Alcohol brief intervention, specialty treatment and drinking outcomes at 12 months: Results from a systematic alcohol screening and brief intervention initiative in adult primary care.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) in adult primary care is an evidence-based, public health strategy to address unhealthy alcohol use, but evidence of effectiveness of alcohol brief intervention (ABI) in real-world implementation is lacking. METHODS: We fit marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting to estimate the causal effects of ABI on 12-month drinking outcomes using longitudinal electronic health records data for 312,056 adults with a positive screening result for unhealthy drinking between 2014 and 2017 in a large healthcare system that implemented systematic primary care-based SBIRT. We examined effects of ABI with and without adjusting for receipt of specialty alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment, and whether effects varied by patient demographic characteristics and alcohol use patterns. RESULTS: Receiving ABI resulted in significantly greater reductions in heavy drinking days (mean difference [95% CI] = -0.26 [-0.45, -0.08]), drinking days per week (-0.04 [-0.07, -0.01]), drinks per drinking day (-0.05 [-0.08, -0.02]) and drinks per week (-0.16 [-0.27, -0.04]). Effects of ABI on 12-month drinking outcomes varied by baseline consumption level, age group and whether patients already had an AUD, with better improvement in those who were drinking at levels exceeding only daily limits, younger, and without an AUD. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic ABI in adult primary care has the potential to reduce drinking among people with unhealthy drinking considerably on both an individual and population level. More research is needed to help optimize ABI, in particular tailoring it to diverse sub-populations, and studying its long-term public health impact.

Patient and provider factors associated with receipt and delivery of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use is a serious and costly public health problem. Alcohol screening and brief interventions are effective in reducing unhealthy alcohol consumption. However, rates of receipt and delivery of brief interventions vary significantly across healthcare settings, and relatively little is known about the associated patient and provider factors. METHODS: This study examines patient and provider factors associated with the receipt of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in an integrated healthcare system, based on documented brief interventions in the electronic health record. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we retrospectively analyzed 287,551 adult primary care patients (and their 2952 providers) who screened positive for unhealthy drinking between 2014 and 2017. RESULTS: We found lower odds of receiving a brief intervention among patients exceeding daily or weekly drinking limits (vs. exceeding both limits), females, older age groups, those with higher medical complexity, and those already diagnosed with alcohol use disorders. Patients with other unhealthy lifestyle activities (e.g., smoking, no/insufficient exercise) were more likely to receive a brief intervention. We also found that female providers and those with longer tenure in the health system were more likely to deliver brief interventions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings point to characteristics that can be targeted to improve universal receipt of brief intervention.

Health System-Based Unhealthy Alcohol Use Screening and Treatment Comparing Demographically Matched Participants With and Without HIV.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use among persons living with HIV (PLWH) is linked to significant morbidity, and use of alcohol services may differ by HIV status. Our objective was to compare unhealthy alcohol use screening and treatment by HIV status in primary care. METHODS: Cohort study of adult (≥18 years) PLWH and HIV-uninfected participants frequency matched 20:1 to PLWH by age, sex, and race/ethnicity who were enrolled in a large integrated healthcare system in the United States, with information ascertained from an electronic health record. Outcomes included unhealthy alcohol screening, prevalence, provider-delivered brief interventions, and addiction specialty care visits. Other predictors included age, sex, race/ethnicity, neighborhood deprivation index, depression, smoking, substance use disorders, Charlson comorbidity index, prior outpatient visits, insurance type, and medical facility. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute hazard ratios (HR) for the outcomes of time to unhealthy alcohol use screening and time to first addiction specialty visit. Poisson regression with robust standard errors was used to compute prevalence ratios (PR) for other outcomes. RESULTS: 11,235 PLWH and 227,320 HIV-uninfected participants were included. By 4.5 years after baseline, most participants were screened for unhealthy alcohol use (85% of PLWH and 93% of HIV-uninfected), but with a lower rate among PLWH (adjusted HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.85). PLWH were less likely, compared with HIV-uninfected participants, to report unhealthy drinking among those screened (adjusted PR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.79), and among those who screened positive, less likely to receive brief interventions (adjusted PR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.90), but more likely (adjusted HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.4) to have an addiction specialty visit within 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Unhealthy alcohol use was lower in PLWH, but the treatment approach by HIV status differed. PLWH reporting unhealthy alcohol use received less brief interventions and more addiction specialty care than HIV-uninfected participants.

Associations Between Medical Conditions and Alcohol Consumption Levels in an Adult Primary Care Population.

Importance: Excessive alcohol consumption is associated with increased incidence of several medical conditions, but few nonveteran, population-based studies have assessed levels of alcohol use across medical conditions. Objective: To examine associations between medical conditions and alcohol consumption levels in a population-based sample of primary care patients using electronic health record data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used separate multinomial logistic regression models to estimate adjusted associations between 26 medical conditions and alcohol consumption levels in a sample of 2 720 231 adult primary care patients screened for unhealthy drinking between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, then only among those reporting alcohol use. The study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large, integrated health care delivery system that incorporated alcohol screening into its adult primary care workflow. Data were analyzed from June 29, 2018, to February 7, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was level of alcohol use, classified as no reported use, low-risk use, exceeding daily limits only, exceeding weekly limits only, or exceeding daily and weekly limits, per National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism guidelines. Other measures included sociodemographic, body mass index, smoking, inpatient and emergency department use, and a dichotomous indicator for the presence of 26 medical conditions in the year prior to the alcohol screening identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. Results: Among the 2 720 231 included patients, 1 439 361 (52.9%) were female, 1 308 659 (48.1%) were white, and 883 276 (32.5%) were aged 18 to 34 years. Patients with any of the conditions (except injury or poisoning) had lower odds of drinking at low-risk and unhealthy levels relative to no reported use compared with those without the condition. Among 861 427 patients reporting alcohol use, patients with diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.08-1.15), hypertension (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.09-1.13), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.10-1.22), or injury or poisoning (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.07) had higher odds of exceeding daily limits only; those with atrial fibrillation (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06-1.18), cancer (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10), COPD (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.20), or hypertension (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.34-1.40) had higher odds of exceeding weekly limits only; and those with COPD (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.07-1.23), chronic liver disease (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.32-1.53), or hypertension (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.44-1.52) had higher odds of exceeding both daily and weekly limits. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings suggest that patients with certain medical conditions are more likely to have elevated levels of alcohol use. Health systems and clinicians may want to consider approaches to help targeted patient subgroups limit unhealthy alcohol use and reduce health risks.

Physician versus non-physician delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment in adult primary care: the ADVISe cluster randomized controlled implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy 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. METHODS: The 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. RESULTS: Screening 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. CONCLUSION: Findings 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 REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT01135654.