standard Support, 122 (67.0%) to Standard Support and Medication Management and 141 (76.2%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. The mean difference of per cent adherence to acamprosate was higher for those who received Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management (10.6%, 95% confidence interval 19.6% to 1.6%) compared to Standard Support alone, at the primary end point (6-month follow-up). There was no significant difference in per cent days adherent when comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support alone 3.1% (95% confidence interval 12.8% to -6.5%) or comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management 7.9% (95% confidence interval 18.7% to -2.8%). The primary economic analysis at 6 months found that Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management was cost-effective compared to Standard Support alone, achieving small gains in quality-adjusted life-years at a lower cost per participant. Cost-effectiveness was not observed for adjunctive Medication Management compared to Standard Support alone. There were no serious adverse events related to the trial interventions reported., Limitations: The trial's primary outcome measure changed substantially due to data collection difficulties and therefore relied on a measure of self-reported adherence. A lower than anticipated follow-up rate at 12 months may have lowered the statistical power to detect differences in the secondary analyses, although the primary analysis was not impacted., Conclusions: Medication Management enhanced with Contingency Management is beneficial to patients for supporting them to take acamprosate., Future Work: Given our findings in relation to Contingency Management enhancing Medication Management adherence, future trials should be developed to explore its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness with other alcohol interventions where there is evidence of poor adherence., Trial Registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN17083622 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17083622., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 27, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

It is becoming increasingly common for frontline clinicians to see children and teenagers struggle with their mental health. Since mental health issues have increased over the past ten years in the UK, they are now the leading cause of disability and cost the British economy £105 billion annually. The review discusses the evidence base underpinning the effect of yoga on children's mental health and summarises the results of 21 research papers. The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, ERIC, Web of Science, PubMed, Medline and Cochrane Library were searched through Ovid from January 2008 until May 2022. The keywords 'yoga OR mindfulness - AND school AND children OR child OR youth OR adolescent' were used. The search was limited to studies in the English language. The quality of each study was rated against Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised control trials and a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The evidence for yoga therapies in children is encouraging, although studies include methodological flaws such as small sample sizes and sparse information on interventions. This review has highlighted that yoga interventions may be implemented in schools as a preventative and therapeutic measure for mental health issues.

Background: This study examined changes in population-level co-use of cannabis and alcohol before and 12 months after nonmedical cannabis legalization in Canada, relative to the United States that had previously legalized and not legalized (US legal and illegal states, respectively)., Methods: Data are from waves 1 and 2 of the International Cannabis Policy Study, collected in 2018 (before) and 2019 (12 months after legalization in Canada). Respondents aged 16-65 years from Canada ( n  = 25,313) and US legal ( n  = 25,189) and US illegal ( n  = 19,626) states completed an online survey. Changes in co-use between 2018 and 2019 in US legal and illegal states compared to those in Canada were assessed using multinomial logistic regression., Results: Descriptive analyses show increases in cannabis use and monthly or more frequent (MMF) co-use between 2018 and 2019 in all jurisdictions. Compared to no MMF use of cannabis or alcohol, there was no evidence suggesting differences in changes in MMF co-use in US legal or illegal states relative to Canada. However, respondents in US legal states had 33% higher odds of MMF alcohol-only use (OR = 1.33, 99% CI: 1.12, 1.57) compared to no MMF use relative to Canada., Conclusions: Increases in co-use were observed between 2018 and 2019 in all jurisdictions regardless of the legal status of cannabis. These shifts were largely due to increases in cannabis use across the population, including those that use alcohol, and may indicate changing societal norms toward cannabis generally. As the cannabis legalization transition in Canada matures, evaluation over the longer term will improve understanding of the influence of cannabis liberalization on co-use.

Background: There is growing evidence that common strategies are used across unhealthy commodity industries (UCIs) to influence policy decisions in line with their commercial interests. To date, there have been relatively few studies comparing corporate political activity (CPA) across UCIs, especially comparing the alcohol and gambling industries., Methods: A comparative and inductive thematic analysis of alcohol and gambling industry submissions to two House of Lords (HoL) inquiries in the UK was conducted. Themes in the framing, arguments and strategies used by the alcohol and gambling industries in CPA were compared., Results: Alcohol and gambling industry responses largely used the same framings, both in terms of the problems and solutions. This included arguing that harms are only experienced by a 'minority' of people, emphasising individual responsibility and shifting blame for harms to other industry actors. They promoted targeted or localised solutions to these harms, in place of more effective population level solutions, and emphasised the perceived harms of introducing regulation not in the industries' interests., Conclusions: These findings are consistent with previous literature suggesting that UCIs use the same framing and arguments to shape the narrative around their harms and solutions to those harms. This study also identified novel strategies such as shifting blame of harms to other industry actors. Policy makers should be aware of these strategies to avoid undue industry influence on policy decisions and understanding commonalities in strategies may help to inform more effective public health responses across all UCIs., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association.)

Background and Aims: Alcohol use increases throughout adolescence. Emergency department (ED) attendance is an opportunity for alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI), which is effective for adults. This trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ASBI compared with screening alone (SA) in high-risk adolescents., Design, Setting and Participants: Multi-centre, three-group, single-blind, individually randomized trial with follow-ups after 6 and 12 months in 10 ED settings in England. From October 2014 to May 2015 we screened 3327 adolescents aged 14 to 18 years, of whom 756 (22.7%) scored at least 3 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: consumption (AUDIT-C) and consented to participate in this trial. Mean age was 16.1 years; 50.2% were female and 84.9% were white., Interventions: Interventions were personalized feedback and brief advice (PFBA), personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention (eBI) and SA., Measures: The primary outcome was the weekly alcohol consumed in standard UK units (8 g ethanol) at 12 months post-randomization, derived from extended AUDIT-C. Economic outcomes included quality of life and service use, from perspectives of both the National Health Service and personal social services (NHS&PSS) and society., Findings: At 12 months, mean weekly consumption was 2.99 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.38-3.70] standard units for the SA group, 3.56 (95% CI = 2.90, 4.32) for PFBA and 3.18 (95% CI = 2.50, 3.97) for eBI, showing no significant differences. The PFBA group consumed mean 0.57 (-0.36, 1.70) units more than SA; and eBIs consumed 0.19 (-0.71, 1.30) more. Bayes factors suggested lack of effectiveness explained non-significance. From the NHS&PSS perspective, economic analysis showed that PFBA and eBI were not cost-effective compared with SA: PFBA yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £6213 (-£736 843, £812 884), with the intervention having 54% probability of being cost-effective compared with SA at the £20 000 WTP threshold., Conclusions: In emergency departments in England, neither personalized feedback and brief advice nor personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention showed evidence of being effective or cost-effective when compared with screening alone in reducing alcohol consumption among adolescents., (© 2022 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Aims: Adolescents in the UK are among the heaviest drinkers in Europe. The World Health Organization recommends alcohol product labelling to inform consumers about product information and health risks associated with alcohol use. This study investigates support for product information and health messaging on alcohol packaging among UK adolescents., Methods: The 2019 UK Youth Alcohol Policy Survey was an online cross-sectional survey among 3388 adolescents aged 11-19. Participants indicated their support for seven forms of messaging on packaging (e.g. number of alcohol units, links to health conditions). Logistic regression models investigated associations between support for each of the seven forms and alcohol use, perceived risks of alcohol use, and previous exposure to messaging., Results: Between 60 and 79% of adolescents were supportive of different aspects of product labelling. Compared to lower-risk drinkers, higher-risk drinkers (AUDIT-C 5+) had higher odds of supporting including the number of alcohol units (OR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.31-2.54), calories (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.04-1.68), and strength of the product (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.19-2.52) but lower odds of supporting including information on alcohol-related health conditions (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53-0.87). Adolescents who perceived risks of alcohol use more strongly were more likely to support all forms of product information and messaging., Conclusions: The majority of adolescents supported improved alcohol labelling. Higher-risk drinkers were supportive of improved product information but less supportive of health-related messaging. Adolescents who believe alcohol carries health risks were more likely to support messaging., (© The Author(s) 2021. Medical Council on Alcohol and Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.)

Background: Alcohol consumption and related harm increase rapidly from the age of 12 years. We evaluated whether alcohol screening and brief intervention is effective and cost-effective in delaying hazardous or harmful drinking amongst low-risk or abstaining adolescents attending Emergency Departments (EDs)., Methods: This ten-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, pragmatic, individually randomised trial screened ED attenders aged between 14 and 17 years for alcohol consumption. We sampled at random one third of those scoring at most 2 on AUDIT-C who had access to the internet and, if aged under 16, were Gillick competent or had informed consent from parent or guardian. We randomised them between: screening only (control intervention); one session of face-to-face Personalised Feedback and Brief Advice (PFBA); and PFBA plus an electronic brief intervention (eBI) on smartphone or web. We conducted follow-up after six and 12 months. The principal outcomes were alcohol consumed over the 3 months before 12-month follow up, measured by AUDIT-C; and quality-adjusted life-years., Findings: Between October 2014 and May 2015, we approached 5,016 eligible patients of whom 3,326 consented to be screened and participate in the trial; 2,571 of these were low-risk drinkers or abstainers, consuming an average 0.14 units per week. We randomised: 304 to screening only; 285 to PFBA; and 294 to PFBA and eBI. We found no significant difference between groups, notably in weekly alcohol consumption: those receiving screening only drank 0.10 units (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.18); PFBA 0.12 (0.06 to 0.21); PFBA and eBI 0.10 (0.05 to 0.19)., Interpretation: While drinking levels remained low in this population, this trial found no evidence that PFBA with or without eBI was more effective than screening alone in reducing or delaying alcohol consumption., Competing Interests: Declarations of Interest CD, JS and TP have declared personal funding above. JS has also worked to develop new and improved treatments with pharmaceutical companies from whom he and his employer (King's College London) have received honoraria, fees and travel costs. Over the past 3 years, this has included work with Indivior, MundiPharma, Camurus and Accord; and trial medication supply from Camurus. JS has also been named in a patent registration by a pharma company as inventor of a concentrated nasal naloxone spray. King's College London has also registered intellectual property on a novel buccal naloxone formulation. EK is a senior scientist in the NIHR Schools of Primary Care Research and Public Health Research, and the UKCRC Centre of Excellence in Translation Public Health Research. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Introduction: To gain a better understanding of the complex and independent associations between different measures of socioeconomic position (SEP) and smoking in England., Aims and Methods: Between March 2013 and January 2019 data were collected from 120 496 adults aged 16+ in England taking part in the Smoking Toolkit Study. Of these, 18.04% (n = 21 720) were current smokers. Six indicators of SEP were measured: social grade, employment status, educational qualifications, home and car ownership and income. Models were constructed using ridge regression to assess the contribution of each measure of SEP, taking account of high collinearity., Results: The strongest predictor of smoking status was housing tenure. Those who did not own their own home had twice the odds of smoking compared with homeowners (odds ratio [OR] = 2.01). Social grade, educational qualification, and income were also good predictors. Those in social grades C1 (OR = 1.04), C2 (OR = 1.29), D (OR = 1.39), and E (OR = 1.78) had higher odds of smoking than those in social grade AB. Similarly, those with A-level/equivalent (OR = 1.15), GCSE/vocational (OR = 1.48), other/still studying (OR = 1.12), and no post-16 qualifications (OR = 1.48) had higher odds of smoking than those with university qualifications, as did those who earned in the lowest (OR = 1.23), third (OR = 1.18), and second quartiles (OR = 1.06) compared with those earning in the highest. Associations between smoking and employment (OR = 1.03) and car ownership (OR = 1.05) were much smaller., Conclusions: Of a variety of socioeconomic measures, housing tenure appears to be the strongest independent predictor of smoking in England, followed by social grade, educational qualifications, and income. Employment status and car ownership have the lowest predictive power., Implications: This study used ridge regression, a technique which takes into account high collinearity between variables, to gain a better understanding of the independent associations between different measures of SEP and smoking in England. The findings provide guidance as to which SEP measures one could use when trying to identifying individuals most at risk from smoking, with housing tenure identified as the strongest independent predictor., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Background: Whether alcohol and cannabis complement or substitute each other has been studied for over two decades. In the changing cannabis policy landscape, debates are moving rapidly and spill-over effects on other substances are of interest., Aims: update and extend a previous systematic review, by: (a) identifying new human behavioural studies reporting on substitution and/or complementarity of alcohol and cannabis, and (b) additionally including animal studies., Methods: We replicated the search strategy of an earlier systematic review, supplemented with a new search for animal studies. Search results were crossed checked against the earlier review and reference lists were hand searched. Findings were synthesised using a narrative synthesis., Results: Sixty-five articles were included (64 in humans, one in animals). We synthesised findings into categories: patterns of use, substitution practices, economic relationship, substance use disorders, policy evaluation, others and animal studies. Overall, 30 studies found evidence for substitution, 17 for complementarity, 14 did not find evidence for either, and four found evidence for both., Conclusions: Overall, the evidence regarding complementarity and substitution of cannabis and alcohol is mixed. We identified stronger support for substitution than complementarity, though evidence indicates different effects in different populations and to some extent across different study designs. The quality of studies varied and few were designed specifically to address this question. Dedicated high-quality research is warranted.

Aim: To examine patterns of hazardous, harmful and dependent drinking across different socio-economic groups, and how this relationship may be explained by common mental disorder., Methods and Findings: Between 2011-2013, 1,052 participants (age range 17-91, 53% female) were interviewed for Phase 2 of the South East London Community Health study. Latent class analysis was used to define six groups based on multiple indicators of socio-economic status in three domains. Alcohol use (low risk, hazardous, harmful/dependent) was measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the presence of common mental disorder was measured using the revised Clinical Interview Schedule. Multinomial regression was used to explore associations with hazardous, harmful and dependent alcohol use, including after adjustment for common mental disorder. Harmful and dependent drinking was more common among people in Class 2 'economically inactive renters' (relative risk ratio (RRR) 3.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-8.71), Class 3 'economically inactive homeowners' (RRR 4.11, 95% CI 1.19-14.20) and Class 6 'professional renters' (RRR 3.51, 95% CI 1.14-10.78) than in Class 1 'professional homeowners'. Prevalent common mental disorder explained some of the increased risk of harmful or dependent drinking in Class 2, but not Class 3 or 6., Conclusions: Across distinct socio-economic groups in a large inner-city sample, we found important differences in harmful and dependent drinking, only some of which were explained by common mental disorder. The increased risk of harmful or dependent drinking across classes which are very distinct from each other suggests differing underlying drivers of drinking across these groups. A nuanced understanding of alcohol use and problems is necessary to understand the inequalities in alcohol harms., Competing Interests: SB works at the Institute of Alcohol Studies which receives funding from the Alliance House Foundation. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Aims: To explore adolescents' experiences of consenting to, and participating in, alcohol intervention trials when attending for emergency care., Methods: In-depth semi-structured interviews with 27 adolescents (16 males; aged 14-17 years (Mage = 15.7)) who had taken part in one of two linked brief alcohol intervention trials based in 10 accident and emergency departments in England. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and subject to thematic analysis., Results: Research and intervention methods were generally found to be acceptable though confidentiality was important and parental presence could hinder truthful disclosures regarding alcohol use. Participants discussed the importance of being involved in research that was relevant to them and recognised alcohol consumption as a normative part of adolescence, highlighting the importance of having access to appropriate health information. Beyond this, they recognised the benefits and risks of trial participation for themselves and others with the majority showing a degree of altruism in considering longer term implications for others as well as themselves., Conclusions: Alcohol screening and intervention in emergency care is both acceptable and relevant to adolescents but acceptability is reliant on confidentiality being assured and may be inhibited by parental presence., Trial Registration: ISRCTN Number: 45300218., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objective: To estimate and compare the optimal cut-off score of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and AUDIT-C in identifying at-risk alcohol consumption, heavy episodic alcohol use, ICD-10 alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence in adolescents attending ED in England., Design: Opportunistic cross-sectional survey., Setting: 10 emergency departments across England., Participants: Adolescents (n = 5377) aged between their 10th and 18th birthday who attended emergency departments between December 2012 and May 2013., Measures: Scores on the AUDIT and AUDIT-C. At-risk alcohol consumption and monthly episodic alcohol consumption in the past 3 months were derived using the time-line follow back method. Alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence was assessed in accordance with ICD-10 criteria using the MINI-KID., Findings: AUDIT-C with a score of 3 was more effective for at-risk alcohol use (AUC 0.81; sensitivity 87%, specificity 97%), heavy episodic use (0.84; 76%, 98%) and alcohol abuse (0.98; 91%, 90%). AUDIT with a score of 7 was more effective in identifying alcohol dependence (0.92; 96%, 94%)., Conclusions: The 3-item AUDIT-C is more effective than AUDIT in screening adolescents for at-risk alcohol use, heavy episodic alcohol use and alcohol abuse. AUDIT is more effective than AUDIT-C for the identification of alcohol dependence., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health.)

Aims: To review the evidence on the effect of brief interventions (BIs) for alcohol among adults with risky alcohol consumption and comorbid mental health conditions., Methods: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before May 2016 was undertaken and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. The findings were combined in a narrative synthesis. The risk of bias was assessed for included trials., Results: Seventeen RCTs were included in the review and narrative synthesis: 11 in common mental health problems, and 6 in severe mental illness. There was considerable heterogeneity in study populations, BI delivery mode and intensity, outcome measures and risk of bias. Where BI was compared with a minimally active control, BI was associated with a significant reduction in alcohol consumption in four out of nine RCTs in common mental disorders and two out of five RCTs in severe mental illness. Where BI was compared with active comparator groups (such as motivational interviewing or cognitive behavioural therapy), findings were also mixed. Differences in the findings may be partly due to differences in study design, such as the intensity of BI and possibly the risk of bias., Conclusions: Overall, the evidence is mixed regarding the effects of alcohol BI in participants with comorbid mental health conditions. Future well-designed research is required to answer this question more definitively.

Study Objective: We adopt a comparative framework to measure the extent to which variance in the efficacy of alcohol brief interventions to reduce hazardous and harmful drinking at less than or equal to 5-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up in emergency department settings can be determined by differences between study populations (targeted injury and noninjury specific)., Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published before September 2016 was undertaken. Twenty-three high-quality and methodologically similar randomized controlled trials were eligible, with a total number of 15,173 participants included. Primary outcome measure was efficacy of brief intervention compared with a control group in reducing quantity of alcohol consumed. An inverse variance model was applied to measure the effect of treatment in standard mean differences for brief intervention and control groups., Results: At 6-month follow-up, an effect in favor of brief intervention over control was identified for targeted injury studies (standardized mean difference=-0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.17 to -0.02; I 2 =0%). For pooled noninjury-specific studies, small benefits of brief intervention were evident at less than or equal to 5-month follow-up (standardized mean difference=-0.15; 95% CI -0.24 to -0.07; I 2 =0%), at 6-month follow-up (standardized mean difference=-0.08; 95% CI -0.14 to -0.01; I 2 =1%), and at 12-month follow-up (standardized mean difference=-0.08; 95% CI -0.15 to -0.01; I 2 =0%)., Conclusion: Meta-analysis identified noninjury-specific studies as associated with better response to brief intervention than targeted injury studies. However, the inclusion of injured patients with noninjured ones in the experimental and control groups of noninjury-specific studies limited the interpretation of this finding., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To assess the evidence for price-based alcohol policy interventions to determine whether minimum unit pricing (MUP) is likely to be effective., Design: Systematic review and assessment of studies according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, against the Bradford Hill criteria for causality. Three electronic databases were searched from inception to February 2017. Additional articles were found through hand searching and grey literature searches., Criteria for Selecting Studies: We included any study design that reported on the effect of price-based interventions on alcohol consumption or alcohol-related morbidity, mortality and wider harms. Studies reporting on the effects of taxation or affordability and studies that only investigated price elasticity of demand were beyond the scope of this review. Studies with any conflict of interest were excluded. All studies were appraised for methodological quality., Results: Of 517 studies assessed, 33 studies were included: 26 peer-reviewed research studies and seven from the grey literature. All nine of the Bradford Hill criteria were met, although different types of study satisfied different criteria. For example, modelling studies complied with the consistency and specificity criteria, time series analyses demonstrated the temporality and experiment criteria, and the analogy criterion was fulfilled by comparing the findings with the wider literature on taxation and affordability., Conclusions: Overall, the Bradford Hill criteria for causality were satisfied. There was very little evidence that minimum alcohol prices are not associated with consumption or subsequent harms. However the overall quality of the evidence was variable, a large proportion of the evidence base has been produced by a small number of research teams, and the quantitative uncertainty in many estimates or forecasts is often poorly communicated outside the academic literature. Nonetheless, price-based alcohol policy interventions such as MUP are likely to reduce alcohol consumption, alcohol-related morbidity and mortality., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SB and SM work at King's College London, which as an institution is listed as a member of the Alcohol Health Alliance. SM has received funding indirectly from UKCTAS, which as an institution is also listed as a member of the Alcohol Health Alliance. None of the authors have any relationship with the Alcohol Health Alliance., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Purpose: The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS), 14 positively worded statements, is a validated instrument to measure mental wellbeing on a population level. Less is known about the population distribution of the shorter seven-item version (SWEMWBS) or its performance as an instrument to measure wellbeing., Methods: Using the Health Survey for England 2010-2013 (n = 27,169 adults aged 16+, nationally representative of the population), age- and sex-specific norms were estimated using means and percentiles. Criterion validity was examined using: (1) Spearman correlations (ρ) for SWEMWBS with General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), happiness index, EQ-VAS (2) a multinomial logit model with SWEMWBS (low, medium and high wellbeing) as the outcome and demographic, social and health behaviours as explanatory variables. Relative validity was examined by comparing SWEMWBS with WEMWBS using: (1) Spearman correlations (continuous data), and (2) the weighted kappa statistic (categorical), within population subgroups., Results: Mean (median) SWEMWBS was 23.7 (23.2) for men and 23.2 (23.2) for women (p = 0.100). Spearman correlations were moderately sized for the happiness index (ρ = 0.53, P < 0.001), GHQ-12 (ρ = -0.52, p < 0.001) and EQ-VAS (ρ = 0.40, p < 0.001). Participants consuming <1 portion of fruit and vegetables a day versus ≥5 (odds ratio = 1.43 95% Confidence Interval = (1.22-1.66)) and current smokers versus non-smokers (1.28 (1.15-1.41)) were more likely to have low vs medium wellbeing. Participants who binge drank versus non-drinkers were less likely to have high versus medium wellbeing (0.81 (0.71-0.92)). Spearman correlations between SWEMWBS and WEMWBS were above 0.95; weighted kappa statistics showed almost perfect agreement (0.79-0.85)., Conclusion: SWEMWBS distinguishes mental wellbeing between subgroups, similarly to WEMWBS, but is less sensitive to gender differences.

Purpose: Globally, alcohol use is the leading cause of ill health and life years lost in adolescents, although its clinical impact is often overlooked, particularly in England where most research is based in schools. This study aims to examine the prevalence of alcohol consumption and the association between alcohol consumption and age of onset with health and social consequences among adolescents presenting to emergency departments (EDs)., Methods: Consecutive attenders (n = 5,576) aged 10-17 years at 10 EDs were included. Information was collected on general health and functioning, quality of life, alcohol use, and alcohol-related health and social consequences., Results: Nearly 40% of adolescents reported the consumption of alcohol that was more than a sip in their lifetime. Age of the first alcohol consumption before the age of 15 years was associated with tobacco use (p < .001), lower quality of life (p = .003), and evidence of an alcohol use disorder (p = .002). It was also associated with general social functioning (problems with conduct p = .001 and hyperactivity p = .001) and alcohol-related health and social consequences (accident p = .046, problems with a parent p = .017, school p = .0117, or police p = .012)., Conclusions: Rates of alcohol consumption in adolescents presenting to the ED were similar to those reported in schools in England and globally. Associations of alcohol consumption and earlier onset of drinking with poorer health and social functioning were observed. The ED can offer an opportunity for the identification of hazardous alcohol use in adolescents., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adolescence is a critical developmental stage when young people make lifestyle choices that have the potential to impact on their current and future health and social wellbeing. The relationship between substance use and criminal activity is complex but there is clear evidence that the prevalence of problematic substance use is far higher among adolescent offenders than the general adolescent population. Adolescent offenders are a marginalized and vulnerable population who are significantly more likely to experience health and social inequalities in later life than their non-offending peers. There is a paucity of evidence on effective interventions to address substance use and risk-taking behaviours in adolescent offender populations but it is clear that preventative or abstinence orientated interventions are not effective. RISKIT-CJS is an intervention developed in collaboration with young people taking account of the current best evidence. Feasibility and pilot studies have found the intervention addresses the needs of adolescents, is acceptable and has demonstrated potential in reducing substance use and risk-taking behavior., Methods: The study is a mixed method, two-armed, prospective, pragmatic randomized controlled trial with individual randomisation to either treatment as usual alone or the RISKIT-CJS intervention in addition to treatment as usual. Adolescents, aged 13 to 17 years inclusive, engaged with the criminal justice system who are identified as having problematic substance use are eligible to participate. The study will be conducted across three geographical areas; South and South East England, London and North East England between March 2017 and February 2019., Discussion: The study represents an ambitious programme of work to address an area of need for a marginalized and vulnerable population., Trial Registration: ISRCTN77037777 registered 15/09/2016.

Background: Previous studies have shown heavier drinkers are less likely to respond to surveys and require extended efforts to recruit. This study applies the continuum of resistance model to explore how survey estimates of alcohol consumption may be affected by non-response bias in three consecutive years of a general population survey in England., Methods: Using the Health Survey for England (HSE) survey years 2011-13, number of contact attempts (1-6 and 7+) were explored by socio-demographic and drinking characteristics. The odds of drinking more than various thresholds were modelled using logistic regression. Assuming that non-participants were similar to those who were difficult to contact (the continuum of resistance model), the effect of non-response on measures of drinking was investigated., Results: In the fully-adjusted regression model, women who required 7+ calls were significantly more likely to drink more than the UK Government's recommended daily limit (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.33, P = 0.003) and to engage in heavy episodic drinking (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.07-1.42, P = 0.004), however this was not significant in men in the fully-adjusted model. When the continuum of resistance model was applied, there was an increase in average weekly alcohol consumption of 1.8 units among men (a 12.6% relative increase), and an increase of 1.5 units among women (a 20.5% relative increase). There was also an increase in the prevalence of heavy episodic drinking of 2.5% among men (an 12.0% relative increase) and of 2.0% among women (a 15.8% relative increase), although other measures of drinking were less affected., Conclusion: Overall alcohol consumption and the prevalence of heavy episodic drinking were higher among HSE participants who required more extended efforts to contact. The continuum of resistance model suggests non-response bias does affect survey estimates of alcohol consumption., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction: Drinking has adverse impacts on health, well-being, education and social outcomes for adolescents. Adolescents in England are among the heaviest drinkers in Europe. Recently, the proportion of adolescents who drink alcohol has fallen, although consumption among those who do drink has actually increased. This trial seeks to investigate how effective and efficient an alcohol brief intervention is with 11-15 years olds to encourage lower alcohol consumption., Methods and Analysis: This is an individually randomised two-armed trial incorporating a control arm of usual school-based practice and a leaflet on a healthy lifestyle (excl. alcohol), and an intervention arm that combines usual practice with a 30 min brief intervention delivered by school learning mentors and a leaflet on alcohol. At least 30 schools will be recruited from four regions in England (North East, North West, London, Kent and Medway) to follow-up 235 per arm. The primary outcome is total alcohol consumed in the last 28 days, using the 28 day Timeline Follow Back questionnaire measured at the 12-month follow-up. The analysis of the intervention will consider effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. A qualitative study will explore, via 1:1 in-depth interviews with (n=80) parents, young people and school staff, intervention experience, intervention fidelity and acceptability issues, using thematic narrative synthesis to report qualitative data., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was granted by Teesside University. Dissemination plans include academic publications, conference presentations, disseminating to local and national education departments and the wider public health community, including via Fuse, and engaging with school staff and young people to comment on whether and how the project can be improved., Trial Registration Trial: ISRCTN45691494; Pre-results., Competing Interests: EG is a reviewer for NIHR. DH was a member of the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research Commissioning Board until December 2015, and is a subpanel member for NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research from February 2016. EK is a funding board member of the NIHR Public Health Research funding board and the NIHR Senior Fellowships panel. EM is a subpanel member for NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research. LV is a member of the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Clinical Evaluation and Trials Panel, NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research Panel and Director of NIHR Research Design Service for the North East., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background: There is consistent evidence that individuals in higher socioeconomic status groups are more likely to report exceeding recommended drinking limits, but those in lower socioeconomic status groups experience more alcohol-related harm. This has been called the 'alcohol harm paradox'. Such studies typically use standard cut-offs to define heavy drinking, which are exceeded by a large proportion of adults. Our study pools data from six years (2008-2013) of the population-based Health Survey for England to test whether the socioeconomic distribution of more extreme levels of drinking could help explain the paradox., Methods: The study included 51,498 adults from a representative sample of the adult population of England for a cross-sectional analysis of associations between socioeconomic status and self-reported drinking. Heavy weekly drinking was measured at four thresholds, ranging from 112 g+/168 g + (alcohol for women/men, or 14/21 UK standard units) to 680 g+/880 g + (or 85/110 UK standard units) per week. Heavy episodic drinking was also measured at four thresholds, from 48 g+/64 g + (or 6/8 UK standard units) to 192 g+/256 g + (or 24/32 UK standard units) in one day. Socioeconomic status indicators were equivalised household income, education, occupation and neighbourhood deprivation., Results: Lower socioeconomic status was associated with lower likelihoods of exceeding recommended limits for weekly and episodic drinking, and higher likelihoods of exceeding more extreme thresholds. For example, participants in routine or manual occupations had 0.65 (95 % CI 0.57-0.74) times the odds of exceeding the recommended weekly limit compared to those in 'higher managerial' occupations, and 2.15 (95 % CI 1.06-4.36) times the odds of exceeding the highest threshold. Similarly, participants in the lowest income quintile had 0.60 (95 % CI 0.52-0.69) times the odds of exceeding the recommended weekly limit when compared to the highest quintile, and 2.30 (95 % CI 1.28-4.13) times the odds of exceeding the highest threshold., Conclusions: Low socioeconomic status groups are more likely to drink at extreme levels, which may partially explain the alcohol harm paradox. Policies that address alcohol-related health inequalities need to consider extreme drinking levels in some sub-groups that may be associated with multiple markers of deprivation. This will require a more disaggregated understanding of drinking practices.

Aim: Most published research utilizes an AUDIT score of >8 as the threshold for hazardous drinking. Recent research suggests that this limit should be amended for younger drinkers (aged 18-35 years). This study aimed to explore the effect of a revision to AUDIT cut scores., Method: Applying Foxcroft et al.'s [(2015) Accuracy of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test for detecting problem drinking in 18-35 year-olds in England: method comparison study. Alcohol Alcohol 50, 244-50] suggested cut off scores of nine for males and four for females to the most recent Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (2007) data., Results: This more than doubles the prevalence of female hazardous drinkers, and significantly increases the overall rate for that age group when compared with the standard threshold of >8., Conclusion: The prevalence of hazardous drinking among females ages 18-30 may be significantly higher than current estimates., (© The Author 2015. Medical Council on Alcohol and Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.)

Background: Under-reporting of alcohol consumption is widespread; surveys typically capture 40-60% of alcohol sales. However the population distribution of under-reporting is not well understood., Methods: Mixed-methods study to identify factors associated with under-reporting, using the nationally-representative Health Survey for England (HSE) 2011 (overall response rate 66%). Comparison of retrospective computer-assisted personal interview and seven-day drinking diary (n = 3,774 adults 18+, 50% women, diary response rate 69%) to identify factors associated with diary responses exceeding those of the interview using multivariable linear regression for three outcomes: drinking days in the week recorded, volume consumed on heaviest drinking day in the week recorded, and weekly alcohol consumption. Qualitative semi-structured interviews (n = 10) explored reasons for under-reporting in further detail., Results: Number of drinking days was slightly greater in the diary than the interview (P < 0.001). Reported consumption was higher in the diary than in the interview for heaviest drinking day in the week recorded (0.7 units greater among men, 1.2 units among women, P < 0.001), and weekly alcohol consumption in women only (1.1 units among women, P = 0.003). Participants who drank more frequently, more heavily, and had a more varied drinking pattern with respect to the types of drink consumed or choice of drinking venues had a larger difference between their diary week and their interview week.The qualitative interviews identified having a non-routine drinking pattern, self-perception as a non-frequent drinker, and usually tracking drinking using experiential approaches as linked to more drinking being reported in the diary than the retrospective interview., Conclusions: Heavy drinking and non-routine drinking patterns may be associated with greater under-reporting of alcohol consumption. Estimates of drinking above recommended levels are likely to be disproportionately under-estimated.

Background: This study predicts the implications of under-reporting of alcohol consumption in England for alcohol consumption above Government drinking thresholds., Methods: Two nationally representative samples of private households in England were used: General LiFestyle survey (GLF) and Health Survey for England (HSE) 2008. Participants were 9608 adults with self-reported alcohol consumption on heaviest drinking day in the last week (HSE) and 12 490 adults with self-reported average weekly alcohol consumption (GLF). Alcohol consumption in both surveys was revised to account for under-reporting in three hypothetical scenarios. The prevalence of drinking more than UK Government guidelines of 21/14 (men/women) alcohol units a week, and 4/3 units per day, and the prevalence of binge drinking (>8/6 units) were investigated using logistic regression., Results: Among drinkers, mean weekly alcohol intake increases to 20.8 units and mean alcohol intake on heaviest drinking day in the last week increases to 10.6 units. Over one-third of adults are drinking above weekly guidelines and over three-quarters drank above daily limits on their heaviest drinking day in the last week. The revision changes some of the significant predictors of drinking above thresholds. In the revised scenario, women have similar odds to men of binge drinking and higher odds of drinking more than daily limits, compared with lower odds in the original survey., Conclusion: Revising alcohol consumption assuming equal under-reporting across the population does not have an equal effect on the proportion of adults drinking above weekly or daily thresholds. It is crucial that further research explores the population distribution of under-reporting.

Background: Several studies have found participants pour more than 1 standard drink or unit as their usual glass. This is the first study to measure actual and perceived amounts of alcohol in a self-defined usual glass of wines and spirits in the general population., Methods: Participants were a convenience sample of adults who drink alcohol or who pour drinks for other people (n = 283, 54% women) at 6 sites in South East England. The survey was face to face and comprised a self-completion questionnaire and pouring task. Estimation accuracy, categorised as correct (±0.5 units), underestimate (>0.5 units), or overestimate (>0.5 units) was the main outcome., Results: The mean number of units poured was 1.90 (SD 0.80; n = 264) for wine and 1.93 (SD 0.78; n = 201) for spirits. The amount of alcohol in a self-defined usual glass was estimated in 440 glasses (248 wine and 192 spirits). Overestimation took place in 42% glasses of spirit poured and 29% glasses of wine poured, and underestimation in 17 and 19%, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression found volume poured to be significantly associated with underestimating both wines and spirits, and additionally for wine only, belonging to a non-white ethnic group and being unemployed or retired. Not having a university degree was significantly associated with overestimating both drink types., Conclusions: This study is the first in the general population and did not identify systematic underestimation of the amount of alcohol in a self-defined usual glass. Underestimation is significantly associated with volume poured for both drink types; therefore, advocating pouring smaller glasses could reduce underestimation of alcohol consumption., (Copyright © 2012 by the Research Society on Alcoholism.)

BACKGROUND ; There is uncertainty over whether maternal smoking is associated with birth defects. We conducted the first ever comprehensive systematic review to establish which specific malformations are associated with smoking. METHODS ; Observational studies published 1959-2010 were identified (Medline), and included if they reported the odds ratio (OR) for having a non-chromosomal birth defect among women who smoked during pregnancy compared with non-smokers. ORs adjusted for potential confounders were extracted (e.g. maternal age and alcohol), otherwise unadjusted estimates were used. One hundred and seventy-two articles were used in the meta-analyses: a total of 173 687 malformed cases and 11 674 332 unaffected controls. RESULTS ; Significant positive associations with maternal smoking were found for: cardiovascular/heart defects [OR 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.17]; musculoskeletal defects (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05-1.27); limb reduction defects (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.15-1.39); missing/extra digits (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.99-1.41); clubfoot (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.10-1.47); craniosynostosis (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.03-1.73); facial defects (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.35); eye defects (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.11-1.40); orofacial clefts (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.20-1.36); gastrointestinal defects (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.18-1.36); gastroschisis (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.28-1.76); anal atresia (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06-1.36); hernia (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.23-1.59); and undescended testes (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.25). There was a reduced risk for hypospadias (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.95) and skin defects (OR 0.82, 0.75-0.89). For all defects combined the OR was 1.01 (0.96-1.07), due to including defects with a reduced risk and those with no association (including chromosomal defects). CONCLUSIONS ; Birth defects that are positively associated with maternal smoking should now be included in public health educational materials to encourage more women to quit before or during pregnancy.