Search

ObjectiveTo assess the immediate impact of the introduction of minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland on alcohol consumption and whether the impact differed by sex, level of alcohol consumption, age, social grade and level of residential deprivation of respondents.DesignPrimary controlled interrupted time series analysis and secondary before-and-after analysis of the impact of introducing MUP in Scotland using alcohol consumption data for England as control.SettingData from Kantar Worldpanel’s Alcovision survey, a continuous retrospective online timeline follow-back diary survey of the previous week’s alcohol consumption.Participants53 347 women and 53 143 men.InterventionsIntroduction of a minimum price of 50 pence per UK unit (6.25 pence/g) for the sale of alcohol in Scotland on 1 May 2018.Main outcome measuresNumber of grams of alcohol consumed per week, in total, in off-trade (eg, at home) and in on-trade (eg, in pubs, restaurants).ResultsPrimary interrupted time series analyses found that the introduction of MUP was associated with a drop in reported weekly total alcohol consumption of 5.94 g (95% CI 1.29 to 10.60), a drop in off-trade consumption of 3.27 g (95% CI −0.01 to 6.56) and a drop in on-trade consumption of 2.67 g (95% CI −1.48 to 6.82). Associated reductions were larger for women than for men and were greater among heavier drinkers than for lighter drinkers, except for the 5% of heaviest drinking men for whom an associated increase in consumption was found. Secondary before-and-after analyses found that reductions in consumption were greater among older respondents and those living in less deprived areas. The introduction of MUP was not associated with a reduction in consumption among younger men and men living in more deprived areas.ConclusionsGreater policy attention needs to be addressed to the heaviest drinking men, to younger men and to men who live in more deprived areas.

ObjectiveTo synthesise the published literature on practitioner, patient and carer views and experiences of shared medical appointments (SMAs) for the management of long-term conditions in primary care.DesignSystematic review of qualitative primary studies.MethodsA systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science, Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) and Scopus (SciVerse) from database starting dates to June 2019. Practitioner, patient and carer perspectives were coded separately. Deductive coding using a framework approach was followed by thematic analysis and narrative synthesis. Quality assessment was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for qualitative studies.ResultsWe identified 18 unique studies that reported practitioner (n=11), patient (n=14) and/or carer perspectivs(n=3). Practitioners reported benefits of SMAs including scope for comprehensive patient-led care, peer support, less repetition and improved efficiency compared with 1:1 care. Barriers included administrative challenges and resistance from patients and colleagues, largely due to uncertainties and unclear expectations. Skilled facilitators, tailoring of SMAs to patient groups, leadership support and teamwork were reported to be important for successful delivery. Patients’ reported experiences were largely positive with the SMAs considered a supportive environment in which to share and learn about self-care, though the need for good facilitation was recognised. Reports of carer experience were limited but included improved communication between carer and patient.ConclusionThere is insufficient evidence to indicate whether views and experiences vary between staff, medical condition and/or patient characteristics. Participant experiences may be subject to reporting bias. Policies and guidance regarding best practice need to be developed with consideration given to resource requirements. Further research is needed to capture views about wider and co-occurring conditions, to hear from those without SMA experience and to understand which groups of patients and practitioners should be brought together in an SMA for best effect.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019141893.

BACKGROUND: While the efficacy and effectiveness of brief interventions for alcohol (ABI) have been demonstrated in primary care, there is weaker evidence in other settings and reviews do not consider differences in content. We conducted a systematic review to measure the effect of ABIs on alcohol consumption and how it differs by the setting, practitioner group and content of intervention. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO; CINAHL, Social Science Citation Index, Cochrane Library and Global Health up to January 2015 for randomised controlled trials that measured effectiveness of ABIs on alcohol consumption. We grouped outcomes into measures of quantity and frequency indices. We used multilevel meta-analysis to estimate pooled effect sizes and tested for the effect of moderators through a multiparameter Wald test. Stratified analysis of a subset of quantity and frequency outcomes was conducted as a sensitivity check. RESULTS: 52 trials were included contributing data on 29 891 individuals. ABIs reduced the quantity of alcohol consumed by 0.15 SDs. While neither the setting nor content appeared to significantly moderate intervention effectiveness, the provider did in some analyses. Interventions delivered by nurses had the most effect in reducing quantity (d=-0.23, 95% CI (-0.33 to -0.13)) but not frequency of alcohol consumption. All content groups had statistically significant mean effects, brief advice was the most effective in reducing quantity consumed (d=-0.20, 95% CI (-0.30 to -0.09)). Effects were maintained in the stratified sensitivity analysis at the first and last assessment time. CONCLUSIONS: ABIs play a small but significant role in reducing alcohol consumption. Findings show the positive role of nurses in delivering interventions. The lack of evidence on the impact of content of intervention reinforces advice that services should select the ABI tool that best suits their needs.