Search

BackgroundIn clinical trials alcohol brief intervention (BI) in adult primary care has been efficacious in reducing alcohol consumption, but we know little about its impact on health outcomes. Hypertension is a prevalent and costly chronic condition in the U.S. and worldwide, and alcohol use is a modifiable hypertension risk factor.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of receiving BI for unhealthy drinking on blood pressure (BP) control among adult hypertensive patients by analyzing secondary data from a clustered, randomized controlled trial on alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) implementation by primary care physicians (PCP intervention arm) and non-physician providers and medical assistants (NPP&MA intervention arm) in a large, integrated health care delivery system.DesignObservational, prospective cohort study.Subjects3811 adult hypertensive primary care patients screening positive for past-year heavy drinking at baseline, of which 1422 (37%) had an electronic health record BP measure at baseline and 18-month follow-up.Main outcome measuresChange in BP and controlled BP (systolic/diastolic BP

BackgroundUnhealthy alcohol use is a major contributor to the global burden of disease and injury. The US Preventive Services Task Force has recommended alcohol screening and intervention in general medical settings since 2004. Yet less than one in six US adults report health care professionals discussing alcohol with them. Little is known about methods for increasing implementation; different staffing models may be related to implementation effectiveness. This implementation trial compared delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to specialty treatment (SBIRT) by physicians versus non-physician providers receiving training, technical assistance, and feedback reports.MethodsThe study was a cluster randomized implementation trial (ADVISe [Alcohol Drinking as a Vital Sign]). Within a private, integrated health care system, 54 adult primary care clinics were stratified by medical center and randomly assigned in blocked groups of three to SBIRT by physicians (PCP arm) versus non-physician providers and medical assistants (NPP and MA arm), versus usual care (Control arm). NIH-recommended screening questions were added to the electronic health record (EHR) to facilitate SBIRT. We examined screening and brief intervention and referral rates by arm. We also examined patient-, physician-, and system-level factors affecting screening rates and, among those who screened positive, rates of brief intervention and referral to treatment.ResultsScreening rates were highest in the NPP and MA arm (51 %); followed by the PCP arm (9 %) and the Control arm (3.5 %). Screening increased over the 12 months after training in the NPP and MA arm but remained stable in the PCP arm. The PCP arm had higher brief intervention and referral rates (44 %) among patients screening positive than either the NPP and MA arm (3.4 %) or the Control arm (2.7 %). Higher ratio of MAs to physicians was related to higher screening rates in the NPP and MA arm and longer appointment times to screening and intervention rates in the PCP arm.ConclusionFindings suggest that time frames longer than 12 months may be required for full SBIRT implementation. Screening by MAs with intervention and referral by physicians as needed can be a feasible model for increasing the implementation of this critical and under-utilized preventive health service within currently predominant primary care models.Trial registrationClinical Trials NCT01135654.

PurposeTo explore whether reducing substance misuse through a brief motivational intervention also reduces aggression and HIV risk behaviours.MethodsParticipants were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial in primary care if they screened positive for substance misuse. Substance misuse was assessed using the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test; aggression, using a modified version of the Explicit Aggression Scale; and HIV risk, through a count of common risk behaviours. The intervention was received on the day of the baseline interview, with a 3-month follow-up.ResultsParticipants who received the intervention were significantly more likely to reduce their alcohol use than those who did not; no effect was identified for other substances. In addition, participants who reduced substance misuse (whether as an effect of the intervention or not) also reduced aggression but not HIV risk behaviours.ConclusionsReducing substance misuse through any means reduces aggression; other interventions are needed for HIV risk reduction.

This study used a life-course perspective to identify and understand life events related to long-term alcohol and other drug (AOD) use trajectories across the life span. Using a purposive sample, we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 48 participants (n = 30 abstinent and 18 non-abstinent) from a longitudinal study of AOD outcomes 15 years following outpatient AOD treatment. A content analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti software to identify events and salient themes. Caregiving for an ill or dependent family member was related to better AOD outcomes by reinforcing abstinence and reduced drinking, and contributing to alcohol cessation in most individuals who cited caregiving as a pivotal event. Grandparenting and parenting an adult child were motivational for sustaining abstinence and reduced drinking. Findings were mixed on death of a loved one, which was related to abstinence in some and relapse in others. Redemption and mutual fulfillment as caregivers, reconciliations with adult children, and legacy-building as grandparents were themes associated with maintaining abstinence and reduced drinking. AOD treatment has the opportunity to employ motivational interventions for relapse prevention that address the meaning and lifelong reach of intimate relationships for individuals and their AOD use across the life span.

AimsTo assess the effectiveness of brief motivational intervention for alcohol and drug use in young adult primary care patients in a low-income population and country.MethodsA randomized controlled trial in a public-sector clinic in Delft, a township in the Western Cape, South Africa recruited 403 patients who were randomized to either single-session, nurse practitioner-delivered Brief Motivational Intervention plus referral list or usual care plus referral list, and followed up at 3 months.ResultsAlthough rates of at-risk alcohol use and drug use did not differ by treatment arm at follow-up, patients assigned to the Brief Motivational Intervention had significantly reduced scores on ASSIST (Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test) for alcohol-the most prevalent substance.ConclusionBrief Motivational Intervention may be effective at reducing at-risk alcohol use in the short term among low-income young adult primary care patients; additional research is needed to examine long-term outcomes.

ObjectiveTo compare the health problems, preventive care utilization, and medical costs of child family members (CFMs) of adults diagnosed with alcohol or drug dependence (AODD) to CFMs of adults diagnosed with diabetes or asthma.MethodsChild family members of adults diagnosed with AODD between 2002 and 2005 and CFMs of matched adults diagnosed with diabetes or asthma were followed up to 7 years after diagnosis of the index adult. Logistic regression was used to determine whether the CFMs of AODD adults were more likely to be diagnosed with medical conditions, or get preventive care, than the CFMs of adults with asthma or diabetes. Children's health services use was compared using multivariate models.ResultsIn Year 5 after index date, CFMs of adults with AODD were more likely to be diagnosed with depression and AODD than CFMs of adults with asthma or diabetes and were less likely to be diagnosed with asthma, otitis media, and pneumonia than CFMs of adults with asthma. CFMs of AODD adults were less likely than CFMs of adult asthmatic patients to have annual well-child visits. CFMs of AODD adults had similar mean annual total health care costs to CFMs of adults with asthma but higher total costs ($159/yr higher, confidence interval, $56-$253) than CFMs of adult diabetic patients. CFMs of adults with AODD had higher emergency department, higher outpatient alcohol and drug program, higher outpatient psychiatry, and lower primary care costs than CFMs of either adult asthmatic patients or diabetic patients.ConclusionChildren in families with an alcohol- or drug-dependent adult have unique patterns of health conditions, and differences in the types of health services used, compared to children in families with an adult asthmatic or diabetic family member. However, overall cost and utilization for health care services is similar or only somewhat higher. This is the first study of its kind, and the results have implications for the reduction of parental alcohol or drug dependence stigma by health care providers, clearly an important issue in this era of health reform.

BackgroundLower-risk drinking is increasingly being examined as a treatment outcome for some patients following addiction treatment. However, few studies have examined the relationship between drinking status (lower-risk drinking in particular) and healthcare utilization and cost, which has important policy implications.MethodsParticipants were adults with alcohol dependence and/or abuse diagnoses who received outpatient alcohol and other drug treatment in a private, nonprofit integrated healthcare delivery system and had a follow-up interview 6 months after treatment entry (N = 995). Associations between past 30-day drinking status at 6 months (abstinence, lower-risk drinking defined as nonabstinence and no days of 5+ drinking, and heavy drinking defined as 1 or more days of 5+ drinking) and repeated measures of at least 1 emergency department (ED), inpatient or primary care visit, and their costs over 5 years were examined using mixed-effects models. We modeled an interaction between time and drinking status to examine trends in utilization and costs over time by drinking group.ResultsHeavy drinkers and lower-risk drinkers were not significantly different from the abstainers in their cost or utilization at time 0 (i.e., 6 months postintake). Heavy drinkers had increasing odds of inpatient (p

BackgroundTreatment for alcohol disorders has traditionally been abstinence-oriented, but evaluating the merits of a low-risk drinking outcome as part of a primary treatment endpoint is a timely issue given new pertinent regulatory guidelines. This study explores a posttreatment low-risk drinking outcome as a predictor of future drinking and problem severity outcomes among individuals with alcohol use disorders in a large private, not for profit, integrated care health plan.MethodsStudy participants include adults with alcohol use disorders at 6 months (N = 995) from 2 large randomized studies. Logistic regression models were used to explore the relationship between past 30-day drinker status at 6 months posttreatment (abstinent [66%], low-risk drinking [14%] defined as nonabstinence and no days of 5+ drinking, and heavy drinking [20%] defined as 1 or more days of 5+ drinking) and 12-month outcomes, including drinking status and Addiction Severity Index measures of medical, psychiatric, family/social, and employment severity, controlling for baseline covariates.ResultsCompared to heavy drinkers, abstinent individuals and low-risk drinkers at 6 months were more likely to be abstinent or low-risk drinkers at 12 months (adj. ORs = 16.7 and 3.4, respectively; p < 0.0001); though, the benefit of abstinence was much greater than that of low-risk drinking. Compared to heavy drinkers, abstinent and low-risk drinkers were similarly associated with lower 12-month psychiatric severity (adj. ORs = 1.8 and 2.2, respectively, p < 0.01) and family/social problem severity (adj. OR = 2.2; p < 0.01). While abstinent individuals had lower 12-month employment severity than heavy drinkers (adj. OR = 1.9; p < 0.01), low-risk drinkers did not differ from heavy drinkers. The drinking groups did not differ on 12-month medical problem severity.ConclusionsCompared to heavy drinkers, low-risk drinkers did as well as abstinent individuals for many of the outcomes important to health and addiction policy. Thus, an endpoint that allows low-risk drinking may be tenable for individuals undergoing alcohol specialty treatment.

BackgroundTreatment for alcohol disorders has traditionally been abstinence-oriented, but evaluating the merits of a low-risk drinking outcome as part of a primary treatment endpoint is a timely issue given new pertinent regulatory guidelines. This study explores a posttreatment low-risk drinking outcome as a predictor of future drinking and problem severity outcomes among individuals with alcohol use disorders in a large private, not for profit, integrated care health plan.MethodsStudy participants include adults with alcohol use disorders at 6 months (N = 995) from 2 large randomized studies. Logistic regression models were used to explore the relationship between past 30-day drinker status at 6 months posttreatment (abstinent [66%], low-risk drinking [14%] defined as nonabstinence and no days of 5+ drinking, and heavy drinking [20%] defined as 1 or more days of 5+ drinking) and 12-month outcomes, including drinking status and Addiction Severity Index measures of medical, psychiatric, family/social, and employment severity, controlling for baseline covariates.ResultsCompared to heavy drinkers, abstinent individuals and low-risk drinkers at 6 months were more likely to be abstinent or low-risk drinkers at 12 months (adj. ORs = 16.7 and 3.4, respectively; p < 0.0001); though, the benefit of abstinence was much greater than that of low-risk drinking. Compared to heavy drinkers, abstinent and low-risk drinkers were similarly associated with lower 12-month psychiatric severity (adj. ORs = 1.8 and 2.2, respectively, p < 0.01) and family/social problem severity (adj. OR = 2.2; p < 0.01). While abstinent individuals had lower 12-month employment severity than heavy drinkers (adj. OR = 1.9; p < 0.01), low-risk drinkers did not differ from heavy drinkers. The drinking groups did not differ on 12-month medical problem severity.ConclusionsCompared to heavy drinkers, low-risk drinkers did as well as abstinent individuals for many of the outcomes important to health and addiction policy. Thus, an endpoint that allows low-risk drinking may be tenable for individuals undergoing alcohol specialty treatment.

BackgroundThis study examined stability of remission in patients who were abstainers and non-problem users at 1-year after entering private, outpatient alcohol and drug treatment. We examined: (a) How does risk of relapse change over time? (b) What was the risk of relapse for non-problem users versus abstainers? (c) What individual, treatment, and extra-treatment characteristics predicted time to relapse, and did these differ by non-problem use versus abstinence?MethodsThe sample consisted of 684 adults in remission (i.e., abstainers or non-problem users) 1 year following treatment intake. Participants were interviewed at intake, and 1, 5, 7, 9, and 11 years after intake. We used discrete-time survival analysis to examine when relapse is most likely to occur and predictors of relapse.ResultsRelapse was most likely at 5-year, and least likely at 11-year follow-up. Non-problem users had twice the odds of relapse compared to abstainers. Younger individuals and those with fewer 12-step meetings and shorter index treatment had higher odds of relapse than others. We found no significant interactions between non-problem use and the other covariates suggesting that significant predictors of outcome did not differ for non-problem users.ConclusionsNon-problem use is not an optimal 1-year outcome for those in an abstinence-oriented, heterogeneous substance use treatment program. Future research should examine whether these results are found in harm reduction treatment and self-help models, or in those with less severe problems. Results suggest treatment retention and 12-step participation are prognostic markers of long-term positive outcomes for those achieving remission at 1 year.

BackgroundThe importance of a continuing care approach for substance use disorders (SUDs) is increasingly being recognized. Our prior research found that a Continuing Care model for SUDs that incorporates 3 components (regular primary care, and specialty SUD and psychiatric treatment as needed) is beneficial to long-term remission. The study builds on this work to examine the cost implications of this model.ObjectivesTo examine associations between receiving Continuing Care and subsequent health care costs over 9 years among adults entering outpatient SUD treatment in a private nonprofit, integrated managed care health plan. We also compare the results to a similar analysis of a demographically matched control group without SUDs.Study designLongitudinal observational study.MeasuresMeasures collected over 9 years include demographic characteristics, self-reported alcohol and drug use and Addiction Severity Index, and health care utilization and cost data from health plan databases.ResultsWithin the treatment sample, SUD patients receiving all components of Continuing Care had lower costs than those receiving fewer components. Compared with the demographically matched non-SUD controls, those not receiving Continuing Care had significantly higher inpatient costs (excess cost = $65.79/member-month; P < 0.01) over 9 years, whereas no difference was found between those receiving Continuing Care and controls.ConclusionsAlthough a causal link cannot be established between receiving Continuing Care and reduced long-term costs in this observational study, the findings reinforce the importance of access to health care and development of interventions that optimize patients receiving those services and that may reduce costs to health systems.

This study examined the association between stopping smoking at 1 year after substance use treatment intake and long-term substance use outcomes. Nine years of prospective data from 1185 adults (39% female) in substance use treatment at a private health care setting were analyzed by multivariate logistic generalized estimating equation models. At 1 year, 14.1% of 716 participants who smoked cigarettes at intake reported stopping smoking, and 10.7% of the 469 non-smokers at intake reported smoking. After adjusting for sociodemographics, substance use severity and diagnosis at intake, length of stay in treatment, and substance use status at 1 year, those who stopped smoking at 1 year were more likely to be past-year abstinent from drugs, or in past-year remission of drugs and alcohol combined, at follow-ups than those who continued to smoke (OR=2.4, 95% CI: 1.2-4.7 and OR=1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.4, respectively). Stopping smoking at 1 year also predicted past-year alcohol abstinence through 9 years after intake among those with drug-only dependence (OR=2.4, 95% CI: 1.2-4.5). We found no association between past-year alcohol abstinence and change in smoking status at 1 year for those with alcohol dependence or other substance use diagnoses when controlling for alcohol use status at 1 year. Stopping smoking during the first year after substance use treatment intake predicted better long-term substance use outcomes through 9 years after intake. Findings support promoting smoking cessation among smoking clients in substance use treatment.

This study examined the association between stopping smoking at 1 year after substance use treatment intake and long-term substance use outcomes. Nine years of prospective data from 1185 adults (39% female) in substance use treatment at a private health care setting were analyzed by multivariate logistic generalized estimating equation models. At 1 year, 14.1% of 716 participants who smoked cigarettes at intake reported stopping smoking, and 10.7% of the 469 non-smokers at intake reported smoking. After adjusting for sociodemographics, substance use severity and diagnosis at intake, length of stay in treatment, and substance use status at 1 year, those who stopped smoking at 1 year were more likely to be past-year abstinent from drugs, or in past-year remission of drugs and alcohol combined, at follow-ups than those who continued to smoke (OR=2.4, 95% CI: 1.2-4.7 and OR=1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.4, respectively). Stopping smoking at 1 year also predicted past-year alcohol abstinence through 9 years after intake among those with drug-only dependence (OR=2.4, 95% CI: 1.2-4.5). We found no association between past-year alcohol abstinence and change in smoking status at 1 year for those with alcohol dependence or other substance use diagnoses when controlling for alcohol use status at 1 year. Stopping smoking during the first year after substance use treatment intake predicted better long-term substance use outcomes through 9 years after intake. Findings support promoting smoking cessation among smoking clients in substance use treatment.

Aims This study compared 5-year treatment outcomes of older adults to thoseof middle-aged and younger adults in a large managed care chemical dependency program. We examined age group differences in individual, treatment and extra-treatment factors, which may influence long-term outcome. Design Seventy-seven per cent of original study participants completed a telephone interview 5 years after out-patient chemical dependency treatment at Kaiser Permanente. This sample (N = 925) included 65 patients aged 55-77, 296 patients aged 40-54 and 564 patients aged 18-39 (age at baseline). Measurements Measures at follow-up included alcohol and drug use, Addiction Severity Index (ASI), Alcoholics Anonymous Affiliation Scale, social resource and self-reported health questions. Mortality data were obtained from contact with family members of patients as well as automated health plan records. Findings Older adults were less likely to be drug-dependent at baseline than younger and middle-aged adults, and had longer retention in treatment than younger adults. At 5 years, older adults were less likely than younger adults to have close family or friends who encouraged alcohol or drug use. Fifty-two per cent of older adults reported total abstinence from alcohol and drugs in the previous 30 days versus 40% of younger adults. Older women had higher 30-day abstinence than older men or younger women. Among participants dependent only on alcohol, there were no significant age differences in 30-day abstinence. In logistic regression analysis, age group was not significant. Variables associated with greater age that independently predicted 30-day abstinence in the logistic regression model included longer retention in treatment and having no close family or friends who encouraged alcohol or drug use at 5 years: female gender was also significant. Conclusions Results indicate that older adults have favorable long-term outcome following treatment relative to younger adults, but these differences may be accounted for by variables associated with age such as type of substance dependence, treatment retention, social networks and gender. Age differences in these characteristics inform intervention strategies to support long-term recovery of older adults and provide direction for investigation of how age affects outcome.

Background: The worldwide prevalence of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) among persons with diabetes is estimated at 6.3%, with an annual incidence of 9.1 to 26.1 million persons. The early detection of asymmetrical plantar temperature elevation, followed by reduction of weight -bearing on the affected foot, may be an effective mode of prevention. Methods: Patients with diabetes and peripheral neuropathy (DFU risk groups 2/3) were monitored for plantar abnormalities with a telemedical system consisting of sole inserts with temperature sensors and photographic documentation. An open, prospective, randomized controlled trial was performed to determine whether this system prevented DFUs. The intervention and control groups were also trained in ulcer prevention and observed in follow-up at 6-month intervals for 24 months. Results: 283 patients were recruited. In 85 137 observation days, DFUs arose in five patients in the control group (n = 143) and in no patient in the intervention group (n = 140). The primary outcome measure was the hazard ratio, which was calculated to be 0.015 (95% confidence interval [0; 19,717]; p = 0.25) after adjustment for age, sex, severity of neuropathy, and risk class. There were 239 alarms and 75 instructions to reduce weight-bearing on the foot. The subjects carried out the telemedical application on about 70% of the days of observation. Quality of life improved in both groups. Conclusion: The tele-health system used in this trial is practical and enables the early detection of morbidity. Likely explanations for the unexpectedly low ulceration rate in this trial (and, in turn, for the lack of statistical significance) include the availability of a training program and regular follow-up examinations to patients in both arms of the trial, along with lower mobility levels due to the COVID pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]