[Not Available]

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.

Calibrating the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) for detecting alcohol-related problems among Canadian, UK and US soldiers: cross-sectional pre-deployment and post-deployment survey results

OBJECTIVES

Excessive alcohol use can bring about adverse health and work-related consequences in civilian and military populations. Screening for excessive drinking can help identify individuals at risk for alcohol-related problems who may require clinical interventions. The brief validated measures of alcohol use such as the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), or abbreviated AUDIT-Consumption (AUDIT-C), are often included in military deployment screening and epidemiologic surveys, but appropriate cut-points must be used to effectively identify individuals at risk. Although the conventional AUDIT-C cut-points ≥4 for men and ≥3 for women are commonly used, recent validation studies of veterans and civilians recommend higher cut-points to minimise misclassification and overestimation of alcohol-related problems. This study aims to ascertain optimal AUDIT-C cut-points for detecting alcohol-related problems among serving Canadian, UK and US soldiers.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional pre/post-deployment survey data were used.

SETTINGS

Comprised Army locations in Canada and UK, and selected US Army units.

PARTICIPANTS

Included soldiers in each of the above-mentioned settings.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Soldiers' AUDIT scores for hazardous and harmful alcohol use or high levels of alcohol problems served as a benchmark against which optimal sex-specific AUDIT-C cut-points were assessed.

RESULTS

Across the three-nation samples, AUDIT-C cut-points of ≥6/7 for men and ≥5/6 for women performed well in detecting hazardous and harmful alcohol use and provided comparable prevalence estimates to AUDIT scores ≥8 for men and ≥7 for women. The AUDIT-C cut-point ≥8/9 for both men and women performed fair-to-good when benchmarked against AUDIT ≥16, although inflated AUDIT-C-derived prevalence estimates and low positive predictive values were observed.

CONCLUSION

This multi-national study provides valuable information regarding appropriate AUDIT-C cut-points for detecting hazardous and harmful alcohol use, and high levels of alcohol problems among soldiers. Such information can be useful for population surveillance, pre-deployment/post-deployment screening of military personnel, and clinical practice.

Impact of policy changes and drug shortages on acamprosate and naltrexone use in Ontario, Canada

BACKGROUND

Acamprosate and naltrexone, evidence-based pharmacotherapies for alcohol use disorder (AUD), are publicly covered by the Ontario Drug Benefit (ODB) programs; however, their availability has changed over time, with expanded formulary access in July 2018, followed by an acamprosate shortage in February 2019 and ending in July 2020. We evaluated the impact of these events on the use of these medications in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

We conducted a time-series analysis among individuals with AUD dispensed acamprosate or naltrexone through the ODB from July 2016 to December 2020. Outcomes included monthly rates of those with AUD on therapy (primary), and rate of initiation (secondary) overall and by treatment type. We used autoregressive moving average models to evaluate the impact of expanded coverage and the acamprosate shortage on rates of use, and reported characteristics at first dispensation.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 10,637 individuals (61.0% male) initiated acamprosate or naltrexone. Expanded coverage increased monthly utilization rates of acamprosate (p = 0.0004), naltrexone (p < 0.0001), and either AUD pharmacotherapy (p < 0.0001). The acamprosate shortage led to a 98.1% reduction in acamprosate use (p = 0.0003) but did not impact naltrexone (p = 0.51). Our secondary analysis yielded consistent results with respect to the shortage; however, the expanded formulary listing did not impact the rate of new acamprosate patients (p = 0.3). By December 2020, 5.3% of ODB recipients with AUD were accessing pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although coverage expansion increased access to medications that treat AUD, the shortage of acamprosate led to large reductions in its use, with no responsive increase in naltrexone prescribing.

The prevalence of hazardous and harmful alcohol use across trauma-exposed occupations: A meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Trauma exposure is associated with hazardous and/or harmful alcohol use. Occupational groups frequently exposed to trauma may be at risk of alcohol harm. This meta-analysis determined the prevalence of hazardous and harmful alcohol use across trauma-exposed occupations and meta-regressions explored the impact of pre-defined covariates on the variance in prevalence estimates.

METHOD

Literature was searched from 2000 to March 2020, using Scopus, Web of Science and PsycINFO. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they used a standardized measure of alcohol use (e.g., Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT)). Studies were excluded if they measured alcohol use following an isolated sentinel event (e.g., 9/11). The following occupations were included: first responders, health care workers, Armed Forces, war journalists and train drivers.

RESULTS

1882 studies were identified; 55 studies were eligible. The pooled prevalence of hazardous use was 22% (95% Confidence Intervals [CI]: 17%-27%) and 11% (95% CI: 8%-14%) for harmful use. Hazardous alcohol use was significantly lower in health care workers (13%; 95% CI: 10%-16%) than first responders (26%; 95% CI: 20%-32%) and Armed Forces (34%; 95% CI: 18%-52%). There was marked heterogeneity across studies and higher prevalence rates in low-quality studies. The meta-regression identified higher proportion of males and younger mean age as predictors of variance.

CONCLUSIONS

Male-dominated occupations, such as police officers and military personnel, showed higher levels of hazardous and harmful alcohol use, indicating that interventions tailored specifically for these occupational groups may be needed.

Sex and gender: More than just demographic variables

LAY SUMMARY

Taking as a starting point that sex and gender are not the same thing, a principal understanding of Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+), this article reviews research published in 2020 on the health and well-being of Veterans and currently serving members of the Canadian Armed Forces. The purpose of this review was to see how sex and gender were referred to in this published literature. The published research tended not to differentiate between sex and gender, often using the two terms as though they referred to the same thing. Possible reasons for why this has happened are explored, as is the importance of treating sex and gender as fundamentally different things.