A clinical trial on a brief motivational intervention in reducing alcohol consumption under a telehealth supportive counseling

Practice Facilitation to Address Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) is the fourth most preventable cause of death in the US. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that primary care clinicians routinely screen all adults 18 years and older for UAU; however, this preventive service is poorly implemented.

Objective

To determine if practice facilitation improved delivery of the recommended care for UAU compared to usual care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This practice-level cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted across diverse and representative primary care practices throughout Virginia. A total of 76 primary care practices enrolled between October 2019 and January 2023.

Intervention

Practices received immediate (intervention) or 6-month delayed (control) practice facilitation, which included tailored educational sessions, workflow management, and tools for addressing UAU.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included the increase in recommended screening for UAU, brief interventions, referral for counseling, and medication treatment. Data were collected via medical record review (structured and free text data) and transcripts of practice facilitator sessions and exits interviews.

Results

Of the 76 primary care practices enrolled, 32 were randomized to intervention and 35 to control; 11 789 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [16.3] years; 61.1% women) were randomly selected for analysis, with patient demographics similar to Virginia at large. From baseline to 6 months after intervention, screening with a validated instrument increased from 2.1% (95% CI, 0.5%-8.4%) to 35.5% (95% CI, 11.5%-69.9%) in the intervention group compared to 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-1.8%) to 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-5.8%) in the control group (P < .001). Brief office-based interventions for the intervention group increased from 26.2% (95% CI, 14.2%-45.8%) to 62.6% (95% CI, 43.6%-78.3%) vs 45.5% (95% CI, 28.0%-64.1%) to 55.1% (95% CI, 36.5%-72.3%) in the control group (P = .008). Identification of UAU, referral for counseling, and medication treatment had similar changes for both groups. Qualitative analyses of transcripts revealed that few clinicians understood the preventive service prior to practice facilitation, but at the end most felt much more competent and confident with screening and brief intervention for UAU.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cluster randomized clinical trial demonstrated that practice facilitation can help primary care practices to better implement screening and counseling for UAU into their routine workflow. Effective primary care practice implementation interventions such as this can have a profound effect on the health of communities. Given the number of people that the participating practices care for, this intervention resulted in an additional 114 604 patients being screened annually for UAU who would not have been otherwise.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248023.

A mobile phone intervention to reduce heavy drinking: a preliminary analysis of anchoring heuristics

BACKGROUND

Preliminary evidence has been presented for interventions focused on preventing alcohol consumption or reducing the occurrence of episodes of excessive drinking. The anchoring text message intervention is a newly proposed theory-based approach to reducing heavy drinking among youth. The current study tests the preliminary efficacy of this intervention for reducing heavy drinking among Mexican youth.

METHODS

Focusing on a sample of sixteen Mexican youths-nine not-heavy drinkers and seven heavy drinkers-the participants completed a survey on alcohol consumption and anchoring heuristics. Pretest and post-test questionnaire data were collected to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention. The anchoring text messages consisted of strategies to limit alcohol use and feedback reminder messages. Assessments were conducted at baseline, four weeks of intervention, and post-intervention.

RESULTS

Logistic regression analyses indicated a significant effect on heavy drinking episodes post-intervention. The post-intervention anchoring effects among the heavy drinker participants were different from those among the non-heavy drinkers in terms of reporting heavy drinking and future drinking. The anchoring heuristic-based intervention reduced the quantity of drinking and the future estimation of drinking and improved the ability to reject alcohol in the heavy drinker group.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide preliminary support for the effectiveness of the anchoring heuristic-based intervention, conducted through text messages sent by mobile phone to reduce alcohol consumption. The intervention promoted a reduction in alcohol consumption. Future research should be directed toward investigating the anchoring effects among heavy drinkers.

Efficacy of psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol use in comorbid alcohol use disorder and alcohol-related liver disease: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

This systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021234598) fills a gap in the literature by assessing the efficacy of psychosocial interventions in patients with alcohol use disorder and alcohol-related liver disease (ARLD), focusing on drinking reduction and abstinence as intervention goals. A systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted across various databases. Study screening and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. The data were presented through narrative synthesis. Primary outcomes were alcohol reduction and abstinence at the longest follow-up. Ten RCTs were included, evaluating interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), motivational enhancement therapy (MET), motivational interviewing, or peer support. The total population included 1519 participants. Four studies included a combination of more than one intervention, and two trialed an integrated approach, including medical and psychosocial management. A significant reduction was observed with MET, while abstinence was observed with peer support, MET, and CBT/MET within integrated treatment. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate. Six studies presented a low risk of bias, one had some concerns, and three were high risk. The findings highlight the potential of psychosocial interventions, with MET being repeatedly associated with improved outcomes. Integrated treatment also demonstrated a promising role in ARLD. Future research should head toward improving the robustness and quality of the evidence. It should also aim to further tailor and trial new psychosocial interventions on this specific clinical population. This will enhance the translation of the evidence into real-world settings.

Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Harmful alcohol use is defined as unhealthy alcohol use that results in adverse physical, psychological, social, or societal consequences and is among the leading risk factors for disease, disability and premature mortality globally. The burden of harmful alcohol use is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and there remains a large unmet need for indicated prevention and treatment interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in these settings. Evidence regarding which interventions are effective and feasible for addressing harmful and other patterns of unhealthy alcohol use in LMICs is limited, which contributes to this gap in services.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial and pharmacologic treatment and indicated prevention interventions compared with control conditions (wait list, placebo, no treatment, standard care, or active control condition) aimed at reducing harmful alcohol use in LMICs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed in the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group (CDAG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Clinical Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) through 12 December 2021. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Web of Science, and Opengrey database to identify unpublished or ongoing studies. We searched the reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles for eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs comparing an indicated prevention or treatment intervention (pharmacologic or psychosocial) versus a control condition for people with harmful alcohol use in LMICs were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 66 RCTs with 17,626 participants. Sixty-two of these trials contributed to the meta-analysis. Sixty-three studies were conducted in middle-income countries (MICs), and the remaining three studies were conducted in low-income countries (LICs). Twenty-five trials exclusively enrolled participants with alcohol use disorder. The remaining 51 trials enrolled participants with harmful alcohol use, some of which included both cases of alcohol use disorder and people reporting hazardous alcohol use patterns that did not meet criteria for disorder. Fifty-two RCTs assessed the efficacy of psychosocial interventions; 27 were brief interventions primarily based on motivational interviewing and were compared to brief advice, information, or assessment only. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to brief interventions given the high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Studies reporting continuous outcomes: Tau² = 0.15, Q =139.64, df =16, P<.001, I² = 89%, 3913 participants, 17 trials, very low certainty; Studies reporting dichotomous outcomes: Tau²=0.18, Q=58.26, df=3, P<.001, I² =95%, 1349 participants, 4 trials, very low certainty). The other types of psychosocial interventions included a range of therapeutic approaches such as behavioral risk reduction, cognitive-behavioral therapy, contingency management, rational emotive therapy, and relapse prevention. These interventions were most commonly compared to usual care involving varying combinations of psychoeducation, counseling, and pharmacotherapy. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to psychosocial treatments due to high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 1.15; Q = 444.32, df = 11, P<.001; I²=98%, 2106 participants, 12 trials, very low certainty). Eight trials compared combined pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions with placebo, psychosocial intervention alone, or another pharmacologic treatment. The active pharmacologic study conditions included disulfiram, naltrexone, ondansetron, or topiramate. The psychosocial components of these interventions included counseling, encouragement to attend Alcoholics Anonymous, motivational interviewing, brief cognitive-behavioral therapy, or other psychotherapy (not specified). Analysis of studies comparing a combined pharmacologic and psychosocial intervention to psychosocial intervention alone found that the combined approach may be associated with a greater reduction in harmful alcohol use (standardized mean difference (standardized mean difference (SMD))=-0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.24; 475 participants; 4 trials; low certainty). Four trials compared pharmacologic intervention alone with placebo and three with another pharmacotherapy. Drugs assessed were: acamprosate, amitriptyline, baclofen disulfiram, gabapentin, mirtazapine, and naltrexone. None of these trials evaluated the primary clinical outcome of interest, harmful alcohol use.   Thirty-one trials reported rates of retention in the intervention. Meta-analyses revealed that rates of retention between study conditions did not differ in any of the comparisons (pharmacologic risk ratio (RR) = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.44, 247 participants, 3 trials, low certainty; pharmacologic in addition to psychosocial intervention: RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.40, 363 participants, 3 trials, moderate certainty). Due to high levels of heterogeneity, we did not calculate pooled estimates comparing retention in brief (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.00; Q = 172.59, df = 11, P<.001; I2 = 94%; 5380 participants; 12 trials, very low certainty) or other psychosocial interventions (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.01; Q = 34.07, df = 8, P<.001; I2 = 77%; 1664 participants; 9 trials, very low certainty). Two pharmacologic trials and three combined pharmacologic and psychosocial trials reported on side effects. These studies found more side effects attributable to amitriptyline relative to mirtazapine, naltrexone and topiramate relative to placebo, yet no differences in side effects between placebo and either acamprosate or ondansetron. Across all intervention types there was substantial risk of bias. Primary threats to validity included lack of blinding and differential/high rates of attrition.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In LMICs there is low-certainty evidence supporting the efficacy of combined psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use relative to psychosocial interventions alone. There is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of pharmacologic or psychosocial interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use largely due to the substantial heterogeneity in outcomes, comparisons, and interventions that precluded pooling of these data in meta-analyses. The majority of studies are brief interventions, primarily among men, and using measures that have not been validated in the target population. Confidence in these results is reduced by the risk of bias and significant heterogeneity among studies as well as the heterogeneity of results on different outcome measures within studies. More evidence on the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions, specific types of psychosocial interventions are needed to increase the certainty of these results.

A smartphone-based supportive counseling on health anxiety and acceptance of disability in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus patients: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a supportive counseling via the smart phone on the health anxiety, and acceptance of disability in the patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

METHODS

The present study was a randomized clinical trial with pre-post design. Randomly dividing 124 patients into experimental and control groups. Before and after the intervention, all patients answered the health anxiety and disability acceptance questionnaires. For eight weeks, the trial group received remote counseling help using the WhatsApp platform.

RESULTS

All 124 patients randomized into groups, completed follow-up which were analyzed. By the end of 8th week, the level of health anxiety (MD=11.34, P < 0.001) of the experiment group was significantly lower than the control group, while the level of acceptance of disability (MD=91.42, P < 0.001) of experiment group was significantly higher than the control group.

CONCLUSION

Smartphone-based supportive counseling may help people with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus manage their symptoms better, and live better by reducing health worry and increasing acceptance of impairment.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Virtual supportive counseling can assist healthcare professionals to optimize the potential of education and support processes.

Leveraging mHealth and Wearable Sensors to Manage Alcohol Use Disorders: A Systematic Literature Review

Background: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a condition prevalent in many countries around the world, and the public burden of its treatment is close to $130 billion. mHealth offers several possible interventions to assist in the treatment of AUD. Objectives: To analyze the effectiveness of mHealth and wearable sensors to manage AUD from evidence published over the last 10 years. Methods: Following the Kruse Protocol and PRISMA 2020, four databases were queried (PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Science Direct) to identify studies with strong methodologies (n = 25). Results: Five interventions were identified, and 20/25 were effective at reducing alcohol consumption. Other interventions reported a decrease in depression and an increase in medication compliance. Primary barriers to the adoption of mHealth interventions are a requirement to train users, some are equally as effective as the traditional means of treatment, cost, and computer literacy. Conclusion: While not all mHealth interventions demonstrated statistically significant reduction in alcohol consumption, most are still clinically effective to treat AUD and provide a patient with their preference of a technologically inclined treatment Most interventions require training of users and some technology literacy, the barriers identified were very few compared with the litany of positive results.

Telemedicine in the treatment of addictions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this update is to provide an overview of recent research publications (January 2020-January 2022) on real-time telemedicine solutions for the management of addictions (alcohol, tobacco, opioids, and other drugs).

RECENT FINDINGS

Motivational interviewing by real-time telemedicine showed effectiveness in youth and adults for risky alcohol use and alcohol use disorders, even when a concurrent mental health disorder exists. Live telemedicine is well accepted for managing tobacco use disorders. The range of interventions for treating opioid use disorder by real-time telemedicine is large and has been increased due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (prescription of opioid agonists, peer-to-peer support, counseling, and group therapy).

SUMMARY

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the implementation of real-time telemedicine and, in parallel, research has been conducted to test its effectiveness. Videoconferencing and telephone interventions are supported by solid evidence for risky alcohol use and alcohol use disorder, tobacco use disorder and opioid use disorder. The Integration of other types of telemedicine (asynchronous telemedicine and remote monitoring) and with the entire health system is lacking. Many areas and vulnerable populations (e.g., homeless, elderly, and cannabis use disorders) need more attention.