Improvements in readiness to change and drinking in primary care patients with unhealthy alcohol use: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The course of alcohol consumption and cognitive dimensions of behavior change (readiness to change, importance of changing and confidence in ability to change) in primary care patients are not well described. The objective of the study was to determine changes in readiness, importance and confidence after a primary care visit, and 6-month improvements in both drinking and cognitive dimensions of behavior change, in patients with unhealthy alcohol use. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients with unhealthy alcohol use visiting primary care physicians, with repeated assessments of readiness, importance, and confidence (visual analogue scale (VAS), score range 1-10 points). Improvements 6 months later were defined as no unhealthy alcohol use or any increase in readiness, importance, or confidence. Regression models accounted for clustering by physician and adjusted for demographics, alcohol consumption and related problems, and discussion with the physician about alcohol. RESULTS: From before to immediately after the primary care physician visit, patients (n = 173) had increases in readiness (mean +1.0 point), importance (+0.2), and confidence (+0.5) (all p < 0.002). In adjusted models, discussion with the physician about alcohol was associated with increased readiness (+0.8, p = 0.04). At 6 months, many participants had improvements in drinking or readiness (62%), drinking or importance (58%), or drinking or confidence (56%). CONCLUSION: Readiness, importance and confidence improve in many patients with unhealthy alcohol use immediately after a primary care visit. Six months after a visit, most patients have improvements in either drinking or these cognitive dimensions of behavior change

A cautionary note regarding count models of alcohol consumption in randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption is commonly used as a primary outcome in randomized alcohol treatment studies. The distribution of alcohol consumption is highly skewed, particularly in subjects with alcohol dependence. METHODS: In this paper, we will consider the use of count models for outcomes in a randomized clinical trial setting. These include the Poisson, over-dispersed Poisson, negative binomial, zero-inflated Poisson and zero-inflated negative binomial. We compare the Type-I error rate of these methods in a series of simulation studies of a randomized clinical trial, and apply the methods to the ASAP (Addressing the Spectrum of Alcohol Problems) trial. RESULTS: Standard Poisson models provide a poor fit for alcohol consumption data from our motivating example, and did not preserve Type-I error rates for the randomized group comparison when the true distribution was over-dispersed Poisson. For the ASAP trial, where the distribution of alcohol consumption featured extensive over-dispersion, there was little indication of significant randomization group differences, except when the standard Poisson model was fit. CONCLUSION: As with any analysis, it is important to choose appropriate statistical models. In simulation studies and in the motivating example, the standard Poisson was not robust when fit to over-dispersed count data, and did not maintain the appropriate Type-I error rate. To appropriately model alcohol consumption, more flexible count models should be routinely employed

How Accurate Are Blood (or Breath) Tests for Identifying Self-Reported Heavy Drinking Among People with Alcohol Dependence?

AIMS: Managing patients with alcohol dependence includes assessment for heavy drinking, typically by asking patients. Some recommend biomarkers to detect heavy drinking but evidence of accuracy is limited. METHODS: Among people with dependence, we assessed the performance of disialo-carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (%dCDT, ≥1.7%), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT, ≥66 U/l), either %dCDT or GGT positive, and breath alcohol (> 0) for identifying 3 self-reported heavy drinking levels: any heavy drinking (≥4 drinks/day or >7 drinks/week for women, ≥5 drinks/day or >14 drinks/week for men), recurrent (≥5 drinks/day on ≥5 days) and persistent heavy drinking (≥5 drinks/day on ≥7 consecutive days). Subjects (n = 402) with dependence and current heavy drinking were referred to primary care and assessed 6 months later with biomarkers and validated self-reported calendar method assessment of past 30-day alcohol use. RESULTS: The self-reported prevalence of any, recurrent and persistent heavy drinking was 54, 34 and 17%. Sensitivity of %dCDT for detecting any, recurrent and persistent self-reported heavy drinking was 41, 53 and 66%. Specificity was 96, 90 and 84%, respectively. %dCDT had higher sensitivity than GGT and breath test for each alcohol use level but was not adequately sensitive to detect heavy drinking (missing 34-59% of the cases). Either %dCDT or GGT positive improved sensitivity but not to satisfactory levels, and specificity decreased. Neither a breath test nor GGT was sufficiently sensitive (both tests missed 70-80% of cases). CONCLUSIONS: Although biomarkers may provide some useful information, their sensitivity is low the incremental value over self-report in clinical settings is questionable

Improvements in readiness to change and drinking in primary care patients with unhealthy alcohol use: a prospective study

BACKGROUND. The course of alcohol consumption and cognitive dimensions of behavior change (readiness to change, importance of changing and confidence in ability to change) in primary care patients are not well described. The objective of the study was to determine changes in readiness, importance and confidence after a primary care visit, and 6-month improvements in both drinking and cognitive dimensions of behavior change, in patients with unhealthy alcohol use. METHODS. Prospective cohort study of patients with unhealthy alcohol use visiting primary care physicians, with repeated assessments of readiness, importance, and confidence (visual analogue scale (VAS), score range 1–10 points). Improvements 6 months later were defined as no unhealthy alcohol use or any increase in readiness, importance, or confidence. Regression models accounted for clustering by physician and adjusted for demographics, alcohol consumption and related problems, and discussion with the physician about alcohol. RESULTS. From before to immediately after the primary care physician visit, patients (n = 173) had increases in readiness (mean +1.0 point), importance (+0.2), and confidence (+0.5) (all p < 0.002). In adjusted models, discussion with the physician about alcohol was associated with increased readiness (+0.8, p = 0.04). At 6 months, many participants had improvements in drinking or readiness (62%), drinking or importance (58%), or drinking or confidence (56%). CONCLUSION. Readiness, importance and confidence improve in many patients with unhealthy alcohol use immediately after a primary care visit. Six months after a visit, most patients have improvements in either drinking or these cognitive dimensions of behavior change.Swiss National Science Foundation; Fondation Suisse de Recherche sur I'Alcool; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Generalist Faculty Physician Scholar Award

Drinking to toxicity: college students referred for emergency medical evaluation

Background: In 2009, a university adopted a policy of emergency department transport of students appearing intoxicated on campus. The objective was to describe the change in ED referrals after policy initiation and describe a group of students at risk for acute alcohol-related morbidity. Methods: A retrospective cohort of university students during academic years 2007–2011 (September–June) transported to local ED’s was evaluated. Data were compared 2 years prior to initiation of the policy and 3 years after and included total number of ED transports and blood or breath alcohol level. Results: 971 Students were transported to local ED’s. The mean number of yearly transports 2 years prior to policy initiation was 131 and 3 years after was 236 (56 % increase, p < 0.01). 92 % had a blood or breath alcohol level obtained. The mean alcohol level was 193 mg/dL. Twenty percent of students had alcohol levels greater than 250 mg/dL. Conclusions: Adoption of a university alcohol policy was followed by a significant increase in ED transports of intoxicated students. College students identified as intoxicated frequently drank to toxicity

Readmission Rates of Patients Discharged against Medical Advice: A Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE: We compared the readmission rates and the pattern of readmission among patients discharged against medical advice (AMA) to control patients discharged with approval over a one-year follow-up period. METHODS: A retrospective matched-cohort study of 656 patients(328 were discharged AMA) who were followed for one year after their initial hospitalization at an urban university-affiliated teaching hospital in Vancouver, Canada that serves a population with high prevalence of addiction and psychiatric disorders. Multivariate conditional logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of discharge AMA on 14-day related diagnosis hospital readmission. We fit a multivariate conditional negative binomial regression model to examine the readmission frequency ratio between the AMA and non-AMA group. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: AMA patients were more likely to be homeless (32.3% vs. 11%) and have co-morbid conditions such as psychiatric illnesses, injection drug use, HIV, hepatitis C and previous gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients discharged AMA were more likely to be readmitted: 25.6% vs. 3.4%, p<0.001 by day 14. The AMA group were more likely to be readmitted within 14 days with a related diagnosis than the non-AMA group (Adjusted Odds Ratio 12.0; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.7-38.9). Patients who left AMA were more likely to be readmitted multiple times at one year compared to the non-AMA group (adjusted frequency ratio 1.6; 95% CI: 1.3-2.0). There was also higher all-cause in-hospital mortality during the 12-month follow-up in the AMA group compared to non-AMA group (6.7% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients discharged AMA were more likely to be homeless and have multiple co-morbid conditions. At one year follow-up, the AMA group had higher readmission rates, were predisposed to multiple readmissions and had a higher in-hospital mortality. Interventions to reduce discharges AMA in high-risk groups need to be developed and tested