Demographic and socioeconomic factors influencing disparities in prevalence of alcohol-related injury among underserved trauma patients in a safety-net hospital

Approaches and reporting of alcohol and other drug testing for injured patients in hospital-based studies: A systematic review

ISSUE

Hospital alcohol and/or other drug (AOD) testing is important for identifying AOD-related injuries; however, testing methods vary. This systematic review aimed to examine biological AOD testing methods from hospital-based studies of injured patients and quantify what proportion reported key information on those testing methods.

APPROACH

Observational studies published in English from 2010 onwards involving biological AOD testing for injured patients presenting to hospital were included. Studies examining single injury causes were excluded. Extracted data included concentration thresholds for AOD detection (e.g., lower limits of detection, author-defined cut-offs), test type (e.g., immunoassay, breathalyser) and approach (e.g., routine, clinical discretion), timing of testing, sample type and the proportion of injured cases tested for AODs.

KEY FINDINGS

Of 83 included studies, 76 measured alcohol and 37 other drugs. Forty-nine studies defined blood alcohol concentration thresholds (ranging from 0 to 0.1 g/100 mL). Seven studies defined concentration thresholds for other drugs. Testing approach was reported in 39/76 alcohol and 18/37 other drug studies. Sample type was commonly reported (alcohol: n = 69/76; other drugs: n = 28/37); alcohol was typically measured using blood (n = 60) and other drugs using urine (n = 20). Studies that reported the proportion of cases tested (alcohol: n = 53/76; other drugs: n = 28/37), reported that between 0% and 89% of cases were not tested for alcohol and 0% and 91% for other drugs. Timing of testing was often unreported (alcohol: n = 61; other drugs: n = 30).

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

Variation in AOD testing methods alongside incomplete reporting of those methods limits data comparability and interpretation. Standardised reporting of testing methods will assist AOD-related injury surveillance and prevention.

Prevalence of Alcohol and Other Drug Use in Patients Presenting to Hospital for Violence-Related Injuries: A Systematic Review

Substance use is a risk factor for being both a perpetrator and a victim of violence. The aim of this systematic review was to report the prevalence of acute pre-injury substance use in patients with violence-related injuries. Systematic searches were used to identify observational studies that included patients aged ≥15 years presenting to hospital after violence-related injuries and used objective toxicology measures to report prevalence of acute pre-injury substance use. Studies were grouped based on injury cause (any violence-related, assault, firearm, and other penetrating injuries including stab and incised wounds) and substance type (any substance, alcohol only, drugs other than alcohol only), and they were summarized using narrative synthesis and meta-analyses. This review included 28 studies. Alcohol was detected in 13%-66% of any violence-related injuries (five studies), 4%-71% of assaults (13 studies), 21%-45% of firearm injuries (six studies; pooled estimate = 41%, 95% CI: 40%-42%, n = 9,190), and 9%-66% of other penetrating injuries (nine studies; pooled estimate = 60%, 95% CI: 56%-64%, n = 6,950). Drugs other than alcohol were detected in 37% of any violence-related injuries (one study), 39% of firearm injuries (one study), 7%-49% of assaults (five studies), and 5%-66% of penetrating injuries (three studies). The prevalence of any substance varied across injury categories: any violence-related injuries = 76%-77% (three studies), assaults = 40%-73% (six studies), firearms = n/a, other penetrating injuries = 26%-45% (four studies; pooled estimate = 30%, 95% CI: 24%-37%, n = 319).Overall, substance use was frequently detected in patients presenting to hospital for violence-related injuries. Quantification of substance use in violence-related injuries provides a benchmark for harm reduction and injury prevention strategies.

Could reasons for admission help to screen unhealthy alcohol use in emergency departments? A multicenter French study

Background

Many patients admitted to general emergency departments (EDs) have a pattern of drinking that could lead to future alcohol-related complications. However, it is often difficult to screen these patients in the context of emergency. The aim of this study is to analyze whether reasons for admission could help to screen patients who have an unhealthy alcohol use.

Method

Patients were recruited among six public hospital ED in France, between 2012 and 2014. During a one-month period in each hospital, anonymous questionnaires including sociodemographic questions, AUDIT-C and RAPS4-QF were administered to each patients visiting the ED. The reason for admission of each patient was noted at the end of their questionnaire by the ED practitioner.

Results

Ten thousand Four hundred twenty-one patients were included in the analysis. Patients who came to the ED for injuries and mental disorders were more likely to report unhealthy alcohol use than non-harmful use or no use. Among male patients under 65 years old admitted to the ED for a mental disorder, 24.2% drank more than four drinks (40 g ethanol) in typical day at least four time a week in the last 12 months. Among these patients, 79.7% reported daily or almost daily heavy episodic drinking (HED, 60 g ethanol), and all were positive on the RAPS4-QF.

Conclusion

This study highlights that unhealthy alcohol use is frequent among ED patients and particularly among those who come for injuries or mental disorders. Men under 65 years old with a mental disorder require special attention because of their increased prevalence of daily or almost daily HED.

Prevalence of alcohol and other drug use in patients presenting to hospital for fall-related injuries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Alcohol and other drug (AOD) use is a key preventable risk factor for serious injuries. Prevention strategies to date have largely focused on transport injuries, despite AOD use being a significant risk factor for other injury causes, including falls. This systematic review aimed to report the prevalence of AOD use in patients presenting to hospital for fall-related injuries.

METHODS

This systematic review includes studies published in English after the year 2010 that objectively measured the prevalence of AOD use in patients presenting to hospital for a fall-related injury. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were completed by two independent reviewers. Data were presented using narrative synthesis and, where appropriate, meta-analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 12 707 records were screened. Full texts were retrieved for 2042 records, of which 29 were included. Four studies reported the combined prevalence of any alcohol and/or drug use, generating a pooled prevalence estimate of 37% (95% CI 25% to 49%). Twenty-two records reported on the prevalence of acute alcohol use alone and nine reported specifically on the prevalence of drugs other than alcohol, with prevalence ranging from 2% to 57% and 7% to 46%, respectively. The variation in prevalence estimates likely resulted from differences in toxicology testing methods across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

AOD exposure was common in hospitalised fall-related injuries. However, research addressing prevalence across different types of falls and the use of drugs other than alcohol was limited. Future research should address these areas to improve our understanding of which populations should be targeted in AOD and injury prevention strategies .

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020188746.

Causal mechanisms proposed for the alcohol harm paradox-a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The alcohol harm paradox (AHP) posits that disadvantaged groups suffer from higher rates of alcohol-related harm compared with advantaged groups, despite reporting similar or lower levels of consumption on average. The causes of this relationship remain unclear. This study aimed to identify explanations proposed for the AHP. Secondary aims were to review the existing evidence for those explanations and investigate whether authors linked explanations to one another.

METHODS

This was a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE (1946-January 2021), EMBASE (1974-January 2021) and PsycINFO (1967-January 2021), supplemented with manual searching of grey literature. Included papers either explored the causes of the AHP or investigated the relationship between alcohol consumption, alcohol-related harm and socio-economic position. Papers were set in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development high-income countries. Explanations extracted for analysis could be evidenced in the empirical results or suggested by researchers in their narrative. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to group explanations.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine papers met the inclusion criteria and initial coding revealed that these papers contained 41 distinct explanations for the AHP. Following inductive thematic analysis, these explanations were grouped into 16 themes within six broad domains: individual, life-style, contextual, disadvantage, upstream and artefactual. Explanations related to risk behaviours, which fitted within the life-style domain, were the most frequently proposed (n = 51) and analysed (n = 21).

CONCLUSIONS

While there are many potential explanations for the alcohol harm paradox, most research focuses on risk behaviours while other explanations lack empirical testing.

Socioeconomics affecting quality outcomes in Asian trauma patients within the United States

INTRODUCTION

Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders are often considered as a uniform group when examining race in health outcomes. However, the generally favorable economic outcomes in this group belie significant socioeconomic variance between its heterogeneous subgroups. This study evaluates the impact of socioeconomic status on the health outcomes of Asian trauma patients.

METHODS

From 2012 to 2015, 52,704 Asians who presented to trauma centers were registered with the National Trauma Data Bank with known disposition. Chi² and multivariate logistic regression analysis for mortality were performed controlling for age, gender, comorbidities, injury severity, insurance, race, and ethnicity. Negative binomial regression analysis with margins for length of stay (LOS) was performed. Subgroup analysis was done for polytrauma (Injury Severity Score >15, n = 14,787).

RESULTS

Asians represent 1.8% of the trauma population. Uninsured Asians were 1.9 times more likely to die than privately insured Asians (P < 0.001). Medicare patients were 1.8 times more likely to die (P < 0.001). Eighty-one Asians identified themselves as Hispanic, and there was no significant difference in their mortality or LOS for this group (P = 0.06, P = 0.18). Bleeding disorders, diabetes, cirrhosis, hypertension, respiratory disease, cancer, esophageal varices, angina, cerebrovascular accident, and dependent health care before trauma all individually affected mortality and were controlled for in this model (P < 0.05). LOS was 1.7 d longer in Medicaid patients (2.2 d with polytrauma) and 1.1 d longer in workman's compensation patients (2.1 d with polytrauma). Uninsured had a shorter LOS (P < 0.005). Asian males with polytrauma stayed 1.6 d longer than females (P < 0.001), and age did not affect LOS for this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Noteworthy socioeconomic disparities influence Asian trauma patients independent of their race. Mortality is affected by insurance status, despite controlling for injury severity and comorbidities.