Search

Introduction Methods Results Discussion and Conclusion The Grog Survey App is a validated, visual and interactive self‐administered application for tablet computers that is designed to help Aboriginal Australians describe their alcohol consumption. Each person who completes the App also receives a brief intervention with feedback tailored to their survey responses. We aimed to qualitatively assess the acceptability and perceived quality of the Grog App's brief intervention, among higher risk consumers and health providers at an Aboriginal residential rehabilitation centre.This descriptive qualitative study analysed feedback from clients (n = 20) and staff (n = 10) of a drug and alcohol residential rehabilitation service on the brief intervention element of the Grog App. Data were collected face‐to‐face via semi‐structured interviews over four consecutive weeks between May and June 2021. A content analysis was conducted, which was informed by the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS).Client and staff feedback is summarised using four themes from the MARS framework: (i) aesthetics; (ii) engagement; (iii) functionality; and (iv) information. Most clients and staff felt like health messages on the brief intervention were written by ‘someone who understands’. Overall, clients and staff described the brief intervention as visually appealing, engaging and likely able to elicit ‘lightbulb moments’.The brief intervention on the Grog App is unique in its provision of tailored advice based on survey responses to all individuals (i.e., those who do not drink through to those with likely dependence). Further research is needed to assess effectiveness of this brief intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Contrary to stereotypes, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are more likely to abstain from drinking than other Australians. We explored characteristics and experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians who do not drink alcohol. Method: We conducted a cross‐sectional, representative survey of 775 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians (16+ years) in remote and urban South Australia. We explore correlates of not drinking alcohol using multi‐level logistic regression. We describe reasons for non‐drinking and harms participants experienced in past 12 months from others' drinking. Results: Non‐drinking participants were more likely to be older (OR 1.35 [95% CI 1.21, 1.50] per decade) and unemployed (OR 2.72 [95% CI 1.77, 4.20]). Participants who spoke Aboriginal Australian languages at home were three times more likely to be lifetime abstainers from drinking (OR 3.07 [95% CI 1.52, 6.21]). Common reasons for not drinking alcohol were health and family. Most did not report harms from others' alcohol consumption (79.6%, 76.9%, urban and remote respectively). Stress from others' alcohol consumption was the most reported harm by non‐drinkers (14.5% and 23.1%, urban and remote, respectively). Discussion and Conclusions: Culture such as speaking Aboriginal Australian languages might have protective effects that promote abstaining but was rarely explicitly cited as a reason for not drinking. A greater understanding of local values held by people who do not drink alcohol could help inform health messaging and other interventions to reduce alcohol‐related harms. Understanding local reasons for abstaining can help tailor health messaging to suit local contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Alcohol screening among Indigenous Australians is important to identify individuals needing support to reduce their drinking. Understanding clinical contexts in which clients are screened, and which clients are more or less likely to be screened, could help identify areas of services and communities that might benefit from increased screening. Methods: We analysed routinely collected data from 22 Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations Australia‐wide. Data collected between February 2016 and February 2021 were analysed using R, and aggregated to describe screening activity per client, within 2‐monthly extraction periods. Descriptive analyses were performed to identify contexts in which clients received an Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test consumption (AUDIT‐C) screen. Multi‐level logistic regression determined demographic factors associated with receiving an AUDIT‐C screen. Three models are presented to examine if screening was predicted by: (i) age; (ii) age and gender; (iii) age, gender and service remoteness. Results: We observed 83,931 occasions where AUDIT‐C was performed at least once during a 2‐monthly extraction period. Most common contexts were adult health check (55.0%), followed by pre‐consult examination (18.4%) and standalone item (9.9%). For every 10 years' increase in client age, odds of being screened with AUDIT‐C slightly decreased (odds ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98, 0.99). Women were less likely to be screened with AUDIT‐C (odds ratio 0.95; 95% CI 0.93, 0.96) than men. Discussion and Conclusions: This study identified areas where alcohol screening can be increased (e.g., among women). Increasing AUDIT‐C screening across entire communities could help reduce or prevent alcohol‐related harms. Future Indigenous‐led research could help identify strategies to increase screening rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Alcohol dependence is a chronic condition impacting millions of individuals worldwide. Safe and effective medicines to reduce relapse can be prescribed by general practitioners but are underutilised in the general Australian population. Prescription rates of these medicines to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) Australians in primary care are unknown. We assess these medicines in Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services and identify factors associated with prescription. Methods: Baseline data (spanning 12 months) were used from a cluster randomised trial involving 22 Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services. We describe the proportion of First Nations patients aged 15+ who were prescribed a relapse prevention medicine: naltrexone, acamprosate or disulfiram. We explore associations between receiving a prescription, a patient AUDIT‐C score and demographics (gender, age, service remoteness) using logistic regression. Results: During the 12‐month period, 52,678 patients attended the 22 services. Prescriptions were issued for 118 (0.2%) patients (acamprosate n = 62; naltrexone n = 58; disulfiram n = 2; combinations n = 4). Of the total patients, 1.6% were ‘likely dependent’ (AUDIT‐C ≥ 9), of whom only 3.4% received prescriptions for these medicines. In contrast, 60.2% of those who received a prescription had no AUDIT‐C score. In multivariate analysis, receiving a script (OR = 3.29, 95% CI 2.25–4.77) was predicted by AUDIT‐C screening, male gender (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.55–3.29), middle age (35–54 years; OR = 14.41, 95% CI 5.99–47.31) and urban service (OR = 2.87, 95% CI 1.61–5.60). Discussion and Conclusions: Work is needed to increase the prescription of relapse prevention medicines when dependence is detected. Potential barriers to prescription and appropriate ways to overcome these need to be identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Discussion and Conclusions Regular screening for risky drinking is important to improve the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. We explored whether the rate of screening for risky drinking using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test—Consumption (AUDIT‐C) questions was disrupted at Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS) during state‐wide and territory‐wide COVID‐19 lockdowns in 2020.Retrospective analysis of screening data from 22 ACCHSs located in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia. These services provide holistic and culturally appropriate primary care. A multi‐level Poisson regression, including AR(1) autocorrelation, was used to predict counts of AUDIT‐C screening at ACCHSs.AUDIT‐C screening was suppressed during state‐wide and territory‐wide lockdowns in 2020 (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.42 [0.29, 0.61]). The effect of lockdowns differed by service remoteness. While there was a substantial reduction in AUDIT‐C screening for urban and inner regional services (IRR 0.25 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15, 0.42]), there was not a statistically significant change in screening at outer regional and remote (IRR 0.60 [95% CI 0.33, 1.09]) or very remote services (IRR 0.67 [95% CI 0.40, 1.11]).The COVID‐19 lockdowns in Australia likely suppressed rates of screening for risky drinking in urban and inner regional regions. As harm from alcohol consumption may have increased during lockdowns, policymakers should consider implementing measures to enable screening for risky drinking to continue during future lockdowns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-determination theory holds that the intrinsic and extrinsic content of people's aspirations differentially affect their wellness. An evidence base spanning nearly 30 years indicates that focusing on intrinsic goals (such as for growth, relationships, community giving, and health) promotes well-being, whereas a focus on extrinsic goals (such as for wealth, fame, and beauty) deters well-being. Yet, the evidence base contains exceptions, and some authors have argued that focusing on extrinsic goals may not be universally detrimental. We conducted a systematic review and used multilevel meta-analytic structural equation modeling to evaluate the links between intrinsic and extrinsic aspirations with indices of well-being and ill-being. Across 92 reports (105 studies), 1,808 effects, and a total sample of N = 70,110, we found that intrinsic aspirations were linked positively with well-being, r = 0.24 [95% CI 0.22, 0.27], and negatively with ill-being, r = −0.11 [−0.14, −0.08]. When the variety of extrinsic aspiration scoring methods were combined, the link with well-being was not statistically significant, r = 0.02 [−0.02, 0.06]. However, when extrinsic aspirations were evaluated in terms of their predominance in the overall pattern of aspiring the effect was universally detrimental, linking negatively to well-being, r = −0.22 [−0.32, −0.11], and positively to ill-being, r = 0.23 [0.17, 0.30]. Meta-analytic conclusions about the associations between goal types and wellness are important because they inform how individuals could shape aspirations to support their own happiness and how groups and institutions can frame goals such that their pursuit is for the common good. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several initiatives have sought to increase the number of First Nations individuals with a higher degree in research (i.e., PhD or research masters)—in Australia and in similarly colonised countries. However, little has been written on day‐to‐day support structures and mechanisms that might help First Nations Australian candidates thrive in postgraduate research degrees and beyond. For sensitive research fields such as alcohol, emerging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers must grapple with topics which are stigmatising and in some instances associated with traumatic associations. There is also a lack of studies internationally that describe optimal support for First Nations students undertaking a higher degree by research with a primary focus on alcohol. Here we discuss what we have learned from the support offered through the Centre of Research Excellence in Indigenous Health and Alcohol—from the perspective of academic staff, students, trainees and early career researchers. We consider what may be generalisable lessons from this experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) Australians have identified alcohol consumption as an area of concern. Accurate screening tools are required to help detect and assist at‐risk drinkers, and to provide accurate data to policy makers. The Finnish method (determining drinking patterns based on the last two to four drinking occasions), has been proposed as a culturally appropriate and effective screening tool for detecting Indigenous Australians at risk from alcohol consumption. While it has been found to be valid and acceptable for use with Indigenous Australians, the Finnish method has not been compared to the three‐item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test—Consumption (AUDIT‐C) which is currently recommended by the Australian government for use in Aboriginal community‐controlled health services. Methods: We compared the performance of the AUDIT‐C and Finnish method as screening tools for detecting harms experienced from alcohol in a representative, cross‐sectional, sample of Indigenous Australians. Results: AUDIT‐C was substantially faster for participants to complete than the Finnish method. Metrics derived from both the AUDIT‐C and Finnish method were similarly linked to the frequency of self‐reported International Classification of Diseases, 11th revision dependence symptoms and harms. Discussion and Conclusions: The AUDIT‐C is likely most appropriate for use in clinical settings due to its speed and ease of use. The Finnish method provides relatively detailed information about drinking and is better suited to population surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: There is a higher prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use among Indigenous populations, but there have been few studies of the effectiveness of screening and treatment in primary health care. Over 24 months, we tested whether a model of service-wide support could increase screening and any alcohol treatment. Design: Cluster-randomized trial with 24-month implementation (12 months active, 12 months maintenance). Setting: Australian Aboriginal Community Controlled primary care services. Participants: Twenty-two services (83 032 clients) that use Communicare practice software and see at least 1000 clients annually, randomized to the treatment arm or control arm. Intervention and comparator: Multi-faceted early support model versus a comparator of waiting-list control (11 services). Measurements: A record (presence = 1, absence = 0) of: (i) Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test--Consumption (AUDIT-C) screening (primary outcome), (ii) any-treatment and (iii) brief intervention. We received routinely collected practice data bimonthly over 3 years (1-year baseline, 1-year implementation, 1-year maintenance). Multi-level logistic modelling was used to compare the odds of each outcome before and after implementation. Findings: The odds of being screened within any 2-month reference period increased in both arms post-implementation, but the increase was nearly eight times greater in earlysupport services [odds ratio (OR) = 7.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.04-15.63, P < 0.001]. The change in odds of any treatment in early support was nearly double that of waiting-list controls (OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.19-2.98, P = 0.01) but was largely driven by decrease in controls. There was no clear evidence of difference between groups in the change in the odds of provision of brief intervention (OR = 1.95, 95% CI = 0.53-7.17, P = 0.32). Conclusions: An early support model designed to aid routine implementation of alcohol screening and treatment in Aboriginal health services resulted in improvement of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test--Consumption screening rates over 24 months of implementation, but the effect on treatment was less clear. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Aboriginal clients accessing Aboriginal community‐controlled residential alcohol and other drug rehabilitation services in New South Wales, Australia believe they have better outcomes due to culturally appropriate care. However, there is a paucity of published treatment outcome data. This study aims to identify predictors of treatment outcomes based on client characteristics at intake. Methods: A cross‐sectional, retrospective, observational study of 2326 admissions to six services between January 2011 and December 2016. The outcomes were: (i) leaving treatment early; (ii) self‐discharge or house discharge (by staff); and (iii) re‐admission within two years. The predictors examined were Aboriginal status, age, justice system referral and primary substance of concern. Competing risk and Poisson regression analyses were used to identify trends in the data. Results: The mean age of clients was 33 years, and the majority (56%) stayed at least 6 weeks. Aboriginal clients whose primary substance of concern was stimulants were almost eight times more likely to re‐admitted within 2 years than other clients (risk ratio 7.91; P < 0.001). Aboriginal clients who were also referred from justice were more likely to self‐discharge (risk ratio 1.87; P < 0.001). Furthermore, Aboriginal clients who were aged older than 30 were less likely to have a re‐admission (risk ratio 0.32; P ≤ 0.001). Discussion and Conclusions: This study showed client characteristics that are predictive of harmful outcomes include age under 30, justice client, primary substance of use and their interactions. Future research could build on these results to aid ongoing development of residential rehabilitation programs for Aboriginal peoples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Measuring self‐reported alcohol use is challenging in any population, including when episodic drinking may be common. Drinking among Indigenous Australians has been shown to vary greatly within and between communities. However, most survey methods assume 'regular' patterns of drinking. National estimates have also been shown to underestimate alcohol use among this group. This paper describes drinking patterns in two representative community samples (urban and remote). Methods: Indigenous Australians (aged 16+ years) in two South Australian sites were recruited to complete the Grog Survey App. The App is a validated, interactive tablet‐based survey tool, designed to help Indigenous Australians describe their drinking. Drinking patterns were described using medians and interquartile ranges; gender and remoteness were compared using Wilcoxon rank‐sum tests. Spearman correlations explored the relationship between drinking patterns and age. Logistic regressions tested if beverage or container preference differed by remoteness or gender. Results: Three‐quarters of participants (77.0%, n = 597/775) were current drinkers. Median standard drinks per occasion was 7.8 (78 g), 1.3 drinking occasions per month (median). Three‐quarters of current drinkers (73.7%) reported a period without drinking (median: 60 days). Remote drinkers were more likely to drink beer. Improvised containers were used by 40.5% of drinkers. Discussion and Conclusions: Episodic drinking with extended 'dry' periods and from non‐standard drinking containers was common in this representative sample of Indigenous Australians. The diversity of container use and beverage preference, by gender and remoteness, illustrates nuances in drinking patterns between communities. It shows the importance of community‐level data to inform local strategies addressing alcohol misuse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Little is known about the prevalence of current alcohol dependence in Indigenous Australian communities. Here we identify the frequency of reported symptoms, estimate the prevalence and describe the correlates of current alcohol dependence. Methods: A representative sample of Indigenous Australians (16+ years) was recruited from an urban and remote community in South Australia. Data were collected between July and October 2019 via a tablet computer‐based application. Participants were likely dependent if they reported two or more dependence symptoms (ICD‐11; in the last 12 ‐months), weekly or more frequently. Chi‐square tests described the relationship between demographics, remoteness and alcohol dependence. Spearman correlations estimated the relationship between symptoms of dependence, consumption characteristics and demographics. Results: A total of 775 Indigenous Australians participated. The most frequently reported symptoms were prioritising alcohol over other things and loss of control. Overall, 2.2% were likely dependent on alcohol (n = 17/775). Prevalence did not vary by remoteness. Participants who drank more and more frequently tended to report more frequent symptoms of dependence. In the urban site, men tended to report more frequent symptoms of dependence than women. Age, income and schooling were not linked to dependence. Discussion and Conclusions: The prevalence of current alcohol dependence in this representative sample was similar to that of the general Australian and international estimates. Understanding risk factors for current alcohol dependence will be useful to inform the allocation of funding and support. Accurate estimates of the prevalence of current alcohol dependence are important to better identify specialist treatment needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Unhealthy alcohol consumption is a key concern for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Indigenous') communities. It is important to identify and treat at‐risk drinkers, to prevent harms to physical or social wellbeing. We aimed to test whether training and support for Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHS) staff would increase rates of alcohol screening and brief intervention. Design Cluster randomized trial. Setting: Australia. Cases/Intervention/Measurements Twenty‐two ACCHSs that see at least 1000 clients per year and use Communicare as practice management software. The study included data on 70 419 clients, training, regular data feedback, collaborative support and funding for resources ($9000). Blinding was not used. The comparator was waiting‐list control (equal allocation). Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT‐C) screening and records of brief interventions were extracted from practice management software at 2‐monthly intervals. Observations described the clinical actions taken for clients over each 2‐month interval. The baseline period (28 August 2016–28 August 2017) was compared with the post‐implementation period (29 August 2017–28 August 2018). We used multi‐level logistic regression to test the hypotheses that clients attending a service receiving active support would be more likely to be screened with AUDIT‐C (primary outcome) or to receive a brief intervention (secondary outcome). Findings We observed an increase in the odds of screening with AUDIT‐C for both groups, but the increase was 5.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.31, 7.07] times larger at services receiving support. We found little evidence that the support programme increased the odds of a recorded brief intervention relative to control services (odds ratio = 2.06; 95% CI = 0.90, 4.69). Differences in baseline screening activity between treatment and control reduce the certainty of our findings. Conclusions: Providing Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services with training and support can improve alcohol (AUDIT‐C) screening rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: SMART Recovery is a popular mutual support group program. Little is known about its suitability or perceived helpfulness for Indigenous peoples. This study explored the cultural utility of SMART Recovery in an Australian Aboriginal context. Methods: An Indigenous‐lensed, multi‐methods, exploratory study design was used to develop initial evidence of: (i) attributes of Aboriginal SMART Recovery facilitators and group members; (ii) characteristics of Aboriginal‐led SMART Recovery groups; (iii) perceived acceptability and helpfulness of SMART Recovery; and (iv) areas for potential improvement. Data were collected by synthesising Indigenous qualitative methods (research topic and social yarning) with western qualitative and quantitative methods (participant surveys, program adherence rating scale, group observations and field notes). Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Participants were a culturally diverse sample of male and female Aboriginal facilitators (n = 10) and group members (n = 11), aged 22–65 years. Aboriginal‐led SMART Recovery groups were culturally customised to suit local contexts. Program tools 'goal setting' and 'problem solving' were viewed as the most helpful. Suggested ways SMART Recovery could enhance its cultural utility included: integration of Aboriginal perspectives into facilitator training; creation of Aboriginal‐specific program and marketing materials; and greater community engagement and networking. Participants proposed an Aboriginal‐specific SMART Recovery program. Discussion and Conclusions: This study offers insights into Aboriginal peoples' experiences of SMART Recovery. Culturally‐informed modifications to the program were identified that could enhance cultural utility. Future research is needed to obtain diverse community perspectives and measure health outcomes associated with group attendance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined acceptability and feasibility of a tablet application ("App") to record self-reported alcohol consumption among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Four communities (1 urban; 3 regional/remote) tested the App, with 246 adult participants (132 males, 114 females). The App collected (a) completion time; (b) participant feedback; (c) staff observations. Three research assistants were interviewed. Only six (1.4%) participants reported that the App was "hard" to use. Participants appeared to be engaged and to require minimal assistance; nearly half verbally reflected on their drinking or drinking of others. The App has potential for surveys, screening, or health promotion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: To reduce health and social inequities, it is important to understand how drinking patterns vary within and between Indigenous peoples. We aimed to assess variability in estimates of Indigenous Australian drinking patterns and to identify demographic and methodological factors associated with this. Design A three‐level meta‐analysis of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Indigenous') drinking patterns [International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) no. CRD42018103209]. Setting: Australia. Participants: Indigenous Australians. Measurements The primary outcomes extracted were drinking status, single‐occasion risk and life‐time risk. Moderation analysis was performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity. Moderators included gender, age, socio‐economic status, local alcohol restrictions, sample population, remoteness, Australian state or territory, publication year, Indigenous involvement in survey design or delivery and cultural adaptations. Findings A systematic review of the literature revealed 41 eligible studies. For all primary outcomes, considerable heterogeneity was identified within (I22 = 51.39–68.80%) and between (I32 = 29.27–47.36%) samples. The pooled proportions (P) of current drinkers [P = 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.53–0.65], single‐occasion (P = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.24–0.44) and life‐time (P = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.15–0.29) risk were all moderated by gender, age, remoteness and measurement tool. Reference period moderated proportions of participants at single‐occasion risk. Conclusions: Indigenous Australian drinking patterns vary within and between communities. Initiatives to reduce high‐risk drinking should take account of this variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Indigenous peoples who have experienced colonisation or oppression can have a higher prevalence of alcohol-related harms. In Australia, Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs) offer culturally accessible care to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) peoples. However there are many competing health, socioeconomic and cultural client needs. Methods and analysis A randomised cluster wait-control trial will test the effectiveness of a model of tailored and collaborative support for ACCHSs in increasing use of alcohol screening (with Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C)) and of treatment provision (brief intervention, counselling or relapse prevention medicines). Setting Twenty-two ACCHSs across Australia. Randomisation Services will be stratified by remoteness, then randomised into two groups. Half receive support soon after the trial starts (intervention or ‘early support’); half receive support 2 years later (wait-control or ‘late support’). The support Core support elements will be tailored to local needs and include: support to nominate two staff as champions for increasing alcohol care; a national training workshop and bimonthly teleconferences for service champions to share knowledge; onsite training, and bimonthly feedback on routinely collected data on screening and treatment provision. Outcomes and analysis Primary outcome is use of screening using AUDIT-C as routinely recorded on practice software. Secondary outcomes are recording of brief intervention, counselling, relapse prevention medicines; and blood pressure, gamma glutamyltransferase and HbA1c. Multi-level logistic regression will be used to test the effectiveness of support. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been obtained from eight ethics committees: the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council of New South Wales (1217/16); Central Australian Human Research Ethics Committee (CA-17-2842); Northern Territory Department of Health and Menzies School of Health Research (2017- 2737); Central Queensland Hospital and Health Service (17/QCQ/9); Far North Queensland (17/QCH/45-1143); Aboriginal Health Research Ethics Committee, South Australia (04-16-694); St Vincent’s Hospital (Melbourne) Human Research Ethics Committee (LRR 036/17); and Western Australian Aboriginal Health Ethics Committee (779). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol affects Indigenous communities globally that have been colonised. These effects are physical, psychological, financial and cultural. This systematic review aims to describe the prevalence of current (12-month) alcohol dependence in Indigenous Peoples in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America, to identify how it is measured, and if tools have been validated in Indigenous communities. Such information can help inform estimates of likely treatment need. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was completed in six electronic databases for reports on current alcohol dependence (moderate to severe alcohol use disorder) published between 1 January 1989–9 July 2020. The following data were extracted: (1) the Indigenous population studied; country, (2) prevalence of dependence, (3) tools used to screen, assess or diagnose current dependence, (4) tools that have been validated in Indigenous populations to screen, assess or diagnose dependence, and (5) quality of the study, assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies. Results: A total of 11 studies met eligibility criteria. Eight were cross-sectional surveys, one cohort study, and two were validation studies. Nine studies reported on the prevalence of current (12-month) alcohol dependence, and the range varied widely (3.8–33.3% [all participants], 3–32.8% [males only], 1.3–7.6% [females only]). Eight different tools were used and none were Indigenous-specific. Two tools have been validated in Indigenous (Native American) populations. Conclusion: Few studies report on prevalence of current alcohol dependence in community or household samples of Indigenous populations in these four countries. Prevalence varies according to sampling method and site (for example, specific community versus national). Prior work has generally not used tools validated in Indigenous contexts. Collaborations with local Indigenous people may help in the development of culturally appropriate ways of measuring alcohol dependence, incorporating local customs and values. Tools used need to be validated in Indigenous communities, or Indigenous-specific tools developed, validated and used. Prevalence findings can inform health promotion and treatment needs, including funding for primary health care and specialist treatment services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: First Nations peoples of Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America (USA) and Canada are more likely to be non-drinkers than other people in these countries. However, those who do drink may be at greater risk of alcohol-related harms (at a population level) due to the ongoing impacts from colonisation and associated oppression. Addressing unhealthy drinking (drinking above recommended limits including alcohol use disorders) in primary care settings is one important way to increase accessibility of treatment. Methods: This systematic review identifies peer-reviewed studies of alcohol treatments delivered in primary care or other non-residential settings for First Nations peoples of Australia, New Zealand, USA and Canada. Literature searches were conducted in seven academic databases from their inception until March, 2020. We assessed evidence of treatment or implementation effectiveness, perceived acceptability or accessibility, and the study quality as assessed by the AXIS tool and by a measure of community participation in the research process. Results: Twenty-eight studies were included, published between 1968 and 2018. Studies reported on a range of alcohol treatments, from brief intervention to ambulatory withdrawal management, relapse prevention medicines, and cultural therapies. Brief intervention was the most studied approach. Cultural healing practices and bicultural approaches were a key theme amongst several studies. Four studies measured treatment effectiveness, including one randomised controlled trial (naltrexone vs naltrexone plus sertraline vs placebo) and two uncontrolled trials of disulfiram. Of the six implementation studies, three were (hybrid) effectiveness-implementation designs. Most of the remaining studies (n = 21) focused on treatment accessibility or acceptability. Community participation in the research process was poorly reported in most studies. Conclusions: Research evidence on how best to care for First Nations peoples with unhealthy alcohol use is limited. Trials of naltrexone and disulfiram presented promising results. Cultural and bicultural care were perceived as highly important to clinical staff and clients in several studies. More effectiveness studies on the full scope of alcohol treatments are needed. Greater community participation in research and more transparent reporting of this in study methods will be key to producing quality research that combines scientific rigour with cultural appropriateness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-determination theory (SDT) posits that experiences of autonomy lead people to be more prosocial, whereas experiences of control lead to antisocial actions. In this meta-analysis, we tested the links between autonomy and prosociality and control and antisociality, across 139 reports (167 studies) with 1,189 effect sizes (N = 75,546 participants). We used two-stage structural equation modeling including both correlational and longitudinal study designs. We found support for the hypothesized direct links between autonomy and prosociality and between control and antisociality, with cross-paths between these constructs being weaker. In line with SDT's claims that the salutary effects of autonomy are universal, results also showed that the hypothesized links were consistent across cultures, genders, and age categories. We also reviewed emerging experimental research on the effect of autonomy-priming interventions on prosociality. To conclude, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings and lay out an agenda for future research. Public Significance Statement: Increasing prosocial behaviors and reducing antisocial tendencies is a critical challenge across many areas of policy. This review systematically assessed the available evidence on whether experiences of autonomy (and reductions in control, its opposite) facilitate prosocial outcomes and undermine antisocial behaviors. We found that autonomy was linked with more prosociality across a wide range of contexts, whereas control was consistently linked with antisocial outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]