The effectiveness of a brief intervention for intensive care unit patients with hazardous alcohol use: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening for hazardous alcohol use and performing brief interventions (BIs) are recommended to reduce alcohol-related negative health consequences. We aimed to compare the effectiveness (defined as an at least 10% absolute difference) of BI with usual care in reducing alcohol intake in intensive care unit survivors with history of hazardous alcohol use. METHODS: We used Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) score to assess history of alcohol use. PATIENTS: Emergency admitted adult ICU patients in three Finnish university hospitals, with an AUDIT-C score > 5 (women), or > 6 (men). We randomized consenting eligible patients to receive a BI or treatment as usual (TAU). INTERVENTION: BI was delivered by the time of ICU discharge or shortly thereafter in the hospital ward. CONTROLS: Control patients received TAU. OUTCOME: The primary outcome was self-reported alcohol consumption during the preceding week 6 and 12 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were the change in AUDIT-C scores from baseline to 6 and 12 months, health-related quality of life, and mortality. The trial was terminated early due to slow recruitment during the pandemic. RESULTS: We randomized 234 patients to receive BI (N = 117) or TAU (N = 117). At 6 months, the median alcohol intake in the BI and TAU groups were 6.5 g (interquartile range [IQR] 0-141) and 0 g (0-72), respectively (p = 0.544). At 12 months, it was 24 g (0-146) and 0 g (0-96) in the BI and TAU groups, respectively (p = 0.157). Median change in AUDIT-C from baseline to 6 months was - 1 (- 4 to 0) and 2 (- 6 to 0), (p = 0.144) in the BI and TAU groups, and to 12 months - 3 (- 5 to - 1) and - 4 (- 7 to - 1), respectively (p = 0.187). In total, 4% (n = 5) of patients in the BI group and 11% (n = 13) of patients in the TAU group were abstinent at 6 months, and 10% (n = 12) and 15% (n = 17), respectively, at 12 months. No between-groups difference in mortality emerged. CONCLUSION: As underpowered, our study cannot reject or confirm the hypothesis that a single BI early after critical illness is effective in reducing the amount of alcohol consumed compared to TAU. However, a considerable number in both groups reduced their alcohol consumption. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03047577).

Hazardous alcohol consumption and perioperative complications in a cardiac surgery patient. A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the prevalence and effects of hazardous alcohol consumption on perioperative complications in cardiac surgery patients. Preoperative hazardous alcohol consumption has been associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications in noncardiac patient populations. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from the Finnish Intensive Care Consortium database and electronic patient records on all cardiac surgery patients treated in the intensive care units (ICUs) of Helsinki University Hospital (n = 919) during 2017. Data on preoperative alcohol consumption were routinely collected using the alcohol use disorder identification test consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaire. We analyzed perioperative data and outcomes for any associations with hazardous alcohol consumption. Outcome measures were length of stay in the ICU, re-admissions to ICU, bleeding and infectious complications, and incidence of postoperative arrhythmias. RESULTS: AUDIT-C scores were available for 758 (82.5%) patients, of whom 107 (14.1%) fulfilled the criteria for hazardous alcohol consumption (AUDIT-C score of 5/12 or higher for women and 6/12 or higher for men). Patients with hazardous alcohol consumption were younger, median age 59 (IQR 52.0-67.0) vs. 69.0 (IQR 63.0-74.0), p < .001, and more often men 93.5% vs. 71.9%, p < .001 than other patients and had an increased risk for ICU re-admissions [adjusted OR (aOR) 4.37 (95% CI, 1.60-11.95)] and severe postoperative infections aOR 3.26 (95% CI, 1.42-7.54). CONCLUSION: Cardiac surgery patients with a history of hazardous alcohol consumption are younger than other patients and are predominantly men. Hazardous alcohol consumption is associated with an increased risk of severe postoperative infections and ICU re-admissions.

Prevalence and impact of hazardous alcohol use in intensive care cohort: A multicenter, register-based study.

BACKGROUND: Reports of the prevalence and impact of hazardous alcohol use among intensive care unit (ICU) patients are contradictory. We aimed to study the prevalence of hazardous alcohol use among ICU patients and its association with ICU length of stay (LOS) and mortality. METHODS: Finnish ICUs have been using the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) to evaluate and record patients' alcohol use into the Finnish Intensive Care Consortium's Database (FICC). We retrieved data from the FICC from a 3-month period. We excluded data from centers with an AUDIT-C recording rate of less than 70% of admissions. We defined hazardous alcohol use as a score of 5 or more for women and 6 or more for men from a maximum score of 12 points. RESULTS: Two thousand forty-five patients were treated in the 10 centers with an AUDIT-C recording rate of 70% or higher. AUDIT-C was available for 1576 (77%) patients and indicated hazardous alcohol use for 334 (21%) patients who were more often younger (median age 55 [interquartile range 42-65] vs 67 [57-74] [P < .001]) and male (78.1% vs 61.3% [P < .001]) compared to other patients. We found no difference in LOS or hospital mortality between hazardous and non-hazardous alcohol users. Among the non-abstinent, risk of death within a year increased with increasing AUDIT-C scores adjusted odds ratio 1.077 (95% confidence interval, 1.006-1.152) per point. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of hazardous alcohol use in Finnish ICUs was 21%. Patients with hazardous alcohol use were more often younger and male compared with non-hazardous alcohol users.