Referral to treatment for hospitalized medical patients with an alcohol use disorder: A proof-of-concept brief intervention study

Between acute medicine and municipal alcohol treatment: Cross-sectoral collaborations regarding patients with alcohol problems

Aim: The aim was to examine cross-sectoral collaborations of a Danish emergency department (ED) and two municipal treatment centres in the uptake area regarding patients with alcohol problems. Methods: The study was a qualitative exploratory study. We conducted individual interviews with ED nurses and secretaries (n = 21) and group interviews (n = 2) in municipal alcohol treatment centres with three and four participants, respectively. Interviews were analysed, first with qualitative content analysis, then by applying the analytical concept "boundary object". Results: Three themes emerged: (1) Responsibilities in practice; (2) Professional contrasts; and (3) The social nurse in a unique position. Themes illuminated a low degree of collaboration characterising the intersectoral work. Blurred responsibilities, challenged communication and acute versus long-term focus were some of the factors not supporting cross-sector collaborations. However, the function of the social nurse was highly appreciated in both sectors and plays a central role. Nonetheless, implicit limitations of this function entail that not all patients with alcohol problems are referred and handled within an ED setting. Conclusions: Overall, we found a lack of collaborative work between healthcare professionals in ED and municipalities for patients with alcohol problems. However, the "social nurse" function was greatly valued in both sectors due to a mediating role, since healthcare professionals in both sectors experienced lack of organisational structures supporting collaborative network, perceived temporal barriers, limited knowledge exchange and differences in approaches to patients.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: a scoping review and typology

BACKGROUND

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2021 that studied interventions linking patients with SUD from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) or alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: A Scoping review and typology

Background

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000-2021 that studied interventions linking SUD patients from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Results

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) followed by alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

Conclusions

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, outcomes, and helpfulness of strategies to implement screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in acute care

Background

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is a clinical intervention used to address alcohol and illicit drug use. SBIRT use has resulted in positive health and social outcomes; however, SBIRT implementation remains low. Research on implementing interventions, such as SBIRT, lacks information about challenges and successes related to implementation. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) provides a framework to guide comprehension, clarity, and relevance of strategies available for implementation research. This framework was applied to qualitative feedback gathered from site coordinators (SCs) leading SBIRT implementation. The purpose of this study was to describe the SCs’ experiences pertaining to SBIRT implementation across a health system.

Methods

Within the context of a larger parent study, a semi-structured interview guide was used to capture 14 SCs’ perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, and outcomes pertaining to SBIRT implementation. Qualitative data were analyzed using standard content analytic procedures. A follow-up survey was developed based on 14 strategies identified from qualitative data and was administered electronically to determine the SC’s perceptions of the most helpful implementation strategies on a scale of 1 (least helpful) to 5 (most helpful).

Results

All 14 invited SCs participated in the SBIRT implementation interview, and 11 of 14 (79%) responded to the follow-up survey. Within the categories of barriers, facilitators, and outcomes, 25 subthemes emerged. The most helpful implementation strategies were reexamining the implementation (M = 4.38; n = 8), providing ongoing consultation (M = 4.13; n = 8), auditing and providing feedback (M = 4.1; n = 10), developing education materials (M = 4.1; n = 10), identifying and preparing champions (M = 4; n = 7), and tailoring strategies (M = 4; n = 7).

Conclusion

SCs who led implementation efforts within a large healthcare system identified several barriers and facilitators to the implementation of SBIRT. Additionally, they identified clinician-related outcomes associated with SBIRT implementation into practice as well as strategies that were helpful in the implementation process. This information can inform the implementation of SBIRT and other interventions in acute care settings.

Making a bridge between general hospital and specialised community-based treatment for alcohol use disorder-A pragmatic randomised controlled trial

AIM

To investigate if more patients in the intervention group attended specialized alcohol treatment compared with a treatment-as-usual group (TAU).

METHODS

Pragmatic randomized controlled trial where consecutive patients, admitted to somatic hospitals, filled out a lifestyle questionnaire with the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) embedded. Patients scoring 8+ on AUDIT were included in the study. Included patients were randomized to either a Danish screening brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) called the Relay model or TAU depending on date of admission. The Relay group was offered a brief alcohol intervention by an outreach alcohol therapist. Patients scoring 16 points and above on the AUDIT test also received referral to alcohol treatment. Outcome was attendance at specialized outpatient alcohol treatment centres after discharge from hospital. Information on patients was gathered from municipal databases at 18 months follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 3534 patients completed the questionnaire, and 609 patients (17%) scored AUDIT 8+. 48 patients were lost to follow-up, and the final sample had 561 patients. Only 33 patients (6%) attended outpatient treatment at 18-months follow-up, but significantly more patients in the Relay group sought alcohol treatment than in the TAU group (OR = 2.5 [1.2;5.2] (p = 0.017)). Number needed to treat (NNT) was 20 [95% CI 11.2;112.3].

CONCLUSION

The Relay intervention was associated with more patients attending specialized treatment, but further research is needed to establish if general hospitals are an excellent platform for performing SBIRT.

Study protocol testing toolkit versus usual care for implementation of screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment in hospitals: a phased cluster randomized approach

BACKGROUND

Alarming rates of unhealthy alcohol, non-prescription drug, and tobacco use highlight the preventable health risks of substance abuse and the urgent need to activate clinicians to recognize and treat risky use. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an efficacious and effective processes to identify, reduce and prevent risky use of substances. This paper describes a study protocol testing implementation of a toolkit to enhance use of SBIRT in acute care settings to recognize and address patient risky alcohol, drug, and tobacco use.

METHODS

This study uses a phased cluster randomized mixed method design to test nurse-led implementation of an SBIRT toolkit on one medical-surgical unit at 14 acute care hospitals (critical access, community and academic health centers). Medical surgical units will be randomly assigned to implement the SBIRT toolkit (engagement and communication, assessment, planning, training, and evaluation tools) or a wait-list usual care control group that begins implementation 6 months later. Primary endpoints are documentation of SBIRT delivery in randomly selected electronic medical records at baseline, 6 months and 12 months after group 1 implementation (61 records per unit per time period, N = 2562). Two surveys will be administered to unit nurses: smoking cessation activities will be assessed at baseline and SBIRT use will be assessed on randomly-selected days after implementation. In addition, site coordinators will complete a baseline capacity assessment, an implementation fidelity survey post-implementation, and a structured interview at the end of the study. Multilevel mixed-effects effects logistic and linear models will be used to analyze use of SBIRT and cost outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This study will guide subsequent SBIRT implementation, dissemination, and spread across rural, community and urban healthcare systems throughout the state and beyond. The long-term objective is to activate clinicians to recognize, intervene and refer people with risky substance use to improve health and decrease substance use disorders. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03560076.

Associated factors of readiness to change in young adult risky drinkers

BACKGROUND

Readiness to change alcohol use has been associated with a number of predictors including emotional distress, drinking severity, and consequence severity, as well as with static demographic factors such as gender and race/ethnicity.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationships among these variables and readiness to change alcohol use in young adults.

METHODS

Structural equation modeling was used to test pathways of readiness to change in 1,256 young adult patients (78% male/22% female) ages 18-29 who were provided screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) as part of a Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Treatment Capacity Expansion Project.

RESULTS

The strongest relationships were between emotional distress, drinking severity, and consequence severity with readiness to change. Results indicated that participants with more severe alcohol problems demonstrated higher levels of readiness to change alcohol use and therefore, may be more amenable to behavior change. Additionally, females, Hispanic/Latino, and Black non-Hispanic (Black) participants demonstrated higher levels of readiness to change when compared to other groups.

CONCLUSION

These results lend support to the concept that young adults are using alcohol to modulate their emotions. Furthermore, resultant severity of consequences from drinking may play an important role in their readiness to change risky drinking. This may be especially true for females, who reported greater emotional distress, and for Hispanic/Latinos and Blacks, who reported greater drinking severity with greater emotional distress. Caregivers may be better equipped to address young adult alcohol use with this added understanding.