Impact of Training and Municipal Support on Primary Health Care-Based Measurement of Alcohol Consumption in Three Latin American Countries: 5-Month Outcome Results of the Quasi-experimental Randomized SCALA Trial.

PURPOSE: We aimed to test the effects of providing municipal support and training to primary health care providers compared to both training alone and to care as usual on the proportion of adult patients having their alcohol consumption measured. METHODS: We undertook a quasi-experimental study reporting on a 5-month implementation period in 58 primary health care centres from municipal areas within Bogotá (Colombia), Mexico City (Mexico), and Lima (Peru). Within the municipal areas, units were randomized to four arms: (1) care as usual (control); (2) training alone; (3) training and municipal support, designed specifically for the study, using a less intensive clinical and training package; and (4) training and municipal support, designed specifically for the study, using a more intense clinical and training package. The primary outcome was the cumulative proportion of consulting adult patients out of the population registered within the centre whose alcohol consumption was measured (coverage). RESULTS: The combination of municipal support and training did not result in higher coverage than training alone (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.0, 95% CI = 0.6 to 0.8). Training alone resulted in higher coverage than no training (IRR = 9.8, 95% CI = 4.1 to 24.7). Coverage did not differ by intensity of the clinical and training package (coefficient = 0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.5). CONCLUSIONS: Training of providers is key to increasing coverage of alcohol measurement amongst primary health care patients. Although municipal support provided no added value, it is too early to conclude this finding, since full implementation was shortened due to COVID-19 restrictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov ID: NCT03524599; Registered 15 May 2018; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03524599.

Impact of COVID-19 Confinement on Alcohol Purchases in Great Britain: Controlled Interrupted Time-Series Analysis During the First Half of 2020 Compared With 2015-2018.

AIMS: To investigate if COVID-19 confinement led to excess alcohol purchases by British households. METHODS: We undertake controlled interrupted time series analysis of the impact of COVID-19 confinement introduced on 26 March 2020, using purchase data from Kantar Worldpanel's of 23,833 British households during January to early July 2020, compared with 53,428 British households for the same time period during 2015-2018. RESULTS: Excess purchases due to confinement during 2020 were 178 g of alcohol per 100 households per day (adjusted for numbers of adults in each household) above an expected base of 438 g based on averaged 2015-2018 data, representing a 40.6% increase. However, when adjusting for expected normal purchases from on-licenced premises (i.e. bars, restaurants, etc.), there was evidence for no excess purchases of grams of alcohol (a 0.7% increase). With these adjustments, beer purchases dropped by 40%, wine purchases increased by 15% and spirits purchases by 22%. Excess purchases increased the richer the household and the lower the age of the main shopper. Confinement was associated with a shift in purchases from lower to higher strength beers. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 confinement, the evidence suggests that households did not buy more alcohol for the expected time of the year, when adjusting for what they normally would have purchased from on-licenced premises.

Alcohol policy measures are an ignored catalyst for achievement of the sustainable development goals.

BACKGROUND: By adopting Agenda 2030, governments agreed to review and report on their approach and action for achievement of sustainable development goals annually through the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) on Sustainable Development. Health and well-being are at the heart of the United Nations Agenda 2030. Given the social and economic harm that can be done by alcohol, reducing the consumption of alcohol is a pre-requisite to achieve the sustainable development goals. We explored how selected European countries have considered alcohol-related harm as an obstacle to achievement of SDGs and the extent to which they view alcohol policy as a solution to the achievement of sustainable development by analysing their voluntary national reviews (VNRs) submitted to the HLPF between years 2016 and 2020. METHODS: We developed our own framework with 260 questions reflecting three dimensions of alcohol-harm considerations: indication, action, and evaluation. We analysed 36 VNRs of 32 European countries by first assessing them against the 260 questions to find out how they report on alcohol harm and whether they, in their action, refer to evidence-based, cost-effective alcohol policy solutions. Afterwards we used content analysis to assess the extent to which the countries addressed alcohol related harm, whether they refer to alcohol harm within SDG 3 (good health and well-being) or look beyond the health goal and consider alcohol harm having impact on goals other than the Goal 3. FINDINGS: Nine countries (28.1%) did not mention alcohol in their report. Only eight countries (25%) mentioned one or more of the alcohol policy best buys among the actions they are taking to reduce alcohol related harm and only three (9.3%) explicitly elaborated on their impact on goals other than goal 3. Only five countries referred to the agreed indicator 3.5.2 measuring alcohol per capita consumption in the adult population. Many of the remaining countries used a range of terminology rather than alcohol per capita consumption, including "excessive use of alcohol", "heavy use", "too much alcohol ", "harmful alcohol consumption", "use among young people". INTERPRETATION: Alcohol use is, for example, associated with violence (SDG 5 and 16), it contributes to inequalities (SDG 5 and 10), it hinders economic growth (SDG 8), disrupts sustainable consumption (SDG 12) and it adversely impacts environment (SDG 13 and 14). The findings of this study show that these effects are not considered in the design of measures to achieve these goals. Moreover, inaccurate language related to alcohol harm indicates a gap in understanding of extend of alcohol burden and the consequences for sustainable development. So does the choice of ineffective measures to reduce alcohol consumption. Education programs and awareness raising campaigns focusing on individual lifestyle are neither in line with WHO Global Strategy to reduce the harm caused by alcohol that all selected countries adopted in 2010, nor do they reflect the seriousness of the problems related to alcohol use. Effective alcohol policy measures, so called three best buys, are missing from the transformative action that the Agenda 2030 calls for and governments committed to.

Impact of price promotion, price, and minimum unit price on household purchases of low and no alcohol beers and ciders: Descriptive analyses and interrupted time series analysis of purchase data from 70, 303 British households, 2015-2018 and first half of 2020.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of lower strength alcohol products results in less absolute alcohol purchased. This paper estimates the potential impact of price in shifting British household purchases from higher to lower strength beers and ciders. METHODS: Descriptive statistics and controlled interrupted time series analyses using Kantar Worldpanel's British household purchase data from 70,303 households during 2015-2018 and the first half of 2020. FINDINGS: No and low-alcohol products were less likely to be on price promotion than higher strength products. No and low-alcohol beers were cheaper per volume than higher strength beers; the reverse was the case for ciders. With the exception of low strength ciders (which had very few purchases) a higher volume was purchased when the product was on price promotion than when not. Again, with the exception of low strength ciders, the cheaper the cost, the greater the volume of purchase, more so when the product was on price promotion. The introduction of minimum unit price in Scotland (when controlling for changes in Northern England) and in Wales (when controlling for changes in Western England) shifted purchases from higher to lower strength products, more so for ciders than beers. In relative terms, the alcohol by volume of beer dropped by 2% and of cider by 7%. Changes did not differ by household income or the age of the main shopper. INTERPRETATION: There are opportunities for governments and alcohol producers and retailers to facilitate shifts of purchases from higher to lower alcohol strength products. Alcohol producers and retailers can ensure that the price of lower strength products is competitive vis a vis higher strength products. Governments can introduce minimum unit prices for the sale of alcohol, as has been done in Scotland and Wales. FUNDING: No funding was received for this study.

Production, Consumption, and Potential Public Health Impact of Low- and No-Alcohol Products: Results of a Scoping Review.

Switching from higher strength to low- and no-alcohol products could result in consumers buying and drinking fewer grams of ethanol. We undertook a scoping review with systematic searches of English language publications between 1 January 2010 and 17 January 2021 using PubMed and Web of Science, covering production, consumption, and policy drivers related to low- and no-alcohol products. Seventy publications were included in our review. We found no publications comparing a life cycle assessment of health and environmental impacts between alcohol-free and regular-strength products. Three publications of low- and no-alcohol beers found only limited penetration of sales compared with higher strength beers. Two publications from only one jurisdiction (Great Britain) suggested that sales of no- and low-alcohol beers replaced rather than added to sales of higher strength beers. Eight publications indicated that taste, prior experiences, brand, health and wellbeing issues, price differentials, and overall decreases in the social stigma associated with drinking alcohol-free beverages were drivers of the purchase and consumption of low- and no-alcohol beers and wines. Three papers indicated confusion amongst consumers with respect to the labelling of low- and no-alcohol products. One paper indicated that the introduction of a minimum unit price in both Scotland and Wales favoured shifts in purchases from higher- to lower-strength beers. The evidence base for the potential beneficial health impact of low- and no-alcohol products is very limited and needs considerable expansion. At present, the evidence base could be considered inadequate to inform policy.

Impact of minimum unit pricing on alcohol purchases in Scotland and Wales: controlled interrupted time series analyses.

BACKGROUND: As a policy option to reduce consumption of alcohol and the harm it does, on May 1, 2018, Scotland introduced a minimum price of 50 British pence (p) per unit of alcohol (8 g) sold; Wales followed suit on March 2, 2020, with the same minimum unit price (MUP). We analysed household purchase data based on bar codes to assess the impact of these policy options in the medium term for Scotland and in the immediate term for Wales. METHODS: For these location-controlled, interrupted time series regression analyses, the data source was Kantar WorldPanel's household shopping panel, which, at the time of our analysis, included 35 242 British households providing detailed information on 1·24 million separate alcohol purchases in 2015-18 and the first half of 2020. With no data exclusions, we analysed the impact of introducing MUP in Scotland, using purchases in northern England as control, and in Wales, using western England as control. The studied changes associated with MUP were price paid per gram of alcohol purchased, grams of alcohol purchased, and amount of money spent on alcohol. FINDINGS: In Scotland, price increases and purchase decreases following the introduction of MUP in 2018 were maintained during the first half of 2020. The difference between Scotland and northern England in 2020 was a price increase of 0·741 p per gram (95% CI 0·724-0·759), a 7·6% increase, and a purchase decrease of 7·063 g per adult per household per day that an alcohol purchase was made (6·656-7·470), a 7·7% decrease. In Wales, the introduction of MUP led to similar results. The difference between Wales and western England was a price increase 0·841 of 0·841 p per gram (0·732-0·951), an 8·2% increase, and a purchase decrease of 7·052 g per adult per household per day that an alcohol purchase was made (6·463-7·640), an 8·6% decrease. For both Scotland and Wales, reductions in overall purchases of alcohol were largely restricted to households that bought the most alcohol. The introduction of MUP was not associated with an increased expenditure on alcohol by households that generally bought small amounts of alcohol and, in particular, those with low incomes. The changes were not affected by the introduction of COVID-19 confinement in the UK on March 26, 2020. INTERPRETATION: The evidence base supporting the positive, targeted impact of MUP is strengthened by the comparable results for Scotland and Wales. The short-term impact of MUP in Scotland during 2018 is maintained during the first half of 2020. MUP is an effective alcohol policy option to reduce off-trade purchases of alcohol and should be widely considered. FUNDING: None.

Evidence of reducing ethanol content in beverages to reduce harmful use of alcohol.

Alcohol use is a major contributor to the burden of gastrointestinal disease. WHO's global strategy to reduce harmful use of alcohol encourages the alcohol industry to contribute to this effort. However, evidence that alcohol producers have contributed to the reduction of harmful use of alcohol is scarce. Reduction of alcoholic strength of beer has been proposed and initiated as one potential way forward. We examine the evidence base for the success of such an initiative. Direct evidence from natural experiments or other controlled studies is scarce. We identified three potential mechanisms for how reduction of alcoholic strength could affect harmful use of alcohol: by current drinkers replacing standard alcoholic beverages with similar beverages of lower alcoholic strength, without increasing the quantity of liquid consumed; by current drinkers switching to no alcohol alternatives for part of the time, thereby reducing their average amount of ethanol consumed; and by initiating alcohol use in current abstainers. The first mechanism seems to be the most promising to potentially reduce harm, but much will depend on actual implementation, and only an independent assessment will be able to identify effects on harmful drinking. The potential of alcoholic strength reduction is independent of initiation by law or by self-initiative of the industry.