Association Between Receipt of Brief Alcohol Intervention and Quality of Care among Veteran Outpatients with Unhealthy Alcohol Use

Screening for Unhealthy Alcohol and Drug Use in General Medicine Settings

Unhealthy alcohol and drug use are among the top 10 causes of preventable death in the United States, but they are infrequently identified and addressed in medical settings. Guidelines recommend screening adult primary care patients for alcohol and drug use, and routine screening should be a component of high-quality clinical care. Brief, validated screening tools accurately detect unhealthy alcohol and drug use, and their thoughtful implementation can facilitate adoption and optimize the quality of screening results. Recommendations for implementation include patient self-administered screening tools, integration with electronic health records, and screening during routine primary care visits.

Increased Rates of Documented Alcohol Counseling in Primary Care: More Counseling or Just More Documentation?

BACKGROUND

Clinical performance measures often require documentation of patient counseling by healthcare providers. Little is known about whether such measures encourage delivery of counseling or merely its documentation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in provider documentation of alcohol counseling and patient report of receiving alcohol counseling in the Veterans Administration (VA) from 2009 to 2012.

DESIGN

Retrospective time-series analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 5413 men who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use at an outpatient visit and responded to a confidential mailed survey regarding alcohol counseling from a VA provider in the prior year.

MAIN MEASURES

Rates of provider documentation of alcohol counseling in the electronic health record and patient report of such counseling on the survey were assessed over 4 fiscal years. Annual rates were calculated overall and with patients categorized into four mutually exclusive groups based on their own reports of alcohol counseling (yes/no) and whether alcohol counseling was documented by a provider (yes/no).

KEY RESULTS

Provider documentation of alcohol counseling increased 23.6% (95% CI: 17.0, 30.2), from 59.4% to 83.0%, while patient report of alcohol counseling showed no significant change (4.0%, 95% CI: -2.3, 10.3), increasing from 66.1% to 70.1%. An 18.7% (95% CI: 11.7, 25.7) increase in the proportion of patients who reported counseling that was documented by a provider largely reflected a 14.7% decline (95% CI: 8.5, 20.8) in the proportion of patients who reported alcohol counseling that was not documented by a provider. The proportion of patients who did not report counseling but whose providers documented it did not show a significant change (4.9%, 95%CI: 0.0, 9.9).

CONCLUSIONS

If patient report is accurate, increased rates of documented alcohol counseling in the VA from 2009 to 2012 predominantly reflected improved documentation of previously undocumented counseling rather than delivery of additional counseling or increased documentation of counseling that did not meaningfully occur.

Alcohol Use Disorder in Older Adults: Challenges in Assessment and Treatment

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a common, under-recognized, and under-treated health concern in older adults. Its prevalence is expected to reach unprecedented levels as the U.S. population ages; consequently, it is poised to place a significant burden on the healthcare system. Given the growing body of evidence regarding the patterns of use in this age group and the serious consequences of its misuse, it is critical that nurses and other healthcare providers assess for AUD in order to identify older adults in need of treatment. Yet, differences in symptom presentation, problems in isolating the symptoms of AUD from other healthcare complaints associated with aging, as well as the denial and fear of stigma that is especially pervasive in this age group, are major barriers to its identification and subsequent treatment. Furthermore, the lack of consistent use of evidence-based, age-specific screening instruments to identify those at risk is another significant obstacle to successful treatment. Healthcare providers in primary care are especially well-positioned to perform a systematic assessment utilizing appropriate instruments to identify AUD and initiate age-specific interventions, including the use of alcohol screening and brief interventions (ASBIs). The use of ASBIs, along with other targeted interventions such as mutual help groups (MHGs), such as Alcoholics Anonymous, can be key in encouraging insight, dismantling denial, and supporting treatment success, lifelong recovery, and overall quality of life in this vulnerable group.

Comparison of provider-documented and patient-reported brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in VA outpatients

BACKGROUND

Performance measures for brief alcohol interventions (BIs) are currently based on provider documentation of BI. However, provider documentation may not be a reliable measure of whether or not patients are offered clinically meaningful BIs. In particular, BI documented with clinical decision support in an electronic medical record (EMR) could appear identical irrespective of the quality of BI provided. We hypothesized that differences in how BI was implemented across health systems could lead to differences in the proportion of documented BI recalled and reported by patients across health systems.

METHODS

Male outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use identified by confidential satisfaction surveys (2009-2012) were assessed for whether they reported receiving BI in the past year (patient-reported BI) and whether they had BI documented in the EMR during the same period (documented BI). We evaluated and compared the prevalence of documented BI to patient-reported BI across 21 VA networks to determine whether documented BI had a variable association with patient-reported BI across the networks.

RESULTS

Of 9896 eligible male outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use, 59.0% (95% CI 57.4-60.5%) reported BI (50.4-64.9% across networks) and 37.4% (95% CI 36.0-38.9%) had BI documented in the EMR (28.0-44.2% across networks). Overall, 72.9% (95% CI 70.8-75.5%) of patients with documented BI also reported BI. The association between documented BI and patient-reported BI did not vary across VA networks in adjusted logistic regression models.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance measures of BI that rely on provider documentation in EMRs appear comparable to patient report for comparing care across VA networks.