Search

Objective The purpose of routine alcohol screening is to identify patients who may benefit from brief intervention, but patients who also have alcohol and other substance use disorders (AUD/SUD) likely require more intensive interventions. This study sought to determine the prevalence of clinically documented AUD/SUD among VA outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use identified by routine screening. Methods VA patients 18–90 years who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥3 women; ≥4 men) and were randomly selected for quality improvement standardized medical record review (6/06–6/10) were included. Gender-stratified prevalences of clinically documented AUD/SUD (diagnosis of AUD, SUD, or alcohol-specific medical conditions, or VA specialty addictions treatment on the date of or 365 days prior to screening) were estimated and compared across AUDIT-C risk groups, and then repeated across groups further stratified by age. Results Among 63,397 eligible patients with unhealthy alcohol use, 25% (n = 2109) women and 28% (n = 15,199) men had documented AUD/SUD (p

The US Veterans Health Administration [Veterans Affairs (VA)] used performance measures and electronic clinical reminders to implement brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. We evaluated whether documented brief intervention was associated with subsequent changes in drinking during early implementation.Observational, retrospective cohort study using secondary clinical and administrative data.Thirty VA facilities.Outpatients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use [Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C ≥ 5)] in the 6 months after the brief intervention performance measure (n = 22 214) and had follow-up screening 9-15 months later (n = 6210; 28%).Multi-level logistic regression estimated the adjusted prevalence of resolution of unhealthy alcohol use (follow-up AUDIT-C5 with ≥2 point reduction) for patients with and without documented brief intervention (documented advice to reduce or abstain from drinking).Among 6210 patients with follow-up alcohol screening, 1751 (28%) had brief intervention and 2922 (47%) resolved unhealthy alcohol use at follow-up. Patients with documented brief intervention were older and more likely to have other substance use disorders, mental health conditions, poor health and more severe unhealthy alcohol use than those without (P-values 0.05). Adjusted prevalences of resolution were 47% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 42-52%] and 48% (95% CI = 42-54%) for patients with and without documented brief intervention, respectively (P = 0.50).During early implementation of brief intervention in the US Veterans Health Administration, documented brief intervention was not associated with subsequent changes in drinking among outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use and repeat alcohol screening.

Background Medicare reimburses providers for annual alcohol screening. However, the benefit of rescreening patients a year after a negative screen for alcohol misuse is unknown. We hypothesized that some subgroups of patients who screen negative would have a very low probability of converting to a positive subsequent screen (e.g.

A model for teaching an instructor-led group class is proposed that maximizes students' experiential participation while attempting to safeguard their right to privacy and informed consent.

Implementation of alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is a prevention priority. The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System uses a clinical reminder (CR) in the electronic medical record to prompt and document results of screening and trigger a subsequent CR for BI when screening is positive. Although screening rates are over 90%, marked variability in screening quality has been documented. Four researchers observed clinician interactions with CRs during alcohol screening at nine primary care clinics in the northwest US to identify barriers and facilitators to using CRs to implement quality screening. Observers took handwritten notes, which were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively using an a priori coding template adapted during analyses. We observed 58 support staff (25 registered nurses, 26 licensed practical nurses, and seven health technicians) caring for 166 patients. Alcohol screening prompted by the CR was often uncomfortable and of low quality. Clinicians often offered disclaimers prior to screening or made adjustments to how questions were presented, with some citing the sensitive nature of the questions. Verbal screening typically did not include asking questions verbatim. There was substantial variability in methods of conducting screening across clinics, with some using the CR to facilitate in-person screening by interview and others entering patient responses into the CR after completion of a paper-based screen. Although the CR was designed to trigger a subsequent CR for BI when positive, some clinics used paper encounter forms for this. Findings suggest that VA CRs have important limitations as a method of facilitating effective, high-quality alcohol screening. Barriers observed reflect a combination of limitations of CR technology (and the alcohol screening CR specifically), ways the CR was implemented, clinical workflow, complexity of patient needs, and alcohol-related stigma. Future research should address these barriers to effectively implement recommended care.

Alcohol misuse is associated with poor adherence to recommended self-care behaviors, which are critical for diabetes management. This study investigated whether scores on a validated brief alcohol misuse screen are associated with diabetes self-care.Male outpatients (n=3,930) from seven Veterans Affairs sites returned the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) alcohol screen on mailed surveys and indicated they had diabetes. Patients were divided into five alcohol screening groups: no past year alcohol use (AUDIT-C 0), low-level alcohol use (AUDIT-C 1-3); and mild (AUDIT-C 4-5), moderate (AUDIT-C 6-7), and severe (AUDIT-C 8-12) misuse. Outcomes included self-report of monitoring blood glucose, maintaining normal blood glucose levels, inspecting feet, following a meal plan, not smoking, and laboratory data indicating that glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) had been tested in the past year. For each group, the proportion of patients adherent to each behavior were estimated from logistic regression models adjusted for demographics, comorbidity, and depressive symptoms.Patients who did not drink were most likely to report adherence to self-care behaviors, except for past-year HbA1c testing. Compared to patients who did not drink, patients with AUDIT-C scores ?6 were significantly less likely to report maintaining normal blood glucose levels (eg, AUDIT-C 6-7 44% versus AUDIT-C 0 59%) or following a meal plan (48% versus 58%), and were more likely to smoke (71% abstained versus 85%) in adjusted analyses.Results of this study indicate that higher alcohol screening scores are associated with poorer diabetes self-care.

Little is known about follow-up care for alcohol misuse in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system among Operations Enduring and Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) veterans with and without alcohol use disorders (AUD) and/or posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Using data from 4725 OEF/OIF VA outpatients with alcohol screening (2006–2010), we compared the prevalence of follow-up for alcohol misuse—brief intervention (BI) or referral to treatment—among patients with and without AUD and/or PTSD. Among 933 (19.7%) patients with alcohol misuse (AUDIT-C ≥5), 77.0% had AUD and/or PTSD. Rates of BI or referral for alcohol misuse were higher among patients with AUD (76.9%) and both AUD and PTSD (70.1%) compared to those with PTSD only (53.1%) and neither AUD nor PTSD (52.3%). Among OEF/OIF VA outpatients with alcohol misuse, those with AUD had higher rates of follow-up for alcohol misuse than those without, but PTSD was not associated with differential follow-up.

United States rural residents tend toward poorer health than urban residents. Although alcohol use is associated with multiple medical conditions and can be reduced via brief primary care-based interventions, it is unknown whether alcohol consumption differs by rurality among primary care patients. We sought to describe alcohol consumption among urban, suburban, and rural Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatients.Outpatients from 7 VA facilities responded to mailed surveys that included the validated Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C) screening questionnaire. The ZIP code approximation of the US Department of Agriculture's rural-urban commuting area (RUCA) codes classified participants into urban, suburban, and rural areas. For each area, adjusted logistic regression models estimated the prevalence of past-year abstinence among all participants and unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥ 3 for women and ≥ 4 for men) among drinkers.Among 33,883 outpatients, 14,967 (44%) reported abstinence. Among 18,916 drinkers, 8,524 (45%) screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use. The adjusted prevalence of abstinence was lowest in urban residents (43%, 95% CI 42%-43%) with significantly higher rates in both suburban and rural residents [45% (44%-46%) and 46% (45%-47%), respectively]. No significant differences were observed in the adjusted prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use among drinkers.Abstinence is slightly more common among rural and suburban than urban VA outpatients, but unhealthy alcohol use does not vary by rurality. As the VA and other health systems implement evidence-based care for unhealthy alcohol use, more research is needed to identify whether preventive strategies targeted to high-risk areas are needed.

Evidence-based brief interventions for primary care patients with at-risk drinking include personalized feedback on alcohol-related risks, yet little is known about associations between alcohol screening scores and outcomes among women. This study evaluated associations between scores on the three-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaire and self-reported alcohol-related risks and consequences among veteran women.Female outpatients from an urban Veterans Affairs facility were mailed annual surveys (1998-2000) (response rates: 65% Years 1 and 2, 55% Year 3). Measures were obtained from each respondent's first completed survey and included a gender-specific AUDIT-C (0-12 points), self-reported alcohol-related consequences, problem drinking or other drug use, and health risks. The prevalence of each outcome across AUDIT-C score groups (0, 1-2, 3, 4, 5-7, 8-12) was estimated using logistic regression, adjusting for age, race, and marital status.Among 2,670 respondents, 23.7% screened positive for alcohol misuse (AUDIT-C ≥3). For three out of the five alcohol-related consequences (tolerance, blackouts, felt needed to cut down), adjusted prevalence increased at AUDIT-C scores of 3 or more. The remaining alcohol-related consequences (morning eye openers, family/friends worried) increased at scores of 4 or more, as did self-reported problem drinking or other drug use. Associations between health risks (two or more sexual partners, sexually transmitted diseases, injuries, domestic violence, hepatitis/cirrhosis) and AUDIT-C scores were less consistent, but prevalence generally increased at scores of 5 or more.Increasing scores on the AUDIT-C reflect increasing prevalence of self-reported alcohol-related risks and consequences among women. These results provide clinicians with gender-specific information on alcohol-related risks that could be incorporated into brief interventions.

Alcohol consumption is a risk factor for traumatic injury, but it is unknown whether responses to alcohol screening questionnaires administered routinely in primary care are associated with subsequent hospitalization for traumatic injury.We evaluated the association between alcohol screening scores and the risk for subsequent hospitalizations for trauma among Veterans Affairs (VA) general medicine patients.This study included VA outpatients (n = 32,623) at seven sites who returned mailed surveys (1997-1999). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C) scores grouped patients into six drinking categories representing nondrinkers, screen-negative drinkers, and drinkers who screened positive for mild, moderate, severe, and very severe alcohol misuse (scores 0, 1-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, 10-12, respectively). VA administrative and Medicare data identified primary discharge diagnoses for trauma. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of trauma-related hospitalization for each drinking group adjusted for demographics, smoking, and comorbidity.Compared with screen-negative drinkers, patients with severe and very severe alcohol misuse (AUDIT-C 8-9 and ≥10) were at significantly increased risk for trauma-related hospitalization over the follow-up period (adjusted hazard ratios AUDIT-C: 8-9 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31- 3.24 and AUDIT-C≥10 2.13, 95% CI 1.32-3.42).Patients with severe and very severe alcohol misuse had a twofold increased risk of hospital admission for trauma compared to drinkers without alcohol misuse.Alcohol screening scores could be used to provide feedback to patients regarding risk of trauma-related hospitalization. Findings could be used by providers during brief alcohol-related interventions with patients with alcohol misuse.

Background The VA Healthcare System has made progress implementing evidence-based care for unhealthy alcohol use, but whether there are differences in care across race/ethnicity is unclear. We describe alcohol-related care for 3 racial/ethnic groups among VA outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use. Methods This cross-sectional study utilized secondary quality improvement data collected for the VA Office of Quality and Performance (July 2006 to June 2007) to identify a sample of 9,194 black (n = 1,436), Hispanic (n = 500), and white (n = 7,258) VA outpatients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C score ≥4 men; ≥3 women). Alcohol-related care was defined as medical record documentation of brief intervention (advice or feedback) and/or referral (discussion of or scheduled). Logistic regression models estimated the prevalence of alcohol-related care among black, Hispanic, and white patients after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics, alcohol use severity, other substance use, and mental health comorbidity. Results Among all eligible patients, 2,903 (32%) had documented alcohol-related care. Adjusted prevalences were 35.3% (95% CI 30.0 to 40.5) for black, 27.3% (95% CI 21.1 to 33.5) for Hispanic, and 28.9% (95% CI 25.5 to 32.3) for white patients. Differences in documented alcohol-related care between all racial/ethnic groups were significant (p-values all

Background Alcohol screening and brief interventions (BIs) are ranked the third highest US prevention priority, but effective methods of implementing BI into routine care have not been described. Objectives This study evaluated the prevalence of documented BI among Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatients with alcohol misuse before, during, and after implementation of a national performance measure (PM) linked to incentives and dissemination of an electronic clinical reminder (CR) for BI. Methods VA outpatients were included in this study if they were randomly sampled for national medical record reviews and screened positive for alcohol misuse (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption score ≥5) between July 2006 and September 2008 (N=6788). Consistent with the PM, BI was defined as documented advice to reduce or abstain from drinking plus feedback linking drinking to health. The prevalence of BI was evaluated among outpatients who screened positive for alcohol misuse during 4 successive phases of BI implementation: baseline year (n=3504), after announcement (n=753) and implementation (n=697) of the PM, and after CR dissemination (n=1834), unadjusted and adjusted for patient characteristics. Results Among patients with alcohol misuse, the adjusted prevalence of BI increased significantly over successive phases of BI implementation, from 5.5% (95% CI 4.1%-7.5%), 7.6% (5.6%-10.3%), 19.1% (15.4%-23.7%), to 29.0% (25.0%-33.4%) during the baseline year, after PM announcement, PM implementation, and CR dissemination, respectively (test for trend P Conclusions A national PM supported by dissemination of an electronic CR for BI was associated with meaningful increases in the prevalence of documented brief alcohol interventions.

Brief intervention for patients with unhealthy alcohol use is a prevention priority in the United States, but most eligible patients do not receive it. This study evaluated an electronic alcohol-counseling clinical reminder at a single Veterans Affairs general medicine clinic.The systems-level intervention evaluated in this study consisted of making the clinical reminder, which facilitated medical record documentation of brief intervention among patients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use, available to providers on one (of two) randomly selected hallways. Secondary electronic data were extracted for all patients who visited the clinic (October 1, 2002, to September 30, 2005). The proportion of patients with clinical-reminder use was evaluated among patients who screened positive for unhealthy drinking and were assigned to intervention hallway providers ("descriptive cohort"). Adjusted logistic regression evaluated the association between the intervention and resolution of unhealthy drinking at follow-up among all screen-positive patients who completed a second Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption questionnaire 18 months or longer after the first ("outcomes cohort").Eligible patients (N= 22,863) included 10,392 controls and 12,471 in the intervention group. Fifteen percent (398 of 2,640) of descriptive cohort patients with unhealthy drinking had clinical-reminder use, which varied by severity (14% [n = 302 of 2,165] with mild/moderate and 20% [n = 96 of 475] with severe unhealthy drinking,p = .001). Only 39% (156 of 398) of patients with clinical-reminder use had documented brief intervention; advice to abstain was most common. Access to the clinical reminder was not significantly associated with resolution of unhealthy drinking in 1,358 patients in the outcomes cohort.Availability of a clinical reminder to facilitate brief intervention did not, alone, result in substantial use of the clinical reminder. More active implementation efforts may be needed to get brief interventions onto the agenda of busy primary care providers.

Objective: Unhealthy alcohol use is common in medical inpatients, and hospitalization has been hypothesized to serve as a “teachable moment” that could motivate patients to decrease drinking, but studies of hospital-based brief interventions have often not found decreases. Evaluating associations between physical health and subsequent drinking among medical inpatients with unhealthy alcohol use could inform refinement of hospital-based brief interventions by identifying an important foundation on which to build them. We tested associations between poor physical health and drinking after hospitalization and whether associations varied by alcohol dependence status and readiness to change. Methods: Participants were medical inpatients who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use and consented to participate in a randomized trial of brief intervention (n = 341). Five measures of physical health were independent variables. Outcomes were abstinence and the number of heavy drinking days (HDDs) reported in the 30 days prior to interviews 3 months after hospitalization. Separate regression models were fit to evaluate each independent variable controlling for age, gender, randomization group, and baseline alcohol use. Interactions between each independent variable and alcohol dependence and readiness to change were tested. Stratified models were fit when significant interactions were identified. Results: Among all participants, measures of physical health were not significantly associated with either abstinence or number of HDDs at 3 months. Having an alcohol-attributable principal admitting diagnosis was significantly associated with fewer HDDs in patients who were nondependent [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 0.10, 95% CI 0.03–0.32] or who had low alcohol problem perception (aIRR 0.36, 95% CI 0.13–0.99) at hospital admission. No significant association between alcohol-attributable principal admitting diagnosis and number of HDDs was identified for participants with alcohol dependence or high problem perception. Conclusions: Among medical inpatients with nondependent unhealthy alcohol use and those who do not view their drinking as problematic, alcohol-attributable illness may catalyze decreased drinking. Brief interventions that highlight alcohol-related illness might be more successful.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has successfully implemented evidence-based alcohol misuse screening with the AUDIT-C. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical alcohol screening during the first year after implementation. Using medical record review and mailed patient surveys collected during 2004 by VHA Office of Quality and Performance, this study analyzed concordance of screening results among patients with AUDIT-Cs in both data sources. Among 1,637 patients with AUDIT-C from both sources within 90 days, the medical record screening prevalence rate of alcohol misuse, 24.6% (95% CI: 22.5% to 26.7%), was significantly lower than the survey rate, 33.4% (31.1% to 35.7%). Of 8,312 patients identified as nondrinkers in medical records, 24% reported past year alcohol use and 5% screened positive for alcohol misuse on surveys. Lower rates of alcohol use and misuse documented in medical records compared to mailed surveys suggest further investigation and standardization of clinical screening are necessary.

Brief alcohol counseling is a top US prevention priority but has not been widely implemented. The lack of an easy performance measure for brief alcohol counseling is one important barrier to implementation. The purpose of this report is to outline important issues related to measuring performance of brief alcohol counseling in health care settings. We review the strengths and limitations of several options for measuring performance of brief alcohol counseling and describe three measures of brief alcohol counseling tested in the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System. We conclude that administrative data are not well-suited to measuring performance of brief alcohol counseling. Patient surveys appear to offer the optimal approach currently available for comparing performance of brief alcohol counseling across health care systems, while more options are available for measuring performance within health care systems. Further research is needed in this important area of quality improvement.

The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) is a brief validated screen for risky drinking and alcohol abuse and dependence (alcohol misuse). However, the AUDIT-C was validated in predominantly White populations, and its performance in different racial/ethnic groups is unclear.To evaluate the validity of the AUDIT-C among primary care patients from the predominant racial/ethnic subgroups within the United States: White, African American, and Hispanic.Cross-sectional interview validation study.1,292 outpatients from an academic family practice clinic in Texas (90% of randomly sampled eligible).Race/ethnicity was self-reported. Areas under the receiver operating curve (AuROCs) evaluated overall AUDIT-C performance in the 3 racial/ethnic groups compared to diagnostic interviews for alcohol misuse. AUDIT-C sensitivities and specificities at recommended screening thresholds were compared across racial/ethnic groups. AuROCs were greater than 0.85 in all 3 groups, with no significant differences across racial/ethnic groups in men (P = .43) or women (P = .12). At previously recommended cut points, there were statistically significant differences by race in AUDIT-C sensitivities but not specificities. In women, the sensitivity was higher in Hispanic (85%) than in African-American (67%; P = .03) or White (70%; P = .04) women. In men, the sensitivity was higher in White (95%) than in African-American men (76%; P = .01), with no significant difference from Hispanic men (85%; P = .11).The overall performance of the AUDIT-C was excellent in all 3 racial/ethnic groups as reflected by high AuROCs. At recommended cut points, there were significant differences in the AUDIT-C's sensitivity but not in specificity across the 3 racial/ethnic groups.

Background: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C) questions have been previously validated as a 3-item screen for alcohol misuse and implemented nationwide in Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatient clinics. However, the AUDIT-C's validity and optimal screening threshold(s) in other clinical populations are unknown. Methods: This cross-sectional validation study compared screening questionnaires with standardized interviews in 392 male and 927 female adult outpatients at an academic family practice clinic from 1993 to 1994. The AUDIT-C, full AUDIT, self-reported risky drinking, AUDIT question #3, and an augmented CAGE questionnaire were compared with an interview primary reference standard of alcohol misuse, defined as a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4th ed. alcohol use disorder and/or drinking above recommended limits in the past year. Results: Based on interviews with 92% of eligible patients, 128 (33%) men and 177 (19%) women met the criteria for alcohol misuse. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for the AUDIT-C were 0.94 (0.91, 0.96) and 0.90 (0.87, 0.93) in men and women, respectively (p=0.04). Based on AUROC curves, the AUDIT-C performed as well as the full AUDIT and significantly better than self-reported risky drinking, AUDIT question #3, or the augmented CAGE questionnaire (p-values

Background: Assessing readiness to change is recommended as part of brief interventions for patients with unhealthy alcohol use. However, the utility and predictive validity of readiness measures have not been well established. Methods: In a prospective cohort study, we assessed primary care patients with unhealthy alcohol use (past-month drinking of risky amounts, or any amount and an affirmative response to CAGE alcohol screening questionnaire) and reassessed them 6 months later. At study entry, we assessed readiness to change using 1 multi-item measure of stage of change, and 5 single-item measures (readiness per se, importance of changing, confidence in ability to change, intention to cut down, intention to abstain). Outcomes included alcohol consumption and alcohol-related consequences. Multivariable regression models were fit for each measure of readiness and each outcome. Results: Of 312 patients with unhealthy alcohol use, 228 (73%) were assessed at study entry and 6 months later and had complete data. Among readiness measures, only confidence and intention to abstain (1 point changes on single-item measures) were associated with consumption 6 months later: less heavy episodic drinking [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.98 and AOR 0.79, 0.64–0.98, respectively], and less drinking of risky amounts (AOR 0.89, 0.79–1.00 and AOR 0.78, 0.62–0.98, respectively). Intention to abstain was also associated with more abstinence (AOR 1.43, 1.09–1.88). Single-item measures of readiness, importance, and intention to cut down were significantly associated with higher odds of alcohol consequences. Greater confidence (single item) was associated with a lower odds of any consequences (AOR 0.88, 0.79–0.98). Conclusions: Greater readiness, as measured by several brief assessments, was associated with more consequences and was not predictive of consumption. However, assessing confidence in the ability to change one's alcohol use may have a role in predicting subsequent decreases in both consumption and consequences in primary care patients.

Despite evidence-based guidelines, brief alcohol screening and counseling have not been routinely integrated into most primary care practices in the United States.To describe the results of the implementation of evidence-based alcohol screening by the Veterans Health Administration (VA) in 2004, as the first step toward implementation of brief alcohol counseling.This observational study of outpatients from all 21 VA networks relied on the following 2 data sources from the VA Office of Quality and Performance: (1) Medical record reviews, designed to compare VA networks quarterly, evaluated whether established VA patients had documented screening for alcohol misuse and documented follow-up assessment for alcohol use disorders among those who screened positive for alcohol misuse (January-March 2005); and (2) Mailed patient satisfaction surveys from 2004, which oversampled patients new to the VA (response rate,70%), included the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) questions and asked about past-year advice "to drink less or not to drink alcohol" from a VA provider.Based on 10 115 medical record reviews, 93% (range, 89%-96% across networks) of outpatients were screened for alcohol misuse, and 25% (range, 11%-36%) screened positive. Among screen-positive patients, 42% (range, 5%-84%) had documented follow-up assessment, but absolute numbers of screen-positive patients evaluated were small (27-80 patients per network). Based on 235 481 patient surveys, the prevalence of alcohol misuse was 22% (range, 15%-27% across networks), and 28% (range, 20%- 36%) of screen-positive patients reported receiving alcohol-related advice. Alcohol-related advice increased as AUDIT-C scores increased.The VA successfully implemented evidence-based alcohol screening, but the rate of follow-up among screen-positive patients remained low.

PURPOSE Readiness to change drinking may influence the content or effectiveness of brief alcohol counseling. This study was designed to assess readiness to change and its relationship to alcohol misuse severity among primary care patients whose screening questionnaire was positive for alcohol misuse. METHODS This study was a cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 2 consecutive mailed questionnaires. Male outpatients at 7 Veterans Affairs (VA) general medicine clinics were eligible if they returned both questionnaires, screened positive for alcohol misuse (augmented CAGE Questionnaire ≥1 point), responded to 3 readiness-to-change questions, and completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). A validated algorithm based on 3 standardized questions categorized participants into 3 readiness groups (precontemplation, contemplation, action). Measures of alcohol misuse severity included AUDIT, CAGE, and the 3 consumption questions from the AUDIT (AUDIT-C). Analyses were descriptive; linear-by-linear associations between alcohol misuse severity and readiness were tested with χ2 statistics. RESULTS Response rates to the first and second surveys were 59% and 55%, respectively. Of the 6,419 eligible outpatients who screened positive for alcohol misuse, 4,797 (75%) reported any readiness to change (contemplation 24%, action 51%). Among patients with AUDIT scores >8, more than 90% indicated that they drank more than they should and/or had contemplated drinking less. Greater readiness was significantly associated with greater alcohol misuse severity (P

Purpose: Russia has high per capita alcohol consumption and an injection-drug-use-driven HIV epidemic. However, the role of alcohol in the spread of HIV infection in Russia is largely unexplored. Thus, we assessed recent alcohol use and associated HIV risk behaviors among HIV-infected persons in St. Petersburg, Russia. Methods: We recruited HIV-infected hospitalized patients from the Botkin Infectious Disease Hospital between June 2001 and March 2002. Interviewers assessed alcohol and drug use with the addiction severity index (ASI) and sex- and drug-risk behaviors with the risk assessment battery (RAB). Lifetime abuse or dependence diagnoses for alcohol and drugs were established by a physician with addiction medicine training. Results: Among 201 subjects, diagnoses of abuse or dependence (AB/DEP) were common: 9% (19/201) had only alcohol AB/DEP; 39% (78/201) had alcohol and drug AB/DEP; 47% (95/201) had only drug AB/DEP; and 4% (9/201) had no diagnosis of alcohol or drug AB/DEP. Sex- and drugrisk behaviors varied significantly by substance use diagnosis. Subjects with any alcohol AB/DEP had higher sex-risk RAB scores than those with drug only AB/DEP (6.1 versus 3.9, p < .0001). Among subjects with any diagnosis of drug AB/DEP, having in addition an alcohol diagnosis was associated with unclean needle use in the last six months (33% (26/78) versus 21% (20/95), p = 0.08). Conclusions: Lifetime alcohol diagnoses of abuse or dependence were present in nearly one-half of hospitalized HIV-infected patients in St. Petersburg, Russia and were associated with significantly higher sex-risk behaviors and borderline significantly higher drug-risk behaviors. As HIV infection spreads rapidly in Russia and Eastern Europe, these data support the need for HIV risk-reduction interventions in alcohol abusing populations and raise the potential of benefit by addressing alcohol use in HIV-infected populations.

protocol was facilitated by providing monetary compensation for attendance and for returning blister packs. Supervised urines were obtained thrice weekly. The primary outcome was relapse (i.e., 2 consecutive urines positive for cocaine). Results: Logistic regression showed the odds ratio (OR) of the SERT group vs. the placebo group to be 0.64 (p

Evaluation of SBI implementation requires validated measures for monitoring drinking outcomes. The AUDIT-C is a validated alcohol screen, but the AUDIT-C’s validity as a measure of changes in drinking is unknown. This study evaluated whether changes in AUDIT-C scores at repeat annual screening have predictive validity in patients with and without documented BI (which could motivate under-reporting at follow-up).

Medication nonadherence is common and is associated with adverse outcomes. Alcohol misuse may be a risk factor for nonadherence; however, evidence is limited.To identify whether alcohol misuse, as identified by a simple screening tool, is associated in a dose-response manner with increased risk for medication nonadherence in veterans attending primary care clinics.Secondary analysis of cohort data collected prospectively from 1997 to 2000 as part of a randomized, controlled trial.7 Veterans Affairs primary care clinics.5473 patients taking a statin, 3468 patients taking oral hypoglycemic agents, and 13 729 patients taking antihypertensive medications.Patients completed the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaire, a validated 3-question alcohol misuse screening test. Their scores were categorized into nondrinkers; low-level alcohol use; and mild, moderate, and severe alcohol misuse. Medication adherence, defined as having medications available for at least 80% of the observation days, was measured from pharmacy records for either 90 days or 1 year after the alcohol screening date. Logistic regression was used to estimate the predicted proportions of adherent patients in each AUDIT-C group and adjusted for demographic and clinical covariates.The proportion of patients treated for hypertension and hyperlipidemia who were nonadherent increased with higher AUDIT-C scores. For 1-year adherence to statins, the percentage of adherent patients was lower in the 2 highest alcohol misuse groups (adjusted percentage of adherent patients, 58% [95% CI, 52% to 65%] and 55% [CI, 47% to 63%]) than in the nondrinker group (66% [CI, 64% to 68%]). For 1-year adherence to antihypertensive regimens, the percentage of adherent patients was lower in the 3 highest alcohol misuse groups (adjusted percentage of adherent patients, 61% [CI, 58% to 64%]; 60% [CI, 56% to 63%]; and 56% [CI, 52% to 60%]) than in the nondrinker group (64% [CI, 63% to 65%]). No statistically significant differences were observed for oral hypoglycemics in adjusted analyses.This observational study cannot address whether changes in drinking lead to changes in adherence and may not be generalizable to other populations.Alcohol misuse, as measured by a brief screening questionnaire, was associated with increased risk for medication nonadherence.

Methods We conducted qualitative interviews with Latino day laborers and social services to inform the cultural adaptation of screening and brief interventions. Interviews and focus groups were conducted by trained bilingual research staff. Recordings were transcribed; then transcripts were coded and analyzed in Atlas.ti. Each transcript was coded by two members of the research staff. Case summaries and coded quotations were reviewed for prevalent themes. Themes were used to identify sources of mismatch between traditional screening and brief intervention (SBI) and the target population. The adapted intervention was then pilot-tested to assess the feasibility and potential effectiveness. In the pilot test, 104 men were screened using the AUDIT, and men with a score ≥ 6 were offered a brief intervention (56%). Those receiving an intervention completed follow-up surveys at 2 and 8 eight weeks. Alcohol use was assessed using the AUDIT and 14 day timeline follow-back.

Background In the context of routine population-based alcohol screening to identify primary care (PC) patients who might benefit from brief intervention, many patients identified will have alcohol use disorders (AUD) [1] and will likely require more intensive treatments. FDA approved medications are recommended to treat AUD [2] and could be offered in PC. Currently, use of AUD medications is extremely rare. [3] This qualitative study sought to understand barriers and facilitators to prescribing AUD medications in PC.

Background Veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) are at increased risk for alcohol misuse, and innovative methods are needed to improve their access to alcohol screening and brief interventions (SBI). This study adapted an electronic SBI (e-SBI) website shown to be efficacious in college students for OEF/OIF veterans and reported findings from interviews with OEF/OIF veterans about their impressions of the e-SBI. Methods Outpatient veterans of OEF/OIF who drank ≥3 days in the past week were recruited from a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Deployment Health Clinic waiting room. Veterans privately pretested the anonymous e-SBI then completed individual semistructured audio-recorded interviews. Their responses were analyzed using template analysis to explore domains identified a priori as well as emergent domains. Results During interviews, all nine OEF/OIF veterans (1 woman and 8 men) indicated they had received feedback for risky alcohol consumption. Participants generally liked the standard-drinks image, alcohol-related caloric and monetary feedback, and the website’s brevity and anonymity (a priori domains). They also experienced challenges with portions of the e-SBI assessment and viewed feedback regarding alcohol risk and normative drinking as problematic, but described potential benefits derived from the e-SBI (emergent domains). The most appealing e-SBIs would ensure anonymity and provide personalized transparent feedback about alcohol-related risk, consideration of the context for drinking, strategies to reduce drinking, and additional resources for veterans with more severe alcohol misuse. Conclusions Results of this qualitative exploratory study suggest e-SBI may be an acceptable strategy for increasing OEF/OIF veteran access to evidenced-based alcohol SBI.