Alcohol dependence : barriers to treatment and new approaches in primary care

Alcohol dependence is highly prevalent worldwide, with an estimated prevalence of 4 % in the Swedish adult population. However, alcohol dependence has one of the largest gaps between the number of individuals affected and the number in treatment, where less than one in five seek treatment. The overarching aim of this thesis was to study possible strategies to reduce this treatment gap. In study I, the aim was to investigate which type of treatment for alcohol problems, and setting, that was preferred in the general population. Also, reasons for not seeking treatment. In a cross-sectional design, 9005 individuals representative of the general population between 16-80 years of age were interviewed. The results showed that a majority of the participants preferred treatment for alcohol problems within the health care system, while only 5 % preferred the social services. Support groups, psychotherapy and residential treatment were the most endorsed types of treatments. Shame was the most common reason given for not seeking treatment. In study II, the aim was to describe how individuals with alcohol dependence perceive treatment for alcohol use disorders and their reasons for seeking and not seeking treatment. 32 participants aged 18-62 with alcohol dependence were recruited via a market research company. Data was collected through focus group interviews and individual interviews. The results showed that shame and stigma were important barriers for seeking treatment. Additional barriers were; the perception that treatment meant accepting a goal of lifetime abstinence, low level of knowledge of health consequences associated with alcohol use and also low level of knowledge about treatment. Psychotherapy was the most preferred form of treatment. In study III, the effects of treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care were investigated. 288 adults with alcohol dependence were randomized to treatment in primary care with the 15-method, a brief treatment adapted for generalist settings, or treatment at a specialized addiction unit. The hypothesis was that treatment in primary care was non-inferior to specialist care. At six month follow up, the results on the primary outcome measure, weekly alcohol consumption, were statistically inconclusive, and could not confirm non-inferiority. However, treatment in specialist care was not superior to primary care. Sub-analysis showed that primary care was non-inferior for low to moderate severity of dependence, while participants with high severity of dependence had better outcome after specialist treatment. In study IV, the long-term effect of treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care was investigated, as well as trajectories for change of alcohol consumption. The study was based on the 12 month follow up of the participants in study III. The results confirmed non-inferiority for the primary outcome measure; weekly alcohol consumption. The results for the secondary outcome measures were consistent with the primary outcome – a reduction from baseline to 12 month follow up with no differences between primary care and specialist care. The only exception was that patients randomized to specialist care were more satisfied with treatment. The analyses of trajectories showed that the main reduction in consumption occurred during the first six months and were maintained at the 12 month follow up. In conclusion, treatment for alcohol dependence was seen as an issue for the health care services. Shame and stigma impose strong barriers to seeking treatment. The knowledge of health consequences associated with alcohol and treatment for alcohol dependence was limited. Common perceptions of treatment often stood in sharp contrast to preferred treatments among non-treatment seekers. Treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care with the 15-method is a promising approach. Five strategies are suggested in order to decrease the current treatment gap: reduce stigma; organize treatment in an attractive way; offer controlled drinking as a treatment goal; improve health literacy regarding alcohol use, health, alcohol dependence and treatment and finally - new ways to increase dissemination of alcohol interventions in primary care

Proceedings of the 13th annual conference of INEBRIA

CITATION: Watson, R., et al. 2016. Proceedings of the 13th annual conference of INEBRIA. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 11:13, doi:10.1186/s13722-016-0062-9.The original publication is available at https://ascpjournal.biomedcentral.comENGLISH SUMMARY : Meeting abstracts.https://ascpjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13722-016-0062-9Publisher's versio

Perceived barriers to seeking treatment for alcohol use disorders among the general Danish population – a cross sectional study on the role of severity of alcohol use and gender

Abstract Background A minority of all individuals with alcohol use disorders (AUD) seek treatment. Since the suffering from AUD has severe consequences for both the individual and for society, it is important to improve the understanding of barriers to seeking treatment. Most studies of barriers thus far have been conducted in the United States of America or the United Kingdom. There is a need for studies from other contexts. The overall aim is to investigate barriers to treatment seeking for AUD. The specific aims are to: 1) describe barriers to AUD treatment at different levels of alcohol use. 2) compare gender differences regarding barriers to AUD treatment. Methods Study design: Cross-sectional. Participants: 1594 representative Danish adults from the general population aged 30–65 years. An online questionnaire was administrated by a market research company. The questionnaire covered demographic data, barriers to treatment and level of alcohol use. Analyses were performed by means of chi-2 test and logistic regression. Results The most common barriers were related to stigma and shame: admitting to others of having a problem, being labelled, fear of the consequences and that others would find out. Participants with higher severity of alcohol use were more likely to endorse a wish to handle alcohol problems themselves and to report barriers related to treatment services. Women with high severity of alcohol use, endorsed higher level of fear of the consequences than men. Conclusions There is an urgent need to reduce stigma around AUD. Individuals with higher severity of alcohol use report a lower willingness to seek professional treatment if a problem occurs. Especially among individuals with high severity of alcohol use there is a need to address gender specific barriers

Treating alcohol use disorders in primary care - a qualitative evaluation of a new innovation : the 15-method

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore how the characteristics of an innovation, the 15-method, a stepped care model for treatment of alcohol use disorders in primary care was perceived. METHODS/DESIGN/SETTING/SUBJECT: General practitioners and heads of primary care units (n = 10) that delivered the 15-method in a randomized controlled trial participated in individual interviews at two occasions in Stockholm, Sweden. Data were analyzed with theoretical thematic analysis, using Diffusion of Innovation Theory. RESULTS: The participants described that offering the 15-method met a need among their patients. Participants were positive towards the training and the manual for the method. They mentioned a previous lack of routines to work with alcohol use disorders. The 15-method was described as easy to use. It would however be more feasible to implement in a team of different professions, rather than among general practitioners only. Priorities made by regional health care managers were described as important for the implementation, as well as financial incentives. A barrier to implementation was that alcohol screening was perceived as difficult. While the 15-method was perceived as effective in reducing the patients' alcohol use and cost effective, participants expressed uncertainty about the long-term effects. CONCLUSIONS: The 15-method provides structure for treatment of alcohol use disorders and is described by general practitioners and heads as a promising approach. Being able to offer treatment for alcohol dependence may increase the uptake of alcohol interventions in primary care. KEY POINTS Little attention has been given to develop treatment models for alcohol use disorders that are adapted to primary care settings. This study describes how an innovation, the 15-method, a stepped care model for treatment of alcohol use disorders in primary care was perceived. The 15-method provides structure for treatment of alcohol use disorders in primary care and is described by general practitioners and heads as a promising approach. Being able to offer treatment for alcohol dependence may increase the uptake of alcohol interventions in primary care

Pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorders - unequal provision across sociodemographic factors and co-morbid conditions. A cohort study of the total population in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorders (AUD) is effective. However, knowledge about utilization of, and patient characteristics associated with prescriptions is scarce. The aim is to investigate prescriptions of pharmacotherapy for AUD in Sweden across time, sociodemographics, domicile and comorbid conditions. METHOD: This is a national cohort study, comprising 132 733 adult patients with AUD diagnosis between 2007 and 2015. The exposure variables were age, sex, income, education, family constellation, domicile, origin, concurrent psychiatric and somatic co-morbid diagnoses. Logistic regression analyses were used to obtain odds ratios (OR) for any filled prescription of AUD pharmacotherapy; Acamprosate, Disulfiram, Naltrexone or Nalmefene during 12 months after AUD diagnosis. RESULTS: During the study period, the proportion of individuals who received pharmacotherapy ranged between 22.80 and 23.94 % (χ2(64) = 72.00, p = .23). Female sex, age 31-45, higher education and income, living in a big city, co-habiting and born in Sweden, bar Norway, Denmark and Iceland, were associated with higher odds of pharmacotherapy. Concurrent somatic diagnosis was associated with lower odds of pharmacotherapy but psychiatric diagnosis higher (aOR = 0.61 95 % CI 0.59-0.63 and aOR = 1.61 95 % CI 1.57-1.66 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacotherapy for AUD is underutilized. The proportion of individuals with a prescription did not change between 2007 and 2015. Provision of treatment is unequal across different groups in society, where especially older age, lower income and education, and co-morbid somatic diagnosis were associated with lower odds of prescription. There is a need to develop treatment provision, particularly for individuals with co-morbid somatic conditions

Effects of media campaign videos on stigma and attitudes towards treatment seeking for alcohol use disorder: a randomized controlled study

Abstract Background Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is one of the most stigmatized diagnosis, and stigma imposes a major barrier to treatment seeking. There is a need to develop interventions that can reduce stigma and increase treatment seeking. Little is known about the effects of video materials. The aim of this study was to investigate effects of different videos. The primary outcome was public stigma, and secondary outcomes were: self-stigma, and motivation to change own alcohol use; talking to someone else about their alcohol use; seeking information about AUD treatment or seeking AUD treatment. Methods This is a three-armed double blind randomized controlled study. The study included 655 Danish adults. Data was collected at a study webpage, and the survey could be completed anywhere with Internet access. After informed consent and completing baseline measures, participants were randomized, 1:1:1 ratio, to a video (video 1 n = 228; video 2 n = 198; video 3 n = 229). Video 1 and 2 have been used in a national mass media campaign and video 3 was recorded for use in the present study. Immediately after exposure, follow-up measures were completed. Outcomes were analyzed with mixed effects linear regression. Results In total n = 616 completed follow-up (video 1 n = 215; video 2 n = 192; video 3 n = 209). Randomization to video 1 and 3 decreased public stigma measured with “Difference, Disdain & Blame Scales”, while video 2 increased stigma. Video 2 compared to 1: 2.262 (95% CI 1.155; 3.369) p < 0.001. Video 3 compared to 1: -0.082 (95% CI -1.170; 1.006) p = 0.882. Video 3 compared to 2: -2.344 (95% CI -3.455; -1.233) p = 0.882. All videos reduced motivation to change own alcohol use. Participants with hazardous alcohol use, were more sensitive to the different videos, compared to low-risk alcohol use. Video 2 decreased motivation to seek information about treatment. No effects were seen on motivation to seek treatment, motivation to talk to someone else or self-stigma. Conclusions Videos can have an immediate effect on level of public stigma. Other types of interventions are needed to increase motivation and reduce self-stigma. To avoid adverse effects in future interventions, the use of theoretical frameworks and stakeholder involvement is emphasized

Pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder among adults with medical disorders in Sweden

Abstract Background Alcohol-attributable medical disorders are prevalent among individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, there is a lack of research on prescriptions of pharmacological treatment for AUD in those with comorbid conditions. This study aims to investigate the utilization of pharmacological treatment (acamprosate, disulfiram and naltrexone) in specialist care among patients with AUD and comorbid medical diagnoses. Methods This was a descriptive register-based Swedish national cohort study including 132,728 adults diagnosed with AUD (N = 270,933) between 2007 and 2015. The exposure was alcohol-attributable categories of comorbid medical diagnoses. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated using mixed-effect logistic regression analyses for any filled prescription of acamprosate, disulfiram or oral naltrexone within 12 months post AUD diagnosis. Results Individuals with comorbid alcohol-attributable medical diagnoses had lower odds of filling prescriptions for any type of AUD pharmacotherapy compared to those without such comorbidities. Cardiovascular (OR = 0.41 [95% CI: 0.39–0.43]), neurological (OR = 0.52 [95% CI: 0.48–0.56]) and gastrointestinal (OR = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.54–0.60]) diseases were associated with the lowest rates of prescription receipt. The presence of diagnoses which are contraindications to AUD pharmacotherapy did not fully explain the low prescription rate. Conclusion There is a substantial underutilization of AUD pharmacotherapy in patients with AUD and comorbid medical disorders in specialist care. Increasing the provision of pharmacotherapy to this group of patients is essential and may prevent morbidity and mortality. There is a need to further understand barriers to medical treatment both from the patient and prescriber perspective

Associations between alcohol use and outcome of psychological treatment in specialist psychiatric care : a cohort study

BACKGROUND: Alcohol-related issues are widespread worldwide and are fairly substantial. Numerous studies have identified and clarified the effects and prevalence of alcohol use across different contexts. However, when it comes to the prevalence of alcohol in psychiatry and its impact on treatment outcomes compared to other patient groups, studies are relatively scarce, and results often vary, sometimes with different outcomes. This study focuses on investigating the effectiveness of psychological treatment in psychiatric clinics for outpatients, considering those with and without hazardous alcohol use under naturalistic conditions. METHODS: Patients were recruited between 2012 and 2016 from psychiatric clinics in Sormland, Sweden, as part of the regular services. Patients completed symptom assessment instruments regarding depression, anxiety, quality-of-life, and alcohol consumption at the beginning of their psychological treatment, upon completion, and during a follow-up 1 year after completion. Completion of questionnaires was ongoing for some patients until 2021. A total of 324 patients were included in the study, distributed among 59 participating therapists. RESULTS: Among all patients in the study, 30.2% showed hazardous alcohol use at the start of their psychological treatment, with a higher proportion being men. There was a significant reduction in the proportion of patients with hazardous use and a notable decrease in the mean audit score upon completion of psychological treatment. At follow-up, there was no significant change compared to completion. There were 31.2% of the patients who achieved recovery or improvement in the audit score upon completion of treatment. Patients with hazardous alcohol use consistently scored higher mean values on the symptom assessment instruments and lower on the quality-of-life instrument at the beginning. More individuals with hazardous alcohol use typically achieved better results across all outcome instruments at both at completion and follow-up. CONCLUSION: Patients with hazardous alcohol use demonstrate significant improvements in their alcohol consumption through standard psychological treatment in psychiatry, despite the treatment not specifically focusing on alcohol consumption. The progress/improvement appears to be largely maintained at follow-up. Moreover, patients with hazardous alcohol use tend to show greater progress across all outcome instruments. No significant gender differences were detected in this context