Perceptions About Alcohol Harm and Alcohol-control Strategies Among People With High Risk of Alcohol Consumption in Alberta, Canada and Queensland, Australia

Differences in Perceived Threat and Efficacy in Managing Opioid Use Disorder versus Alcohol Use Disorder

Background: Efforts to increase the availability of Medication Assisted Treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD) and opioid use disorder (OUD) may be futile if patients lack motivation for recovery and are unwilling to seek treatment. Objectives: In this cross-sectional, online survey, we used the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) to assess how participants at risk of AUD or OUD react to their perceived threat and assess their response to pharmacotherapy as a potential treatment. EPPM constructs were assessed using the Risk Based Diagnosis Scale. Descriptive statistics measure the proportion of treated vs untreated participants. Untreated participants were sorted into one of three groups categorizing perceived threat - low threat appraisal, and danger or fear control. Results: Of 411 total responses, most (n = 293[71.29%]) sorted into the AUD cohort and 118(28.71%) into the OUD cohort. Overall, 104(25.30%) had received treatment and 307(74.70%) didn't. Within the OUD cohort, there were 67 untreated participants - 16(23.88%) exhibited low threat appraisal, 13(19.40%) were likely to undergo fear control, and 38(56.72%) were likely to undergo danger control. Within the AUD cohort, there were 240 untreated participants - 75(31.25%) exhibited low threat appraisal, 100(41.67%) were likely to experience fear control, and 65(27.08%) were likely to experience danger control. Participants in the OUD cohort were more likely to undergo danger control than those in the AUD cohort (χ2 = 19.26, p < 0.05). Conclusions: This study identified perceived threat and efficacy when an individual was at risk of a SUD, but more insight into potential early interventions is needed - particularly in those individuals with polysubstance use disorder.

Prenatal alcohol exposure risk perception dimensions and influencing factors: A systematic review and conceptual model

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to explore the available literature to understand how risks regarding prenatal alcohol exposure are perceived.

METHODS

A systematic review (PROSPERO; CRD 42020212887) was undertaken. PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched for relevant quantitative and qualitative studies. A thematic analysis of the studies was performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles-nine quantitative and six qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Three dimensions of risk perceptions were identified-perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, and affective risk perception. Three influencing factors of these dimensions were also identified: information (i.e., consistency, confirmation bias, strength of the evidence, and perceived relevance), sociocultural (i.e., social inclusivity, cultural context, and risk interpretation), and individual (i.e., risks versus benefits, controllability, and experience). These dimensions and influencing factors were brought together to create the proposed novel Pregnancy Alcohol Risk Perception (PARP) conceptual model.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel PARP conceptual model developed from the current literature provides a framework to guide understanding of risk perceptions, which includes a wide range of potential influencing factors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

The novel PARP conceptual model provides the groundwork for further refinement with stakeholders, which could in turn be used to inform the design of interventions and health promotional materials to support harm reduction approaches and prevention of prenatal alcohol exposure.

Identifying the Assumptions and Bias That Affect Screening and Brief Interventions for Harmful Alcohol Use

BACKGROUND

Screening for harmful alcohol use (HAU) is standard in clinical settings; however, self-reports of the quantity/frequency of use are often inconsistent with population survey data and objective assessment. Inaccuracies of self-reported alcohol use prompt exploration of patients' reluctance to share this information with their health care providers.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article is to identify the assumptions and biases that affect screening and brief interventions for HAU.

METHOD

A total of 22 research articles were selected for a systematic review of the literature. The studies included prospective and retrospective studies, randomized controlled trials, case studies, and quantitative and qualitative research from 2015 to 2021.

RESULTS

This systematic review identified alcohol health literacy, the inherent bias of surveys and screening tools, stigma, avoidance bias, and the normalization/villainization of alcohol use as contributors to the assumptions and biases that affect screening and brief interventions for HAU.

CONCLUSIONS

Exploring these assumptions and biases presents opportunities to develop strategies that promote positive change.

Rethinking Unhealthy Alcohol Use in the United States: A Structured Review

Greater than moderate alcohol use spans a continuum that includes high levels of total alcohol consumed per period (heavy drinking) as well as episodes of intense drinking (binges) and can give rise to alcohol use disorder (AUD) when associated with an inability to control alcohol use despite negative consequences. Although moderate drinking and AUD have standard, operable definitions in the United States (US), a significant “gray area” remains in which an individual may exceed recommended drinking guidelines but does not meet the criteria for AUD (hereafter referred to as unhealthy alcohol use). To address this need, we conducted a structured literature search to evaluate how this gray area is defined and assess its burden within the US. For purposes of this review, we will refer to this gray area as “unhealthy alcohol use.” Although numerous terms are used to describe various unsafe drinking practices, our review did not find any studies in which the specific prevalence and/or burden of unhealthy alcohol use was evaluated. That is, we found no studies that focus exclusively on individuals who exceed moderate drinking guidelines but do not meet AUD criteria. Furthermore, we did not discover an established framework for identifying individuals with unhealthy alcohol use. The lack of a consistent framework for identifying unhealthy alcohol users has significant implications for patient management and disease burden assessment. Therefore, we propose the following framework in which unhealthy alcohol use comprises 2 distinct subpopulations: those at risk of experiencing alcohol-related consequences and those who have subthreshold problems associated with use. The former, termed “risky drinkers,” are defined by exceeding recommended guidelines for moderate drinking (⩽1 or 2 drinks per day for women and men, respectively). People with subthreshold problems associated with use, defined as exhibiting exactly 1 AUD symptom, would be classified as “problematic drinkers” within this proposed framework. These definitions would help bring the core elements of unhealthy alcohol use into focus, which in turn would help identify and provide management strategies sooner to those affected and reduce the overall burden of unhealthy alcohol use.

Proportion of cancer cases and deaths attributable to alcohol consumption by US state, 2013-2016

BACKGROUND

Alcohol consumption is an established risk factor for several cancer types, but there are no contemporary published estimates of the state-level burden of cancer attributed to alcoholic beverage consumption. Such estimates are needed to inform public policy and cancer control efforts. We estimated the proportion and number of incident cancer cases and cancer deaths attributable to alcohol consumption by sex in adults aged ≥30 years in all 50 states and the District of Columbia in 2013-2016.

METHODS

Age-, sex-, and state-specific cancer incidence and mortality data (2013-2016) were obtained from the US Cancer Statistics database. State-level, self-reported age and sex stratified alcohol consumption prevalence was estimated using the 2003-2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys and adjusted with state sales data.

RESULTS

The proportion of alcohol-attributable incident cancer cases ranged from 2.9 % (95 % confidence interval: 2.7 %-3.1 %) in Utah to 6.7 % (6.4 %-7.0 %) in Delaware among men and women combined, from 2.7 % (2.5 %-3.0 %) in Utah to 6.3 % (5.9 %-6.7 %) in Hawaii among men, and from 2.7 % (2.4 %-3.0 %) in Utah to 7.7 % (7.2 %-8.3 %) in Delaware among women. The proportion of alcohol-attributable cancer deaths also varied considerably across states: from 1.9 % to 4.5 % among men and women combined, from 2.1% to 5.0% among men, and from 1.4 % to 4.4 % among women. Nationally, alcohol consumption accounted for 75,199 cancer cases and 18,947 cancer deaths annually.

CONCLUSION

Alcohol consumption accounts for a considerable proportion of cancer incidence and mortality in all states. Implementing state-level policies and cancer control efforts to reduce alcohol consumption could reduce this cancer burden.

Breathalysing and surveying river users in Australia to understand alcohol consumption and attitudes toward drowning risk

BACKGROUND

Little is known about people's river usage, a leading drowning location. This study examines alcohol consumption patterns of river users and their attitudes to drowning risk.

METHODS

A convenience sample of adult (18+ years) river users were surveyed at four river locations. The survey covered eight domains: demographics; river attendance frequency; frequency of engaging in water activities; drinking patterns; alcohol and water safety knowledge; alcohol and water safety attitudes; alcohol consumption; and Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC). For BAC, participants were asked to record time since their last alcoholic drink and were then breathalysed to record an estimate of their BAC. BAC was examined by BAC reading (negative, positive, ≥0.050%). Hazardous lifetime drinking levels were calculated and their impact on drowning risk evaluated. Univariate and chi square analysis (95% confidence interval) was conducted.

RESULTS

Six hundred eighty four people participated (51.6% female; 49.0% aged 18-34 years). Sixteen percent (15.9%) had a positive BAC (Mean + BAC = 0.068%; SD ± 0.08; Range = 0.001-0.334%), with 7.2% ≥0.050% (Mean BAC ≥0.050% =0.132%; SD ± 0.06). Those significantly more likely to record a BAC ≥0.050% at the river were: aged 18-34 years, resided in inner regional and low socio-economic areas, visited the river in the afternoon, with friends, on days with higher maximum air temperatures, frequent river users (11+ times in the last 30 days) and those who spend longer in the water (301+ minutes). River users who recorded a BAC ≥0.050% were more likely to self-report engaging in risky activities (i.e. diving into water of unknown depth and jumping into the river from height). River users on Australia day (a national public holiday) were significantly more likely to drink heavily (Mean BAC ≥0.05% = 0.175%; SD ± 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite males accounting for 85% of alcohol-related river drowning deaths, similar numbers of males and females were consuming alcohol at the river. This study has addressed a gap in knowledge by identifying river usage and alcohol consumption patterns among those at increased drowning risk. Implications for prevention include delivering alcohol-related river drowning prevention strategies to both males and females; at peak times including during hot weather, afternoons, public holidays and to river users who swim.