An Ethnographic study of unhealthy alcohol use in a Danish Emergency Department

Acceptability Among Frontline Staff Toward Distributing an Anonymous Alcohol Survey in Emergency Departments: A Mixed Methods Study

ABSTRACT

Emergency departments (EDs) serve as the front line when patients encounter the hospital system. Limited data are available of patients' alcohol habits collected during Danish ED visits, and no studies have, to our knowledge, examined frontline staffs' (registered nurses and medical secretaries) acceptability to deliver anonymous alcohol surveys to patients. We aimed at examining the proportion of survey respondents and the prevalence of patients' alcohol habits and also exploring frontline staff acceptability of the distribution of an anonymous survey regarding patients' alcohol habits in EDs. Intendedly, all eligible patients ≥18 years old entering two EDs in March 2019 should receive a survey based on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test. The study was an explanatory, sequential, mixed methods design, and results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and a deductive content analysis based on the theoretical framework of acceptability. In total, 15% (n = 1,305) of the total 8,679 patients in the EDs returned the survey. Qualitative analysis of interviews (n = 31) with staff showed that they had been reluctant to distribute the survey primarily because of ethical concerns of anonymity, freedom of choice, and being nonjudgmental toward patients. Hence, patients with no obvious alcohol problems were more likely to receive the survey. Still, we found that 23% of the respondents had an Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test score ≥ 8. Results indicate that frontline staffs' recognition of patients' alcohol use is inadequate, and findings show a low degree of acceptability among staff to deliver an anonymous survey, which is in line with earlier described barriers toward screening activities in EDs.

Who benefits from alcohol screening and brief intervention? A mini-review on socioeconomic inequalities with a focus on evidence from the United States

Alcohol-attributable mortality contributes to growing health inequalities. Addressing hazardous alcohol use and alcohol use disorders through alcohol screening and brief intervention is therefore a promising public health strategy to improve health equity. In this narrative mini-review, we discuss the extent to which socioeconomic differences exist in the alcohol screening and brief intervention cascade, highlighting the example of the United States. We have searched PubMed to identify and summarize relevant literature addressing socioeconomic inequalities in (a) accessing and affording healthcare, (b) receiving alcohol screenings, and/or (c) receiving brief interventions, focusing predominantly on literature from the Unites States. We found evidence for income-related inequalities in access to healthcare in the United States, partly due to inadequate health insurance coverage for individuals with low socioeconomic status. Alcohol screening coverage appears to be generally very low, as is the probability of receiving a brief intervention when indicated. However, research suggests that the latter is more likely to be provided to individuals with low socioeconomic status than those with high socioeconomic status. Individuals with low socioeconomic status also tend to benefit more from brief interventions, showing greater reductions in their alcohol use. Once access to and affordability of healthcare is ensured and high coverage of alcohol screening is achieved for all, alcohol screening and brief interventions have the potential to enhance health equity by reducing alcohol consumption and alcohol-related health harms.

Why treatment is not an option: Treatment naïve individuals, suffering from alcohol use disorders’ narratives about alcohol use and treatment seeking

Aims: To investigate the narratives of in- and outpatients at mental health and somatic hospitals, who suffer from alcohol use disorders (AUD) but have never sought AUD treatment. More specifically, to understand how the individuals view their alcohol use and explore their reasons for not seeking treatment. Methods: Individuals suffering from AUD were recruited at somatic and mental health hospitals. The study was qualitative, based on semi-structured individual interviews. A narrative analysis was performed. A total of six patients participated: three recruited at a mental health hospital, three from a somatic hospital. Results: The individuals described how heavy alcohol use had always characterised their lives; it was part of their surroundings and it added to their quality of life. Two narrative forms within the individuals’ stories were identified, in which treatment was considered either as a positive option for others but not relevant for themselves, or as representing a threat to the individuals’ autonomy. The participants expressed that they did not believe treatment was relevant for them, and if necessary, they preferred to deal with their heavy drinking themselves. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that a broad focus is needed if relatively more individuals suffering from AUD should seek treatment, since they – in spite of clearly suffering from AUD – nevertheless see themselves as heavy drinkers and have not even thought of seeking treatment. Thus, it is not (only) a question about the attractiveness of the treatment offer or due to lack of knowledge about treatment options that patients suffering from AUD do not seek treatment.