TY - JOUR
T1 - Brief interventions to prevent excessive alcohol use in adolescents at low-risk presenting to Emergency Departments: Three-arm, randomised trial of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
AU - Deluca, Paolo
AU - Coulton, Simon
AU - Alam, Mohammed Fasihul
AU - Boniface, Sadie
AU - Cohen, David
AU - Donoghue, Kim
AU - Gilvarry, Eilish
AU - Kaner, Eileen
AU - Maconochie, Ian
AU - McArdle, Paul
AU - McGovern, Ruth
AU - Newbury-Birch, Dorothy
AU - Patton, Robert
AU - Pellatt-Higgins, Tracy
AU - Phillips, Ceri
AU - Phillips, Thomas
AU - Pockett, Rhys
AU - Russell, Ian
AU - Strang, John
AU - Drummond, Colin
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank the over 100 researchers who worked tirelessly to recruit study participants across the 10 participating EDs. Ruth McGovern, Jen Bradley, Matt Breckons, Emma Simpson, Hayley Alderson, Kirsten Hall, Jen Birch,Paul Corrigan, Jamie Rea, Emily Clare, Carly Brown, Andrea Mulligan, Lisa McDougall, Kenn Walker,Jan Milner, Steph Ogilvie, Steven Elliott, Gillian Lathan, Ashley Lowe, Nicola Connor, Lisa Dingwall, Samantha Nesbitt, Joanne Firman, Alice Hunt, Amanpreet Banga, Amy Wolstenholme, Delah Akomah, Ellen McDonald, Hannah Rose, Jon Jezak, Jordan Quinn, Kim Mihaljevic, Lauren Schumacher, Melissa Ashe, Rebecca McDonald, Sadie Boniface, Saira Shamim, Sarah Feehan, Tajinder Rai, Vera Forjaz, Vicky Brooks, Michelle Lee, Abel Jalloh, Paul Burnett, Carol Taylor, Helen Garvey, Lydia Bromley, Kate Cheung, Paul Williams, Hilary Thornton, Thomas Phillips, Gayle Clifford, Madeleine Duffy, Lyndsey Dixon, Sue Leach, Deborah Smart, Liam Spencer, Anne Marie Ianzito, Louise Carr, Mohamed Pujeh, Sarah Chamberlin, Chidimma Onyejiaka, Tara Harvey, Antionette McNulty, Pat Daly, Val Dun-Toroosian, Lorraine O'Connell, Lesley Haley, Danielle Walker, Anthony Kennedy, Lesley Alderton, Sheila Blenkin, Jill Deane, Amanda Cowton, Tarn Nozedar, Emma Grey, Chloe Barclay, Mandy Porritt, Natasha Newell, Elaine Garett, Kirsty Banham, Julie Gray, Susan Crawford, Debbie Wilson, Wendy Cheadle, June Battram, Julie Colarossi, Claire Irish, Gabrielle Osborne, Heather Marley, Jason Pickering, Karolina Bogdanowicz, Catherine Elzerbi, Susan Kelsey, Hannah Kaner, Andrea Mulligan, Rebecca Reed, Stephanie Ogilvie, Erin Graybill, Sasha Taylor, Wendy Hall, Louise Tam, Naomi Bateman, Liz Jacques, Khatiba Raja, Tom Bramhall, Samantha Lovely and Simon Flynn. Participating EDs:, St Thomas? Hospital, Westminster Bridge Rd, London SE1 7EH, King's College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London SE5 9RS, Ealing Hospital, Uxbridge Rd, Southall UB1 3HW, Croydon University Hospital, 530 London Rd, Croydon CR7 7YE, Hull Royal Infirmary, Anlaby Rd, Hull HU3 2JZ, Darlington Memorial Hospital, Hollyhurst Rd, Darlington DL3 6HX, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, Queen Elizabeth Ave, Gateshead NE9 6SX, North Tees Hospital, Holdforth Road, Hartlepool TS24 9AH, South Tyneside District Hospital, Harton Ln, South Shields NE34 0PL, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Kayll Rd, Sunderland SR4 7TP, Software developers:, We thank Richard McGregor and Danny Berzon of Codeface Ltd for developing SIPS City, the electronic application for the brief intervention, and that for trial management.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/7
Y1 - 2021/7
N2 - Background: Alcohol consumption and related harm increase rapidly from the age of 12 years. We evaluated whether alcohol screening and brief intervention is effective and cost-effective in delaying hazardous or harmful drinking amongst low-risk or abstaining adolescents attending Emergency Departments (EDs). Methods: This ten-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, pragmatic, individually randomised trial screened ED attenders aged between 14 and 17 years for alcohol consumption. We sampled at random one third of those scoring at most 2 on AUDIT-C who had access to the internet and, if aged under 16, were Gillick competent or had informed consent from parent or guardian. We randomised them between: screening only (control intervention); one session of face-to-face Personalised Feedback and Brief Advice (PFBA); and PFBA plus an electronic brief intervention (eBI) on smartphone or web. We conducted follow-up after six and 12 months. The principal outcomes were alcohol consumed over the 3 months before 12-month follow up, measured by AUDIT-C; and quality-adjusted life-years. Findings: Between October 2014 and May 2015, we approached 5,016 eligible patients of whom 3,326 consented to be screened and participate in the trial; 2,571 of these were low-risk drinkers or abstainers, consuming an average 0.14 units per week. We randomised: 304 to screening only; 285 to PFBA; and 294 to PFBA and eBI. We found no significant difference between groups, notably in weekly alcohol consumption: those receiving screening only drank 0.10 units (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.18); PFBA 0.12 (0.06 to 0.21); PFBA and eBI 0.10 (0.05 to 0.19). Interpretation: While drinking levels remained low in this population, this trial found no evidence that PFBA with or without eBI was more effective than screening alone in reducing or delaying alcohol consumption.
AB - Background: Alcohol consumption and related harm increase rapidly from the age of 12 years. We evaluated whether alcohol screening and brief intervention is effective and cost-effective in delaying hazardous or harmful drinking amongst low-risk or abstaining adolescents attending Emergency Departments (EDs). Methods: This ten-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, pragmatic, individually randomised trial screened ED attenders aged between 14 and 17 years for alcohol consumption. We sampled at random one third of those scoring at most 2 on AUDIT-C who had access to the internet and, if aged under 16, were Gillick competent or had informed consent from parent or guardian. We randomised them between: screening only (control intervention); one session of face-to-face Personalised Feedback and Brief Advice (PFBA); and PFBA plus an electronic brief intervention (eBI) on smartphone or web. We conducted follow-up after six and 12 months. The principal outcomes were alcohol consumed over the 3 months before 12-month follow up, measured by AUDIT-C; and quality-adjusted life-years. Findings: Between October 2014 and May 2015, we approached 5,016 eligible patients of whom 3,326 consented to be screened and participate in the trial; 2,571 of these were low-risk drinkers or abstainers, consuming an average 0.14 units per week. We randomised: 304 to screening only; 285 to PFBA; and 294 to PFBA and eBI. We found no significant difference between groups, notably in weekly alcohol consumption: those receiving screening only drank 0.10 units (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.18); PFBA 0.12 (0.06 to 0.21); PFBA and eBI 0.10 (0.05 to 0.19). Interpretation: While drinking levels remained low in this population, this trial found no evidence that PFBA with or without eBI was more effective than screening alone in reducing or delaying alcohol consumption.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85099704406&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103113
DO - 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103113
M3 - Article
SN - 0955-3959
VL - 93
JO - International Journal of Drug Policy
JF - International Journal of Drug Policy
M1 - 103113
ER -