Search

Background: Alcohol and cannabis use frequently co-occur, which can result in problems from social and academic impairment to dependence (i.e., alcohol use disorder [AUD] and/or cannabis use disorder [CUD]). The Emergency Department (ED) is an excellent site to identify adolescents with alcohol misuse, conduct a brief intervention, and refer to treatment; however, given time constraints, alcohol use may be the only substance assessed due to its common role in unintentional injury. The current study, a secondary data analysis, assessed the relationship between adolescent alcohol and cannabis use by examining the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) two question screen's (2QS) ability to predict future CUD at one, two, and three years post-ED visit. Methods: At baseline, data was collected via tablet self-report surveys from medically and behaviorally stable adolescents 12-17 years old (n = 1,689) treated in 16 pediatric EDs for non-life-threatening injury, illness, or mental health condition. Follow-up surveys were completed via telephone or web-based survey. Logistic regression compared CUD diagnosis odds at one, two, or three-year follow-up between levels constituting a single-level change in baseline risk categorization on the NIAAA 2QS (nondrinker versus low-risk, low- versus moderate-risk, moderate- versus high-risk). Receiver operating characteristic curve methods examined the predictive ability of the baseline NIAAA 2QS cut points for CUD at one, two, or three-year follow-up. Results: Adolescents with low alcohol risk had significantly higher rates of CUD versus nondrinkers (OR range: 1.94-2.76, p < .0001). For low and moderate alcohol risk, there was no difference in CUD rates (OR range: 1.00-1.08). CUD rates were higher in adolescents with high alcohol risk versus moderate risk (OR range: 2.39-4.81, p < .05). Conclusions: Even low levels of baseline alcohol use are associated with risk for a later CUD. The NIAAA 2QS is an appropriate assessment measure to gauge risk for future cannabis use.

Adult prediction rules for cervical spine injury (CSI) exist; however, pediatric rules do not. Our objectives were to determine test accuracies of retrospectively identified CSI risk factors in a prospective pediatric cohort and compare them to a de novo risk model. We conducted a 4-center, prospective observational study of children 0 to 17 years old who experienced blunt trauma and underwent emergency medical services scene response, trauma evaluation, and/or cervical imaging. Emergency department providers recorded CSI risk factors. CSIs were classified by reviewing imaging, consultations, and/or telephone follow-up. We calculated bivariable relative risks, multivariable odds ratios, and test characteristics for the retrospective risk model and a de novo model. Of 4091 enrolled children, 74 (1.8%) had CSIs. Fourteen factors had bivariable associations with CSIs: diving, axial load, clotheslining, loss of consciousness, neck pain, inability to move neck, altered mental status, signs of basilar skull fracture, torso injury, thoracic injury, intubation, respiratory distress, decreased oxygen saturation, and neurologic deficits. The retrospective model (high-risk motor vehicle crash, diving, predisposing condition, neck pain, decreased neck mobility (report or exam), altered mental status, neurologic deficits, or torso injury) was 90.5% (95% confidence interval: 83.9%-97.2%) sensitive and 45.6% (44.0%-47.1%) specific for CSIs. The de novo model (diving, axial load, neck pain, inability to move neck, altered mental status, intubation, or respiratory distress) was 92.0% (85.7%-98.1%) sensitive and 50.3% (48.7%-51.8%) specific. Our findings support previously identified pediatric CSI risk factors and prospective pediatric CSI prediction rule development.

ObjectivesTo determine the test-retest reliability, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of a recently devised screen (the Newton screen) for alcohol and cannabis use/misuse, and its predictive validity at follow-up.Study designAdolescents, 12-17 years old (n = 4898), treated in 1 of 16 participating pediatric emergency departments across the US were enrolled in a study as part of a larger study within the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network. Concurrent and predictive validity (at 1, 2, and 3 years of follow-up) were assessed in a random subsample with a structured Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-based interview. Convergent validity was assessed with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification, a widely used alcohol screening measure.ResultsThe sensitivity of the Newton screen for alcohol use disorder at baseline was 78.3% with a specificity of 93.0%. The cannabis use question had a baseline sensitivity of 93.1% and specificity of 93.5% for cannabis use disorder. Predictive validity analyses at 1, 2, and 3 years revealed high specificity but low sensitivity for alcohol and high specificity and moderate sensitivity for cannabis.ConclusionsThe Newton screening instrument may be an appropriate brief screening tool for use in the busy clinical environment. Specificity was high for both alcohol and cannabis, but sensitivity was higher for cannabis than alcohol. Like other brief screens, more detailed follow-up questions may be necessary to definitively assess substance misuse risk and the need for referral to treatment.

BackgroundThe pediatric emergency department (PED) represents an opportune time for alcohol and drug screening. The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) recommends a two-question alcohol screen for adolescents as a predictor of alcohol and drug misuse.ObjectiveA multi-site PED study was conducted to determine the association between the NIAAA two-question alcohol screen and adolescent cannabis use disorders (CUD), cigarette smoking, and lifetime use of other drugs.MethodsParticipants included 12-17-year olds (n = 4834) treated in one of 16 participating PEDs. An assessment battery, including the NIAAA two-question screen and other measures of alcohol, tobacco and drug use, was self-administered on a tablet computer.ResultsA diagnosis of CUD, lifetime tobacco use or lifetime drug use was predicted by any self-reported alcohol use in the past year, which indicates a classification of moderate risk for middle school ages and low risk for high school ages on the NIAAA two-question screen. Drinking was most strongly predictive of a CUD, somewhat weaker for lifetime tobacco use, and weakest for lifetime drug use. This same pattern held for high school and middle school students and was stronger for high school students over middle school students for all three categories. This association was also found across gender, ethnicity and race. The association was strongest for CUD for high school students, sensitivity 81.7% (95% CI, 77.0, 86.5) and specificity 70.4% (95% CI, 68.6, 72.1). Conclusions/Importance: A single question about past year alcohol use can provide valuable information about other substance use, particularly marijuana.

The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) 2-question screen is a valid adolescent alcohol screening tool. No studies have examined if this tool predicts future alcohol problems. We conducted a study at 16 pediatric emergency departments to determine the tool's predictive validity for alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorders (AUDs). Participants (N = 4834) completed a baseline assessment battery. A subsample of participants completed the battery at 1, 2, and 3 years follow up. Of the 2209 participants assigned to follow-up, 1611 (73%) completed a 1-year follow-up, 1591 (72%) completed a 2-year follow-up, and 1377 (62%) completed a 3-year follow-up. The differences in AUDs between baseline NIAAA screen nondrinkers and lower-risk drinkers were statistically significant at 1 year (P = .0002), 2 years (P

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) 2-question alcohol screen within 16 Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network pediatric emergency departments. This article describes the study methodology, sample characteristics, and baseline outcomes of the NIAAA 2-question screen. METHODS:Participants included 12- to 17-year-olds treated in one of the participating pediatric emergency departments across the United States. After enrollment, a criterion assessment battery including the NIAAA 2-question screen and other measures of alcohol, drug use, and risk behavior was self-administered by participants on a tablet computer. Two subsamples were derived from the sample. The first subsample was readministered the NIAAA 2-question screen 1 week after their initial visit to assess test-retest reliability. The second subsample is being reassessed at 12 and 24 months to examine predictive validity of the NIAAA 2-question screen. RESULTS:There were 4834 participants enrolled into the study who completed baseline assessments. Participants were equally distributed across sex and age. Forty-six percent of the participants identified as white, and 26% identified as black. Approximately one quarter identified as Hispanic. Using the NIAAA 2-question screen algorithm, approximately 8% were classified as low risk, 12% were classified as moderate risk, and 4% were classified as highest risk. Alcohol use was less likely to be reported by black participants, non-Hispanic participants, and those younger than 16 years. DISCUSSION:This study successfully recruited a large, demographically diverse sample to establish rates of the NIAAA screen risk categories across age, sex, ethnicity, and race within pediatric emergency departments.

Objectives: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an ongoing public health issue in adolescents. the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and American Academy of Pediatrics have and continue to recommend STI screening in at-risk adolescents, however screening and testing continues to lag behind the need. We previously designed and implemented an electronic risk assessment tool to support STI testing in our pediatric emergency department. Pediatric primary care clinics may be better positioned for STI risk assessments, as they can offer greater privacy and confidentiality, a lower stress environment, and greater opportunity for longitudinal care. STI risk assessment and testing continues to be a challenge in this setting. The goal of this work was to evaluate the usability of our electronic tool to support adaptation and implementation in pediatric primary care practices. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews of pediatricians, clinic staff, and adolescents from 4 pediatric practices as part of a study whose goal is to ultimately implement STI screening in pediatric primary care. The goal of the interviews were (1) to understand contextual factors related to STI screening in primary care, which we have reported previously, and (2) to obtain feedback on our electronic platform, the questionnaire content, and their perspective on implementing it in primary care settings, which we report here. We received quantitative feedback using the System Usability Scale (SUS). The SUS is a validated, reliable tool to measure the usability of hardware, software, websites, and applications. SUS scores range from a score of 0 to 100, with a score of 68 or higher indicating above average usability. We additionally obtained qualitative feedback via interviews and used inductive analysis to identify common themes. Results: We recruited 14 physicians, 9 clinic staff, and 12 adolescents. Participants rated the tool highly using the SUS, with a median score of 92.5 (threshold for average usability is 68) and an interquartile range of 82.5 to 100. Thematically, all participants perceived a need for such a screening program and indicated the format would encourage more honest responses on the topic adolescents. We used these results to modify the questionnaire prior to implementing it into participating practices. Conclusion: We demonstrated that our electronic STI risk assessment tool had a high level of usability and could be adapted for use in pediatric primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]