Minor effect of patient education for alcohol cessation intervention on outcomes after acute fracture surgery: a randomized trial of 70 patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: High alcohol intake is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications. Alcohol cessation intervention is recommended prior to elective surgery. We investigated short- and long-term effects of perioperative intensive alcohol intervention in relation to acute ankle fracture surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 70 patients requiring ankle fracture surgery and consuming ≥ 21 drinks weekly (1 drink = 12 g ethanol) were randomized to a manual-based 6-week intensive standardized alcohol cessation program, the Gold Standard Program (GSP-A), or treatment as usual (TAU), on the day of operation. GSP-A included 5 personal meetings, patient education, and motivational and pharmacological support (alcohol withdrawal prophylaxis, B vitamins, and low-dose disulfiram). Complications requiring treatment were measured after 6 weeks and 1 year. Alcohol intake was validated by biomarkers. Quality of life (QoL) was measured by the SF-36. Hospital costs were obtained from the National Hospital Costs Register. RESULTS: Postoperatively, complete alcohol cessation was higher in the GSP-A than in the TAU group (18/35 vs. 5/35, number needed to treat = 3, p ≤ 0.001), but not lowrisk consumption in the long term (10/35 vs. 7/33, p = 0.5). Number of complications in the short and long term (12/35 vs. 14/33, 16/35 vs. 18/33), the SF-36 score, or hospital costs in the short and long term (€6,294 vs. €8,024, €10,662 vs. €12,198), were similar between the groups. INTERPRETATION: Despite an effect on alcohol cessation and a positive tendency as regards the other outcomes, the postoperative complications, QoL, and costs were similar. Better perioperative strategies for acute surgical patients with high alcohol intake therefore need to be developed.

Perioperative alcohol cessation intervention for postoperative complications.

BACKGROUND: Risky consumption of alcohol is a global problem. More than 3.3 million deaths annually are associated with risky use of alcohol, and global alcohol consumption continues to increase. People who have high alcohol consumption often require planned and emergency surgical procedures.Risky drinking is associated with increased postoperative complications such as infections, cardiopulmonary complications, and bleeding episodes. Alcohol causes disorders of the liver, pancreas, and nervous system. Stopping consumption of alcohol can normalize these organ systems to some degree and may reduce the occurrence of complications after surgery.This review was first published in 2012 and was updated in 2018. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions on rates of postoperative complications and alcohol consumption. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases up until 21 September 2018: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL via EBSCOhost; and two trials registers. We scanned the reference lists and citations of included trials and any identified relevant systematic reviews for further references to additional trials. When necessary, we contacted trial authors to ask for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions on postoperative complications and alcohol consumption. We included participants with risky consumption of alcohol who were undergoing all types of elective or acute surgical procedures under general or regional anaesthesia or sedation, who were offered a perioperative alcohol cessation intervention or no intervention.We defined 'risky drinking' as alcohol consumption equivalent to more than 3 alcoholic units (AU)/d or 21 AU/week (with 1 AU containing 12 grams of ethanol) with or without symptoms of alcohol abuse or dependency. This corresponds to the amount of alcohol associated with increased postoperative complication rates in most clinical studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used guidance provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We presented main outcomes as dichotomous variables in a meta-analysis. When data were available, we conducted subgroup and sensitivity analyses to explore the risk of bias. Primary outcome measures were postoperative complications and in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were successful quitting at the end of the programme, postoperative alcohol use, and length of hospital stay. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included in this updated review one new study (70 participants), resulting in a total of three RCTs (140 participants who drank 3 to 40 AU/d). All three studies were of moderate to good quality. All studies evaluated the effects of intensive alcohol cessation interventions, including pharmacological strategies for alcohol withdrawal symptoms, patient education, and relapse prophylaxis. We identified one ongoing study.Overall, 53 of the 122 participants from three studies who underwent surgery developed any type of postoperative complication that required treatment. Of 61 participants in the intervention groups, 20 had complications, compared with 33 of 61 participants in the control groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.96). Results show differences between the three clinical studies regarding outcome measurement and intensity of the interventions. However, all alcohol cessation programmes were intensive and included pharmacological therapy. The overall quality of evidence for this outcome is moderate.In-hospital and 30-day postoperative mortality rates were low in the three studies. Researchers reported one death among 61 participants in the intervention groups, and three deaths among 61 participants in the control groups (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.07 to 2.96). The quality of evidence for this outcome is low.Investigators describe more successful quitters at the end of the intervention programme than among controls. Forty-one out of 70 participants in the intervention groups successfully quit drinking compared with only five out of 70 participants in the control groups (RR 8.22, 95% CI 1.67 to 40.44). The quality of evidence for this outcome is moderate.All three studies reported postoperative alcohol consumption (grams of alcohol/week) at the end of the programme as median and range values; therefore it was not possible to estimate the mean and the standard deviation (SD). We performed no meta-analysis. All three studies reported length of stay, and none of these studies described a significant difference in length of stay. Data were insufficient for review authors to perform a meta-analysis. No studies reported on the prevalence of participants without risky drinking in the longer term. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review assessed the efficacy of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions for postoperative complications and alcohol consumption. All three studies showed a significant reduction in the number of participants who quit drinking alcohol during the intervention period. Intensive alcohol cessation interventions offered for four to eight weeks to participants undergoing all types of surgical procedures to achieve complete alcohol cessation before surgery probably reduced the number of postoperative complications. Data were insufficient for review authors to assess their effects on postoperative mortality. No studies reported an effect on length of stay, and no studies addressed the prevalence of risky drinking in the longer term.Included studies were few and reported small sample sizes; therefore one should be careful about drawing firm conclusions based on these study results. All three studies were conducted in Denmark, and most participants were men. The included participants may represent a selective group, as they could have been more motivated and/or more interested in participating in clinical research or otherwise different, and effects may have been overestimated for both intervention and control groups in these studies. Trial results indicate that these studies are difficult to perform, that strong research competencies are necessary for future studies, and that further evaluation of perioperative alcohol cessation interventions in high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed. Once published and assessed, the one 'ongoing' study identified may alter the conclusions of this review.

Patient education for alcohol cessation intervention at the time of acute fracture surgery: study protocol for a randomised clinical multi-centre trial on a gold standard programme (Scand-Ankle).

BACKGROUND: Patients with hazardous alcohol intake are overrepresented in emergency departments and surgical wards. These patients have an increased risk of postoperative complications with prolonged hospital stays and admissions to intensive care unit after surgery. In elective surgery, preoperative alcohol cessation interventions can reduce postoperative complications, but no studies have investigated the effect of alcohol cessation intervention at the time of acute fracture surgery. This protocol describes a randomised clinical trial that aims to evaluate the effect of a new gold standard programme for alcohol cessation intervention in the perioperative period regarding postoperative complications, alcohol intake and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients with hazardous alcohol intake undergoing ankle fracture surgery will be recruited into the trial from multiple orthopaedic wards at university hospitals in Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Included patients will be randomly allocated to either standard care or the gold standard programme aimed at complete alcohol abstinence before, during and 6 weeks after surgery. It includes a structured patient education programme and weekly interventions meetings at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic. Furthermore, patients are provided with thiamine and B-vitamins, alcohol withdrawal prophylaxis and treatment, and disulfiram to support abstinence. Alcohol intake is biochemically validated (blood, urine and breath tests) at the weekly intervention meetings and follow-up visits. Follow-up assessments will be conducted 6 weeks and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after surgery for all patients. The effect of the gold standard programme will be assessed comparing the outcome measures between the intervention and control group at each follow-up point. DISCUSSION: The study will provide new knowledge about how to prevent alcohol-related postoperative complications at the time of acute fracture surgery. If effective, the results will be a benefit for the clinical course, patients and society alike. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Id: NCT00986791 ).

Preoperative alcohol cessation prior to elective surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hazardous drinking has been associated with an increased postoperative complication rate after surgery. Common complications include postoperative infections, cardiopulmonary complications, and bleeding episodes. Preoperative abstinence may to some degree reverse alcohol-induced pathophysiological processes and thus prevent postoperative complications. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of preoperative alcohol cessation interventions on the rate of postoperative complications including mortality in hazardous drinkers. To assess the effect of preoperative alcohol cessation interventions for hazardous drinkers on alcohol use in the postoperative period and in the long term. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 9); Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to September 2011); Ovid EMBASE (1966 to September 2011); CINAHL via EBSCOhost (1982 to September 2011). We combined the MEDLINE search strategy with the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy, as contained in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of a preoperative alcohol cessation intervention on postoperative complications or postoperative alcohol consumption, or both, in the short and long term in hazardous drinkers . We excluded intraoperative and postoperative alcohol interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed studies to determine eligibility and extracted data using a tool based on guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Where required, we obtained additional information through collaboration with the original author. We presented the main outcomes as dichotomous variables. Where data were available, we planned to conduct subgroup analyses as well as a sensitivity analysis to explore risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies which involved 69 patients. Both studies were RCTs evaluating the effect of intensive alcohol cessation interventions including pharmacological strategies for alcohol withdrawal and relapse prophylaxis.Our primary outcome measure was postoperative complications and in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Meta-analysis showed an effect on the overall complication rates (odds ratio (OR) 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.61; P = 0.004). There was no significant reduction of in-hospital and 30-day mortality (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.06 to 2.83; P = 0.35).Secondary outcomes included length of stay and postoperative alcohol use. No significant reduction was found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the finding of two studies, it appears that intensive preoperative alcohol cessation interventions, including pharmacological strategies for relapse prophylaxis and withdrawal symptoms, may significantly reduce postoperative complication rates. No effect was found on mortality rates and length of stay.The effect of preoperative alcohol cessation intervention should be further explored in an effort to reduce the adverse effect of alcohol use on surgical outcomes. The number needed to screen to identify eligible patients for alcohol intervention studies in surgical settings seems to be extremely high. This may indicate that these studies are difficult to perform. Nevertheless, timing, duration and intensity of alcohol cessation interventions need to be subject to further investigation.

Alcohol-related hospital admissions: missed opportunities for follow up? A focus group study about general practitioners' experiences.

AIMS: To explore general practitioners' (GPs') follow-up experiences with patients discharged from hospital after admittance for alcohol-related somatic conditions. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Two focus groups with GPs (four women and 10 men), calling for stories about whether the intervention given in the hospital had been recognised by the GP and how this knowledge affected their follow up of the patient's alcohol problem. Systematic text condensation was applied for analysis. FINDINGS: A majority of the GPs had experienced patients with already recognised alcohol problems being rediscovered by the hospital staff. Still, they presented examples of how seeing the patient in a different context might present new opportunities. Few participants had received adequate information from the hospital about their patient's alcohol status, and they emphasised that a report about what had happened and what was planned was needed for follow up. Care pathways for patients with alcohol problems were seen as fragmented. Yet they described how alcohol-related hospital admissions might function as an eye-opener for the patient and a window of opportunity for lifestyle change. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital admittances provide important opportunities for change, but hospital care is seen as fragmented and poorly communicated to the GPs. For shared responsibility and follow up, all participating agents, including the patient, must be sufficiently informed about what has happened and what will follow. For the patient, hospital admittance is usually brief, while the relationship with their GP is long term, even lifelong. GPs are therefore key partners for programme development.

Intensive versus short face-to-face smoking cessation interventions: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of intensive smoking cessation interventions (ISCIs) directly compared with shorter interventions (SIs), measured as successful quitting. METHOD: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL were searched on 15 October 2021. Peer-reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult, daily smokers undergoing an ISCI were included. No setting, time or language restrictions were imposed. Risk of bias and quality of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, respectively. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. RESULTS: 17 550 unique articles were identified and 17 RCTs evaluating 9812 smokers were included. 14 studies were conducted in Europe or the USA. The quality of the evidence was assessed as low or moderate. Continuous abstinence was significantly higher in ISCIs in the long term (risk ratio 2.60, 95% CI 1.71-3.97). Direction and magnitude were similar in the short term; however, they were not statistically significant (risk ratio 2.49, 95% CI: 0.94-6.56). When measured as point prevalence, successful quitting was still statistically significant in favour of ISCIs, but lower (long term: 1.64, 1.08-2.47; short term: 1.68, 1.10-2.56). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION: ISCIs are highly effective compared to SIs. This important knowledge should be used to avoid additional morbidity and mortality caused by smoking.

The efficacy of disulfiram for the treatment of alcohol use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use disorders (AUD) involving hazardous, harmful, and addictive misuse of alcohol are widespread in most parts of the world. The aim of this study was to review the effect of disulfiram in the treatment of patients with AUD. The effect of disulfiram was evaluated according to the primary outcome of an intake of alcohol below 30 and 20 g/d for men and women, respectively, as well as secondary outcomes such as days until relapse, alcohol intake, and numbers of drinking days. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). RESULTS: Eleven randomized controlled trials were included with a total of 1,527 patients. They compared disulfiram treatment with placebo, none or other abstinence-supportive treatments. Overall, 6 studies reported of a significant better effect on abstinence for patients treated with disulfiram. Six of 9 studies measuring secondary outcomes reported that patients treated with disulfiram had significantly more days until relapse and fewer drinking days, respectively. The quality of the included studies was moderate. Heterogeneity was significant in most of the meta-analyses, but valid results were found regarding the effect of disulfiram versus placebo over 12 months and unsupervised disulfiram versus other or no treatment. The vast majority of significant studies were of shorter duration, while only 3 studies of 12 months were significant regarding more days until relapse and/or reduction in drinking days. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised treatment with disulfiram has some effect on short-term abstinence and days until relapse as well as number of drinking days when compared with placebo, none, or other treatments for patients with alcohol dependency or abuse. Long-term effect on abstinence has not been evaluated yet. However, there is a need for more homogeneous and high-quality studies in the future regarding the efficacy of disulfiram.

Health and the need for health promotion in hospital patients.

BACKGROUND: Integrated health promotion improves clinical outcomes after hospital treatment. The first step towards implementing evidence-based health promotion in hospitals is to estimate the need for health promoting activities directed at hospital patients. The aim of this study was to identify the distribution and association of individual health risk factors in a Norwegian hospital population and to estimate the need for health promotion in this population. METHODS: We used a validated documentation model (HPH-DATA Model) to identify the prevalence of patients with nutritional risk (measurements of waist and weight), self-reported physical inactivity, daily smoking and hazardous drinking. We used logistic regression to describe the associations between health risk factors and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Out of 10 included patients, 9 (N = 1522) had one or more health risk factors. In total 68% (N = 1026) were overweight, 44% (N = 660) at risk of under-nutrition, 38% (N = 574) physically inactive, 19% (N = 293) were daily smokers and 4% (N = 54) hazardous drinkers. We identified a new clinical relevant association between under-nutrition and smoking. The association between hazardous drinking and smoking was sustained. CONCLUSION: Nearly all patients included in this study had one or more health risk factors that could aggravate clinical outcomes. There is a significant need, and potential, for health-promoting interventions. Multi-factorial interventions may be frequently indicated and should be the subject of interventional studies.

Will emergency and surgical patients participate in and complete alcohol interventions? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In the everyday surgical life, staff may experience that patients with Alcohol Use Disorders (AUDs) seem reluctant to participate in alcohol intervention programs. The objective was therefore to assess acceptance of screening and intervention as well as adherence to the intervention program among emergency department (ED) and surgical patients with AUDs. METHODS: A systematic literature search was followed by extraction of acceptance and adherence rates in ED and surgical patients. Numbers needed to screen (NNS) were calculated. Subgroup analyses were carried out based on different study characteristics. RESULTS: The literature search revealed 33 relevant studies. Of these, 31 were randomized trials, 28 were conducted in EDs and 31 evaluated the effect of brief alcohol intervention. Follow-up was mainly conducted after six and/or twelve months.Four in five ED patients accepted alcohol screening and two in three accepted participation in intervention. In surgical patients, two in three accepted screening and the intervention acceptance rate was almost 100%. The adherence rate was above 60% for up to twelve months in both ED and surgical patients. The NNS to identify one eligible AUD patient and to get one eligible patient to accept participation in alcohol intervention varied from a few up to 70 patients.The rates did not differ between randomized and non-randomized trials, brief and intensive interventions or validated and self-reported alcohol consumption. Adherence rates were not affected by patients' group allocation and type of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Most emergency and surgical patients with AUD accept participation in alcohol screening and interventions and complete the intervention program.

Fractures and alcohol abuse - patient opinion of alcohol intervention.

PURPOSE: To clarify patient opinions about alcohol intervention in relation to surgery before investigating the effect in a Scandinavian multi-centre randomized trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A qualitative study. Thirteen consecutive alcohol patients with fractures participated after informed consent. They were interviewed during their hospital stay. The number of participants was based on the criteria of data-saturation. The analysis followed the applied qualitative framework model aimed at evaluation of specific participant needs within a larger overall project. RESULTS: All patients regarded alcohol intervention in relation to surgery as a good idea. They did not consider quit drinking as a major problem during their hospital stay and had all remained abstinent in this period. About half of the patients were ready or partly ready to participate in an alcohol intervention. Patient opinions and their readiness to participate were expressed in four groups, which also reflected their readiness to stop drinking in the perioperative period, their general acceptance of supportive disulfiram as part of an alcohol intervention as well as their awareness of postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: This study clarified that the patients found alcohol intervention relevant in relation to surgery.