4.8 Article

Screening and referral for brief intervention of alcohol-misusing patients in an emergency department: a pragmatic randomised control led trial

Journal

LANCET
Volume 364, Issue 9442, Pages 1334-1339

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17190-0

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Alcohol misuse is highly prevalent among people attending emergency departments, but the effect of intervention by staff working in these departments is unclear. We investigated the effect of screening and referral of patients found to be misusing alcohol while attending an emergency department. Methods We undertook a single-blind pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Patients received either an information leaflet or an information leaflet plus an appointment with an alcohol health worker. Outcome data were collected by patient interview and examination of hospital records at 6 and 12 months. Findings 599 patients were randomised over a 12-month period. At 6 months, those referred to an alcohol health worker were consuming a mean of 59.7 units of alcohol per week compared with 83.1 units in the control group (t-2.4, p=0.02). At 12 months those referred were drinking 57.2 units per week compared with 70.8 in controls (t-1.7, p=0.09). Those referred to the alcohol health worker had a mean of 0.5 fewer visits to the emergency department over the following 12 months (1.2 compared with 1.7, t-2.0, p=0.046). Differences in quality of life were not found. Interpretation Opportunistic identification and referral for alcohol misuse in an emergency department is feasible, associated with lower levels of alcohol consumption over the following 6 months, and reduces reattendance at the department. Short-term reductions in alcohol consumption associated with referral for brief intervention for alcohol misuse benefit patients and reduce demand for accident and emergency department services.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available