Service-level barriers to and facilitators of access to services for the treatment of alcohol use disorder and problematic alcohol use: protocol for a scoping review

Was receipt of any specialty alcohol treatment during the pandemic effective at reducing drinking for patients with or at risk of AUD?

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic changed the way healthcare providers delivered most health services, including treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD). Specialty alcohol treatment remained available through the pandemic, and within some systems treatment use increased likely due to telehealth availability. However, the field knows little about the relationship between the pandemic's expanded access to specialty alcohol treatment and alcohol use outcomes.

METHODS

The sample included 14,712 patients from Kaiser Permanente Northern California who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care and had an AUD diagnosis or risked developing an AUD by reporting 5 or more heavy drinking days in a 3-month period between 1/1/2019 and 2/29/2020 (pre-pandemic). The study examined the receipt of any specialty alcohol treatment (including at least one outpatient, inpatient, or telehealth specialty treatment encounter, or pharmacotherapy prescription) from 3/1/2020 (pandemic start) to either the first completed follow-up alcohol screening or 6/20/2022 (study period end). The outcomes of alcohol use included changes in heavy drinking days, drinks per week, drinking days per week, and drinks per drinking day between the pre- and post-pandemic periods.

RESULTS

On average patients significantly decreased alcohol use across all four alcohol use measures examined, regardless of whether they received treatment. However, those who received any treatment compared to those who did not had greater reductions in alcohol use, with an additional decrease of -3.55 heavy drinking days (95 % CI = -5.93, -1.17), -3.80 drinks per week (95 % CI = -5.18, -2.42), -0.72 drinks per drinking day (95 % CI = -1.14, -0.30), and - 1.01 drinking days per week (95 % CI = -1.30, -0.72). Treatment effects were greatest among patients who exceeded both daily and weekly limits pre-pandemic, with an additional decrease of -10.75 heavy drinking days (95 % CI = -15.28, -6.21), -12.83 drinks per week (95 % CI = -16.31, -9.35), -1.67 drinks per drinking day (95 % CI = -2.19, -1.14), and -2.02 drinking days per week (95 % CI = -2.41, -1.63).

CONCLUSIONS

On average, patients decreased alcohol use during the onset of the pandemic, however, those who had any specialty alcohol treatment had significantly greater decreases, suggesting that the hybrid in-person and telehealth treatment approach was effective during the pandemic.

Coping style as a risk factor for future alcohol use disorder: A 16-year longitudinal study in a Canadian military sample

BACKGROUND

Coping strategies used in response to stress have the potential to influence the development of mental health disorders, including alcohol use disorders. The current study investigated whether coping strategies placed an individual at greater likelihood for developing a future alcohol use disorder.

METHODS

This study used data from the Canadian Armed Forces Members and Veterans Mental Health Follow-up Survey; a nationally representative 16-year follow-up survey, with initial data collected in the 2002 Canadian Community Health Survey - Canadian Forces Supplement. The total sample from the two datasets included 2941 individuals who were Regular Force members in 2002. Coping styles included problem-focused, avoidant, and self-medication. Adjusted logistic regression analyses examined relationships between coping style (in 2002) and alcohol use disorders (developed between 2002 and 2018).

RESULTS

Self-medication coping in 2002 was associated with any alcohol disorder since last interview (i.e., 2002-2018) (AOR 1.26; 95 % CI, 1.02-1.57) and during the past year (adjusted odds ratios [AOR 1.26; 95 % CI, 1.08-1.47]), as well as past-year binge drinking (AOR 1.19; 95 % CI, 1.09-1.29). Problem-focused coping was protective against past-year alcohol abuse (AOR 0.84; 95 % CI, 0.71-1.00) and any alcohol use disorder (AOR 0.87; 95 % CI 0.76-1.00).

CONCLUSION

Coping styles were strongly associated with future alcohol use disorders. Notably, results show the risk extended over a 16-year period. Findings suggest the use of self-medicating coping strategies places an individual at increased risk of developing alcohol use disorders, while problem-focused coping may decrease future risk of alcohol use disorders.

Service-level barriers to and facilitators of accessibility to treatment for problematic alcohol use: a scoping review

Introduction

Services to treat problematic alcohol use (PAU) should be highly accessible to optimize treatment engagement. We conducted a scoping review to map characteristics of services for the treatment of PAU that have been reported in the literature to be barriers to or facilitators of access to treatment from the perspective of individuals with PAU.

Methods

A protocol was developed a priori, registered, and published. We searched MEDLINE®, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and additional grey literature sources from 2010 to April 2022 to identify primary qualitative research and surveys of adults with current or past PAU requiring treatment that were designed to identify modifiable characteristics of PAU treatment services (including psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions) that were perceived to be barriers to or facilitators of access to treatment. Studies of concurrent PAU and other substance use disorders were excluded. Study selection was performed by multiple review team members. Emergent barriers were coded and mapped to the accessibility dimensions of the Levesque framework of healthcare access, then descriptively summarized.

Results

One-hundred-and-nine included studies reported an extensive array of unique service-level barriers that could act alone or together to prevent treatment accessibility. These included but were not limited to lack of an obvious entry point, complexity of the care pathway, high financial cost, unacceptably long wait times, lack of geographically accessible treatment, inconvenient appointment hours, poor cultural/demographic sensitivity, lack of anonymity/privacy, lack of services to treat concurrent PAU and mental health problems.

Discussion

Barriers generally aligned with recent reviews of the substance use disorder literature. Ranking of barriers may be explored in a future discrete choice experiment of PAU service users. The rich qualitative findings of this review may support the design of new or modification of existing services for people with PAU to improve accessibility.

Systematic Review Registration

Open Science Framework doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/S849R.