Associations between alcohol brief intervention in primary care and drinking and health outcomes in adults with hypertension and type 2 diabetes: a population-based observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate associations between alcohol brief intervention (BI) in primary care and 12-month drinking outcomes and 18-month health outcomes among adults with hypertension and type 2 diabetes (T2D). DESIGN: A population-based observational study using electronic health records data. SETTING: An integrated healthcare system that implemented system-wide alcohol screening, BI and referral to treatment in adult primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Adult primary care patients with hypertension (N=72 979) or T2D (N=19 642) who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use between 2014 and 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined four drinking outcomes: changes in heavy drinking days/past 3 months, drinking days/week, drinks/drinking day and drinks/week from baseline to 12-month follow-up, based on results of alcohol screens conducted in routine care. Health outcome measures were changes in measured systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) and BP reduction ≥3 mm Hg at 18-month follow-up. For patients with T2D, we also examined change in glycohaemoglobin (HbA1c) level and 'controlled HbA1c' (HbA1c<8%) at 18-month follow-up. RESULTS: For patients with hypertension, those who received BI had a modest but significant additional -0.06 reduction in drinks/drinking day (95% CI -0.11 to -0.01) and additional -0.30 reduction in drinks/week (95% CI -0.59 to -0.01) at 12 months, compared with those who did not. Patients with hypertension who received BI also had higher odds for having clinically meaningful reduction of diastolic BP at 18 months (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.09). Among patients with T2D, no significant associations were found between BI and drinking or health outcomes examined. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol BI holds promise for reducing drinking and helping to improve health outcomes among patients with hypertension who screened positive for unhealthy drinking. However, similar associations were not observed among patients with T2D. More research is needed to understand the heterogeneity across diverse subpopulations and to study BI's long-term public health impact.

Patterns of Health Care Use 5 Years After an Intervention Linking Patients in Addiction Treatment With a Primary Care Practitioner.

Importance: Substance use disorders are associated with high rates of emergency department (ED) use and challenges engaging with primary care services. Objective: To examine 5-year health care engagement and utilization outcomes for participants in the LINKAGE trial, given previously reported associations of LINKAGE with improved care engagement in the short term. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this post hoc analysis of a nonrandomized controlled trial, participants were assigned to the LINKAGE or usual care (UC) groups using a nonrandomized 3-month alternating off and on strategy over 30 months. Baseline through 5-year follow-up data were collected from April 2011 to October 2018. The trial was conducted at an urban outpatient addiction treatment clinic within a large health system among patients newly enrolled in addiction treatment. Data analysis was conducted from April 2021 to February 2022. Intervention: The LINKAGE intervention included 6 group-based sessions emphasizing patient agency, skill, and motivation in navigating health care services as well as a facilitated telephone or email connection with a primary care practitioner. The UC group received medical education. Main Outcomes and Measures: Substance use problem discussions with primary care practitioners (by patient self-report at 1-, 2-, and 5-year follow-up interview) and annual use of the electronic patient portal, primary care, and ED based on electronic health records. Results: A total of 503 participants, with a mean (SD) age of 42 (12) years, 346 (69%) male participants and 37 (7%) African American, 34 (7%) Asian, and 101 (20%) Hispanic participants, were assigned to LINKAGE (252 participants) or UC (251 participants). Compared with UC participants, LINKAGE participants were significantly more likely to discuss substance use problems with a primary care practitioner at 1-year follow-up (risk ratio [RR], 1.30; 95% CI, 1.03-1.65; P = .03) and use the electronic patient portal at 1- and 2-year follow-up (eg, messaging clinicians at 2 years: RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.47; P = .02). The LINKAGE group had small, statistically significant 5-year annual increases in primary care use (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.003-1.07; P = .03) and significant annual decreases in substance-related ED use (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.97; P = .03), relative to UC. The LINKAGE group did not significantly differ from the UC group on other types of ED utilization. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a patient activation intervention embedded in outpatient addiction treatment was associated with sustained improvements in health care engagement beyond previously reported 6-month outcomes and with long-term improvements in health care use patterns. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01621711.

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.

Associations Between Psychiatric Disorders and Alcohol Consumption Levels in an Adult Primary Care Population.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use frequently co-occurs with psychiatric disorders; however, little is known about the relationship between psychiatric disorders and alcohol consumption levels. Understanding varying levels of unhealthy alcohol use among individuals with a variety of psychiatric disorders in primary care would provide valuable insight for tailoring interventions. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 2,720,231 adult primary care patients screened for unhealthy alcohol use between 2014 and 2017 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, using electronic health record data. Alcohol consumption level was classified as no reported use, low-risk use, and unhealthy use, per National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism guidelines. Unhealthy use was further differentiated into mutually exclusive groups: exceeding only daily limits, exceeding only weekly limits, or exceeding both daily and weekly limits. Multivariable multinomial logistic regression models were fit to examine associations between 8 past-year psychiatric disorders (depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, anorexia nervosa, and bulimia nervosa) and alcohol consumption levels, adjusting for sociodemographic and health characteristics. RESULTS: In the full sample [53% female, 48% White, mean (SD) age = 46 (18) years], patients with psychiatric disorders (except eating disorders), compared to those without, had lower odds of reporting low-risk and unhealthy alcohol use relative to no use. Among patients who reported any alcohol use (n = 861,427), patients with depression and anxiety disorder, compared to those without, had higher odds of exceeding only weekly limits and both limits; patients with bulimia nervosa were also more likely to exceed both limits. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that patients with anxiety disorder, depression, and bulimia nervosa who drink alcohol are more likely to exceed recommended limits, increasing risk of developing more serious problems. Health systems and clinicians may wish to consider implementing more robust screening, assessment, and intervention approaches to support these vulnerable subgroups in limiting their drinking.

Changing Results-Engage and Activate to Enhance Wellness: A Randomized Clinical Trial to Improve Cardiovascular Risk Management.

Background Despite the success of current cardiovascular disease (CVD) management programs, many patients do not achieve optimal control of CVD-related risk factors. New strategies are needed to better activate and engage these patients. Methods and Results We conducted a parallel, 2-arm, randomized controlled trial, CREATE Wellness (Changing Results-Engage and Activate to Enhance Wellness) from February 2015 to September 2017 with 12-month follow-up to September 2018. Eligible participants had ≥1 uncontrolled CVD risk factors (hyperlipidemia, hypertension, or diabetes mellitus) for at least 2 years before study enrollment. The control group (n=315) received usual care within an existing CVD population-based disease management program. The intervention group (n=332) received usual care plus a group-based behavioral intervention focused on patient activation and engagement. Study outcomes included patient activation and patient-centered care processes (6 months) and healthcare system engagement, medication adherence, and control of CVD risk factors (12 months). Compared with the control group at follow-up, the intervention group had greater improvement in patient activation (adjusted mean difference=2.8, P=0.01), patient-centered care (adjusted mean difference=0.19, P=0.003), and 2 out of 3 measures of healthcare system engagement (eg, secure messages exchanged with a population health manager; adjusted incidence rate ratio=1.7, P=0.01). Intervention and control arms did not differ on improvement in 1-year CVD risk factor control. Conclusions Further work is needed to more effectively connect increased patient activation and engagement to downstream changes in risk factor control. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02302612.

Alcohol brief intervention in primary care: Blood pressure outcomes in hypertensive patients.

BACKGROUND: In 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. OBJECTIVE: To 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. DESIGN: Observational, prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: 3811 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 MEASURES: Change in BP and controlled BP (systolic/diastolic BP <140/90mmHg). RESULTS: Overall no significant associations were found between alcohol BI and BP change at 18-month follow-up when analyzing the combined sample of subjects in both intervention arms. However, moderation analyses found that receiving BI for positive past-year unhealthy drinking was positively associated with better BP control at 18months in the PCP intervention arm, and for those with lower heavy drinking frequency and poor BP control at the index screening. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that hypertensive patients may benefit from receiving physician brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care. Findings also highlight potential population-level benefits of alcohol BI if widely applied, suggesting a need for the development of innovative strategies to facilitate SBIRT delivery in primary care settings.

Examination of the Effects of an Intervention Aiming to Link Patients Receiving Addiction Treatment With Health Care: The LINKAGE Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Research has shown that higher activation and engagement with health care is associated with better self-management. To our knowledge, the linkage intervention (LINKAGE) is the first to engage patients receiving addiction treatment with health care using the electronic health record and a patient activation approach. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of an intervention aiming to link patients receiving addiction treatment with health care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A nonrandomized clinical trial evaluating the LINKAGE intervention vs usual care by applying an alternating 3-month off-and-on design over 30 months. Participants were recruited from an outpatient addiction treatment clinic in a large health system between April 7, 2011, and October 2, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Six group-based, manual-guided sessions on patient engagement in health care and the use of health information technology resources in the electronic health record, as well as facilitated communication with physicians, vs usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes, measured at 6 months after enrollment, were patient activation (by interview using the Patient Activation Measure), patient engagement in health care (by interview and electronic health record), and alcohol, drug, and depression outcomes (by interview using the Addiction Severity Index for alcohol and drug outcomes and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) for depression). RESULTS: A total of 503 patients were recruited and assigned to the LINKAGE (n = 252) or usual care (n = 251) conditions, with no differences in baseline characteristics between conditions. The mean (SD) age of the patients was 42.5 (11.8) years, 31.0% (n = 156) were female, and 455 (90.5%) completed the 6-month interview. Compared with usual care participants, LINKAGE participants showed an increase in the mean number of log-in days (incidence rate ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.19-1.97; P = .001). Similar results were found across types of patient portal use (communicating by email, viewing laboratory test results and information, and obtaining medical advice). LINKAGE participants were more likely to talk with their physicians about addiction problems (odds ratio, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.52-3.49; P < .001). Although 6-month abstinence rates were high for both conditions (≥70.0% for both) and depression symptoms improved (the proportion with scores ≥15 on the 9-item PHQ dropped from 15.1% [38 of 252] to 8.0% [18 of 225] among LINKAGE participants), there were no differences between conditions. Those who received all intervention components had significantly better alcohol and other drug outcomes than those who received fewer intervention components. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Findings support the feasibility and effectiveness of the LINKAGE intervention in helping patients receiving addiction treatment engage in health care and increase communication with their physicians. The intervention did not affect short-term abstinence or depression outcomes. Understanding if the LINKAGE intervention helps prevent relapse and manage long-term recovery will be important. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01621711.

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.