Pain and Hazardous Alcohol Use in Veterans in Primary Care: The Role of Affective Pain Interference and Alcohol Pain-Coping Perceptions.

Chronic pain and unhealthy alcohol use commonly co-occur and are associated with negative health outcomes. Veterans may be particularly vulnerable to these conditions, yet limited research has examined factors involved in their co-occurrence. This cross-sectional study aimed to examine the role of affective pain interference and alcohol pain-coping perceptions in the relationship between pain and hazardous alcohol use. As informed by the catastrophizing, anxiety, negative urgency, and expectancy model, we hypothesized that the relationship between pain and hazardous alcohol consumption is mediated by affective pain interference and stronger among those with greater perceptions that alcohol helps cope with pain. Participants were 254 VA primary care patients (87.8% male, Mage = 64.03, 76.4% White) with a history of chronic musculoskeletal pain, past-year alcohol use, and past-week pain. Veterans completed a mailed survey including measures of pain, affective pain interference, alcohol pain-coping perceptions, and hazardous alcohol use. Hypotheses were tested with regression models and PROCESS macros. As hypothesized, affective pain interference mediated the pain-hazardous alcohol use association. Contrary to hypotheses, results showed no moderating effect of alcohol pain-coping perceptions. Findings partially support relationships among theorized constructs and suggest that for Veterans with co-occurring pain and alcohol use it may be important to target pain-related affective interference and perceptions that alcohol helps cope with pain. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents a test of factors involved in the pain and alcohol relationship, as informed by the CANUE model. Findings suggest that for Veterans with co-occurring pain and past-year alcohol use, it may be important to target pain-related affective interference and perceptions that alcohol helps cope with pain.

Factors Influencing Patient Receptivity to Brief Alcohol Interventions in Primary Care: An Application of Conjoint Analysis.

Background: Brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) are an evidence-based practice for addressing hazardous alcohol use in primary care settings. However, numerous barriers to implementation of BAIs in routine practice have been identified, including concerns about patient receptivity to BAIs. Despite this being a commonly identified barrier to BAI implementation, little BAI implementation research has focused on patient receptivity. Objectives: This study aimed to identify the treatment preferences of primary care patients who screened positive for hazardous alcohol use and to evaluate factors that may influence patients' receptivity to BAIs delivered in primary care. We conducted a mailed survey of primary care patients (N = 245) who screened positive for hazardous alcohol use on annual screening measures based on electronic medical record data. Patients completed measures assessing treatment preferences and a conjoint analysis questionnaire designed to evaluate the relative importance of three factors (focus of the BAI, tailoring of the BAI, and familiarity with the provider delivering the BAI) for patient receptivity. Results: Conjoint analysis results revealed that familiarity with provider (with patients preferring BAIs delivered by providers they have previously met) was the most important factor in predicting patients' receptivity to BAIs. Additionally, patients preferred to discuss alcohol use in the context of another concern (focus of the BAI) and preferred personalized information tailored based on their specific health concerns (tailoring of the BAI), although these factors were not statistically significant when accounting for familiarity with provider. Conclusions: Findings of the present study have potential to inform future research on implementation of BAIs.

Treatment-As-Usual Control Groups in Brief Alcohol Intervention Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) are evidence-based practices that can help reduce hazardous drinking among patients in medical settings. However, descriptions of the treatment-as-usual (TAU) control groups that BAIs are compared to in clinical trials often lack clarity and detail. This systematic review and meta-analysis quantified and compared descriptions of intervention and TAU control arms within reports of randomized controlled trials and examined whether treatment effects were affected by level of detail in narrative descriptions. METHOD: A systematic literature search to identify eligible articles was performed. Studies were rated on methodological quality, and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist was used to rate the level of clarity and detail included in descriptions of the intervention and TAU conditions in eligible articles. Data were extracted from articles for use in meta-analysis and meta-regression. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria. Across the studies, TIDieR ratings for intervention arms were higher than ratings for control arms. BAIs were linked to reductions in drinks per week, heavy drinking episodes, and alcohol consequences over time when compared with TAU. TIDieR ratings for control groups were significantly associated with larger treatment effects on drinks per week and alcohol consequences but were not significant for heavy drinking episodes. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis reiterated the effectiveness of BAIs in medical settings. Yet the lack of clarity in TAU descriptions raises concerns regarding the validity of BAI trials, suggesting need for more detailed reporting and use of the TIDieR guidelines for support.

Brief alcohol interventions in U.S. medical settings: A systematic review of the implementation literature.

This systematic review provides a synthesis of the literature on brief alcohol intervention (BAI) implementation in medical settings. We utilized the Proctor et al. (2011) taxonomy of eight implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability) to organize and describe the qualitative and quantitative literature regarding BAI implementation. An electronic search of the PubMed database identified 25 articles that met inclusion criteria. The study team independently assessed all articles for methodological quality, with the majority of studies rated as weak to moderate. Descriptive and narrative review of the included articles identified penetration and acceptability as the two most commonly reported implementation outcomes. Studies rarely reported other outcomes (e.g., fidelity, cost, sustainability, adoption). On average, studies utilized approximately six implementation strategies to facilitate implementation, with education (96%), quality management (64%), and planning (56%) strategies the most frequently reported. Promising evidence exists that patients and providers are accepting of BAI implementation efforts and implementation efforts are helpful in expanding the reach of BAIs. A theory-informed approach to selecting implementation strategies may enhance implementation success in future work. When reporting on implementation, all studies should provide detailed BAI descriptions and strategies to enhance replication efforts. We suggest study designs that balance practical outcomes with methodological rigor to maximize the quality of future studies and better inform implementation efforts.

Meaning differentiates depression and grief among suicide survivors.

The present study examined the utility of meaning to differentiate between depression and grief in a sample of suicide survivors (N = 555). Three regression models were tested, each with a different measure of meaning predicting depression and grief. Across three models, meaning was negatively associated with depression but positively associated with grief. Additionally, grief and depression were negatively correlated across all models. Results support a conceptual distinction between grief and depression, with the presence or absence of meaning in life as a key distinguishing factor between the two in a population with a relatively high risk for pathological grieving.