Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms improve after an integrated brief alcohol intervention for OEF/OIF/OND veterans

Unhealthy alcohol use and brief intervention rates among high and low complexity veterans seeking primary care services in the Veterans Health Administration

INTRODUCTION

Brief intervention (BI) is recommended for all primary care (PC) patients who screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use; however, patients with multiple chronic health conditions who are at high-risk of hospitalization (i.e., "high complexity" patients) may face disparities in receiving BIs in PC. The current study investigated whether high complexity and low complexity patients in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) differed regarding screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use, alcohol-use severity, and receipt of BI for those with unhealthy alcohol use.

METHODS

Patients were veterans receiving PC services at the VHA in a mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The study extracted VHA administrative and clinical data for a total of 282,242 patients who had ≥1 PC visits between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2014, during which they were screened for unhealthy alcohol use by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C). The study defined high complexity patients as those within and above the 90th percentile of risk for hospitalization per the VHA's Care Assessment Need Score. Logistic regression models assessed if being a high complexity patient was associated with screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥ 5), severity of unhealthy alcohol use in those who screened positive (AUDIT-C score range 5-12), and receipt of BI in those who screened positive.

RESULTS

Our sample was 94.5% male, 83% White, 13% Black, 4% other race, and 1.7% Hispanic. A total of 10,813 (3.8%) patients screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use from which we identified 569 (5.3%) high complexity and 10,128 (93.6%) low complexity patients (n = 116 removed due to missing complexity data). Relative to low complexity patients, high complexity patients were less likely to screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use (3.3% vs. 4.1%, AOR = 0.59, p < .001); however, in patients who screened positive, high complexity patients had higher AUDIT-C scores (Mean AUDIT-C = 7.75 vs. 6.87, AOR = 1.46, p < .001) and were less likely to receive a BI (78.0% vs. 92.6%, AOR = 0.42, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in BI exist for highly complex patients despite having more severe unhealthy alcohol use. Future research should examine the specific patient- and/or clinic-level factors impeding BI delivery for complex patients.

Evaluation of an integrated personalized feedback intervention for hazardous drinkers with elevated anxiety sensitivity and PTSD symptoms: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Hazardous drinking and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are commonly co-occurring conditions among adults. Motivational enhancement interventions, such as personalized feedback interventions (PFI), have demonstrated efficacy for reducing hazardous drinking. Emerging though scant literature has evaluated PFI for co-occurring PTSD and hazardous alcohol use. A transdiagnostic risk factor that may underlie this co-occurrence and inform novel PFI development is anxiety sensitivity (AS).

Objective

To use a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a novel, computer-based PFI for hazardous drinkers with at least subclinical PTSD and elevated AS (AP-PFI), against a time-matched comparison condition (C-PFI).

Methods

Participants (N = 100) will be recruited and enrolled from the Houston, TX community. The study includes: an in-person visit (baseline diagnostic assessment, a brief intervention, and a post-intervention assessment) and two follow-up assessments (1-week and 1-month). Participants who meet study inclusion criteria will be randomized to one of two conditions at baseline: AP-PFI or C-PFI. AP-PFI will consist of a brief, single-session, computer-delivered, PFI-based intervention that provides integrative and normative feedback about alcohol use, AS, and PTSD symptoms. C-PFI will be time-matched but will only include alcohol-related feedback.

Conclusions

AP-PFI is designed to provide feedback about alcohol use, PTSD symptoms, and AS and their interplay and deliver psychoeducation on harm-reduction techniques, interoceptive exposure exercises, and stress management strategies. The intervention may address extant gaps in treatment for these co-occurring conditions by providing a brief, evidence-based, motivational enhancement intervention that is cost-effective with potential to be disseminated across a variety of healthcare settings.

Open trial of a personalized feedback intervention and substance-free activity supplement for veterans with PTSD and hazardous drinking

This study reports findings from an open trial of a two-session intervention for veterans with symptoms of PTSD and hazardous drinking. Rooted in behavioral economic theory, this intervention aimed to decrease alcohol use and increase alcohol-free activities through personalized and normative feedback. This trial assessed the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention in a sample of 15 veterans. Participants completed assessments at baseline and post-intervention (1-month and 3-months). Thirteen participants (86.6%) were retained between the baseline assessment and second intervention session. Acceptability data indicated that veterans overwhelmingly viewed the intervention positively with little dropout between the two sessions. Further, participants in our study reduced alcohol consumption from 37.30 (SD = 17.30) drinks per week at baseline to 22.50 (SD = 27.75) drinks per week at the 1-month assessment and then to 14.60 (SD = 18.64) at the 3-months assessment, representing medium to large effects. PTSD severity also decreased from 57.20 (SD = 16.72) at baseline to 48.90 (SD = 18.99) at the 1-month assessment, representing a small effect. Though effect sizes from pilot trials should be interpreted with caution, findings suggest that this intervention was well-received, feasible to deliver, and may have resulted in improvements in intervention targets.

Manage Emotions to Reduce Aggression: A Pilot Study of a Brief Treatment to Help Veterans Reduce Impulsive Aggression

Veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) report more aggression than civilians with PTSD. Because emotion regulation difficulties mediated the relationship between PTSD symptoms and impulsive aggression in veterans, we developed an intervention to increase emotion regulation skills. This pilot study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a three-session treatment, Manage Emotions to Reduce Aggression (MERA), and examined its effectiveness at reducing aggression and emotion dysregulation. Male combat veterans with PTSD and impulsive aggression completed assessments before and 4 weeks after MERA. Overt Aggression Scale measured frequency of aggression; Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale assessed emotion dysregulation. Most veterans (95%) who completed MERA and the posttreatment assessment (n = 20) reported MERA was helpful. Veterans in the intent-to-treat sample demonstrated a significant decrease in their frequency of aggression (Cohen's d = -0.55) and emotion dysregulation (Cohen's d = -0.55). MERA may be an innovative treatment that helps veterans reduce aggression.