Comparison of transdermal alcohol concentration and self-reported alcohol consumption in people with alcohol dependence attending community alcohol treatment services.

AIM: We aimed to assess the accuracy and wearability of a transdermal alcohol sensor (TAS) (BACtrack Skyn) with people currently receiving treatment at alcohol services. METHOD: A mixed methods observational study involving three NHS alcohol services in south London was conducted. All participants (7=male, 9=female) wore a TAS for 1 week and met with the researcher every other weekday to complete the TAS data download and a TimeLine Follow Back (TLFB). At the end of the week, a post-wear survey was completed. Transdermal Alcohol Concentration (TAC) from the TAS was compared to the TLFB. Post-wear survey responses, attendance voucher incentives and descriptive TAS data (removals, missing and skin temperature data) were analysed. We investigated different drinking event thresholds changing the criteria of TAC level and length of time TAC was increased and analysed each drinking threshold sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicative values, and percentage accuracy classification. RESULTS: The TAS recorded the number of alcohol-drinking days with a high degree of accuracy compared to the TLFB as gold-standard. However, of the participation time of the 16 participants, 14.5% of the TAS data was missing in output and 16.4% of the recorded data suggests the TAS was not currently being worn. Of the data recorded, in line with the drinking event threshold of >15 ug/l TAC, >15minutes, we found that sensitivity = 93%, specificity = 84% and a Pearson correlation of r(16) =.926, p = <.001, BCa 95% CI [.855 -.981]. The threshold with the highest accuracy was TAC>15 ug/l, >60minutes which classified alcohol events with 90% accuracy, AUC =.910, sensitivity = 90%, specificity = 96%. The post-wear survey reported that most participants found it comfortable and that wearing it did not interfere with daily activities. Six participants reported side effects, including itching and a rash, but these would not deter them from wearing it again with all six reporting they would wear the TAS again and for longer than one week. CONCLUSIONS: The TAS did not capture every drinking event that was self-reported but maintained a high correlation. There were instances of missing TAS data and TAS removals. Overall, our findings would support the acceptability and feasibility of TAS as a tool that could be used in clinical settings for objective alcohol monitoring with patients being responsible for the TAS.

Randomized controlled internal pilot trial of a diversion programme for adolescents in police custody who possess illicit substances.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents involved in criminal proceedings are significantly more likely to re-offend than a similar population diverted away from criminal justice. Adolescents who use substances and offend are at higher risk of experiencing negative social, psychological and physical problems that often persist into adulthood. There is some evidence that brief interventions combined with appropriate psychoeducation may be effective in reducing adolescent substance use. METHODS: Prospective two-armed, individually randomized internal pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) with follow-up at 6 months. Young people across three police forces-Kent, Cornwall and Sefton-arrested in possession of class B or C illicit substances were randomly allocated to receive the ReFrame intervention or business as usual. In total, 102 participants were eligible of whom 76 consented and 73 were followed up at 6 months. Outcomes addressed offending behaviour, frequency of substance use, wellbeing and mental health. The study was conducted between February and December 2022. RESULTS: All progression criteria were met, 80% of those eligible consented, 96% adhered to their allocated treatment and 88% were followed up at the primary endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: The feasibility of conducting the pilot trial was a success and it will now proceed to a definitive RCT.

Accuracy of transdermal alcohol monitoring devices in a laboratory setting.

The development of transdermal alcohol sensors (TASs) presents a new method to monitor alcohol consumption with the ability to objectively measure data 24/7. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of two TASs (BACtrack Skyn and Smart Start BARE) in a laboratory setting. Thirty-two adults received a dose of ethanol 0.56 g/kg body weight as a 20% solution while wearing the two TASs and provided Breath Alcohol Concentration (BrAC) measurements for 3.5 h postalcohol consumption. Pearson's correlations and repeated measures analysis of variance tests were conducted on the peak, time-to-peak, and area under the curve data. Bland-Altman plots were derived. A time series analysis and cross-correlations were conducted to adjust for time lag. Both TASs were able to detect alcohol and increase within 20 min. BrAC peaked significantly quicker than Skyn and BARE. BrAC and Skyn peaks were negatively significantly correlated (r = -0.381, P = .035, n = 31), while Skyn and BARE peaks were positively significantly correlated (r = 0.380, P = .038, n = 30). Repeated measures analysis of variance found a significant difference between BrAC, Skyn, and BARE (F(1.946, 852.301) = 459.873, P < .001)). A time series analysis found when BrAC-Skyn and BrAC-BARE were adjusted for the delay to peak, and there was still a significant difference. Failure rates: 1.7% (Skyn) and 4.8% (BARE). Some evidence was obtained for TAS validity as both consistently detected alcohol. Failure rates and time lag show improvements in older device generations. However, neither TAS presented strong equivalence to the breathalyser even when the lag time was adjusted. With further testing and technology advancements, TAS could be a potential alcohol monitoring tool. Two of the newest TAS devices were worn in laboratory conditions for one afternoon to compare their accuracy of alcohol monitoring to a breathalyser. Findings suggest that the two TASs (BACtrack Skyn and SmartStart BARE) recorded significantly similar data postalcohol consumption, but not with the breathalyser.

Working with the police service and homeless services in North West England to reduce alcohol harms: A feasibility study of a tailored Blue Light approach.

INTRODUCTION: Deaths caused by alcohol are increasing in England and 80 % of people with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are not in treatment. The Blue Light approach (Alcohol Change UK) is an initiative to support people with AUDs who are not in treatment. This study aimed to tailor the Blue Light approach (combined with alcohol identification and alcohol brief interventions [ABI] training) for police officers and homeless service staff in North West England, and to qualitatively evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the training. METHODS: The Blue Light approach was tailored using co-production activities, based on Transdisciplinary Action Research. Full-day and half-day training sessions were delivered to the police (full-day N = 14, half-day N = 54) and homeless service staff (full-day N = 11, half-day N = 32), in local police stations and online (four half-day sessions). Semi-structured interviews (N = 23) were conducted to evaluate implementation and integration, analysing the qualitative data in line with Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: Four themes were identified, each with two to three sub-themes, reflecting: (i) the importance of training for working practice, (ii) implementation of the interventions, (iii) changes to relationships within and between organizations, and (iv) recommendations for further changes to the training. Differences in findings across the organizations (police versus homeless services) and by training type attended (full-day versus half-day, in-person versus online) are presented. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to suggest that the training has provided worthwhile knowledge and intervention techniques that can become embedded into working practices. Nevertheless, structural barriers were apparent, primarily within the police service, with clear disparities between recognising the value of the training and what is achievable in practice, given the competing demands.

Adjunctive Medication Management and Contingency Management to enhance adherence to acamprosate for alcohol dependence: the ADAM trial RCT.

Background: Acamprosate is an effective and cost-effective medication for alcohol relapse prevention but poor adherence can limit its full benefit. Effective interventions to support adherence to acamprosate are therefore needed. Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of Medication Management, with and without Contingency Management, compared to Standard Support alone in enhancing adherence to acamprosate and the impact of adherence to acamprosate on abstinence and reduced alcohol consumption. Design: Multicentre, three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled clinical trial. Setting: Specialist alcohol treatment services in five regions of England (South East London, Central and North West London, Wessex, Yorkshire and Humber and West Midlands). Participants: Adults (aged 18 years or more), an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis of alcohol dependence, abstinent from alcohol at baseline assessment, in receipt of a prescription for acamprosate. Interventions: (1) Standard Support, (2) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management provided by pharmacists via a clinical contact centre (12 sessions over 6 months), (3) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management plus Contingency Management that consisted of vouchers (up to £120) to reinforce participation in Medication Management. Consenting participants were randomised in a 2 : 1 : 1 ratio to one of the three groups using a stratified random permuted block method using a remote system. Participants and researchers were not blind to treatment allocation. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome: self-reported percentage of medication taken in the previous 28 days at 6 months post randomisation. Economic outcome: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, a five-level version, used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years, with costs estimated using the Adult Service Use Schedule. Results: Of the 1459 potential participants approached, 1019 (70%) were assessed and 739 (73 consented to participate in the study, 372 (50%) were allocated to Standard Support, 182 (25%) to Standard Support with Medication Management and 185 (25%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. Data were available for 518 (70%) of participants at 6-month follow-up, 255 (68.5%) allocated to Standard Support, 122 (67.0%) to Standard Support and Medication Management and 141 (76.2%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. The mean difference of per cent adherence to acamprosate was higher for those who received Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management (10.6%, 95% confidence interval 19.6% to 1.6%) compared to Standard Support alone, at the primary end point (6-month follow-up). There was no significant difference in per cent days adherent when comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support alone 3.1% (95% confidence interval 12.8% to -6.5%) or comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management 7.9% (95% confidence interval 18.7% to -2.8%). The primary economic analysis at 6 months found that Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management was cost-effective compared to Standard Support alone, achieving small gains in quality-adjusted life-years at a lower cost per participant. Cost-effectiveness was not observed for adjunctive Medication Management compared to Standard Support alone. There were no serious adverse events related to the trial interventions reported. Limitations: The trial's primary outcome measure changed substantially due to data collection difficulties and therefore relied on a measure of self-reported adherence. A lower than anticipated follow-up rate at 12 months may have lowered the statistical power to detect differences in the secondary analyses, although the primary analysis was not impacted. Conclusions: Medication Management enhanced with Contingency Management is beneficial to patients for supporting them to take acamprosate. Future work: Given our findings in relation to Contingency Management enhancing Medication Management adherence, future trials should be developed to explore its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness with other alcohol interventions where there is evidence of poor adherence. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN17083622 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17083622. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Many people who are trying to stop drinking alcohol can find it difficult to remain alcohol free. There is a medication called acamprosate (Campral) that can reduce cravings thereby increasing the likelihood of abstinence. However, some people have trouble taking the right amount of acamprosate tablets needed every day at the right time, preferably at mealtimes. This means the medication is not as effective. We have tested some new ways to help support people taking acamprosate. We tested three different strategies to find the best way to support people taking acamprosate. We recruited 739 people aged 18 and over who were receiving alcohol treatment to stop drinking and were taking acamprosate. We randomly allocated these people to three groups. The first was Standard Support, the usual support people receive when taking acamprosate. The second group received Standard Support plus Medication Management. This consisted of 12 telephone calls over 6 months with a trained pharmacist to discuss the importance of taking the right amount of the medication, how the medication works and strategies to help people take the medication correctly. The third group received Standard Support, Medication Management and Contingency Management. This involved giving people shopping vouchers for participating with Medication Management calls. The maximum value of vouchers per person was £120. People who were in the group receiving Medication Management and Contingency Management took a greater number of acamprosate tablets. We also found that Medication Management plus Contingency Management was more cost-effective; there were greater gains in health with a smaller cost per person compared to Standard Support alone. This shows that there is likely to be a benefit to patients of Medication Management plus Contingency Management for supporting people taking acamprosate.

Factors associated with discharge against medical advice in alcohol withdrawal patients.

This study aimed to examine characteristics associated with discharge against medical advice from the hospital in alcohol withdrawal patients, supporting the work of hospital staff and Alcohol Care Teams and identifying characteristics that may help target patients most likely to discharge against medical advice. We used Hospital Episode Statistics Data to identify demographic and clinical variables and compare these in alcohol withdrawal patients who discharged against medical advice from hospital, compared with those who were discharged by the clinical team. Factors significantly associated with alcohol withdrawal patients discharging against medical advice from hospital were: being admitted as an emergency; discharged on a weekend; living with no fixed abode; being male; being younger and having a shorter length of stay. This study identifies characteristics that can be used to support acute hospitals and Alcohol Care Teams, particularly in the allocation of resources to reduce discharges against medical advice and subsequent readmissions to the hospital. Particular consideration should be given to clinical provision in hospitals in emergency departments and on weekends, and also those patients who are admitted and are of no fixed abode.

A multicomponent psychosocial intervention to reduce substance use by adolescents involved in the criminal justice system: the RISKIT-CJS RCT.

Background: Substance use and offending are related in the context of other disinhibitory behaviours. Adolescents involved in the criminal justice system constitute a particularly vulnerable group, with a propensity to engage in risky behaviour that has long-term impact on their future health and well-being. Previous research of the RISKIT programme provided evidence of a potential effect in reducing substance use and risky behaviour in adolescents. Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent psychosocial intervention compared with treatment as usual in reducing substance use for substance-using adolescents involved in the criminal justice system. Design: A mixed-methods, prospective, pragmatic, two-arm, randomised controlled trial with follow-up at 6 and 12 months post randomisation. Setting: The study was conducted across youth offending teams, pupil referral units and substance misuse teams across four areas of England (i.e. South East, London, North West, North East). Participants: Adolescents aged between 13 and 17 years (inclusive), recruited between September 2017 and June 2020. Interventions: Participants were randomised to treatment as usual or to treatment as usual in addition to the RISKIT-Criminal Justice System (RISKIT-CJS) programme. The RISKIT-CJS programme was a multicomponent intervention and consisted of two individual motivational interviews with a trained youth worker (lasting 45 minutes each) and two group sessions delivered over half a day on consecutive weeks. Main outcome measures: At 12 months, we assessed per cent days abstinent from substance use over the previous 28 days. Secondary outcome measures included well-being, motivational state, situational confidence, quality of life, resource use and fidelity of interventions delivered. Results: A total of 693 adolescents were assessed for eligibility, of whom 505 (73%) consented. Of these, 246 (49%) were allocated to the RISKIT-CJS intervention and 259 (51%) were allocated to treatment as usual only. At month 12, the overall follow-up rate was 57%: 55% in the RISKIT-CJS arm and 59% in the treatment-as-usual arm. At month 12, we observed an increase in per cent days abstinent from substances in both arms of the study, from 61% to 85%, but there was no evidence that the RISKIT-CJS intervention was superior to treatment as usual. A similar pattern was observed for secondary outcomes. The RISKIT-CJS intervention was not found to be any more cost-effective than treatment as usual. The qualitative research indicated that young people were positive about learning new skills and acquiring new knowledge. Although stakeholders considered the intervention worthwhile, they expressed concern that it came too late for the target population. Limitations: Our original aim to collect data on offences was thwarted by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and this affected both the statistical and economic analyses. Although 214 (87%) of the 246 participants allocated to the RISKIT-CJS intervention attended at least one individual face-to-face session, 98 (40%) attended a group session and only 47 (19%) attended all elements of the intervention. Conclusions: The RISKIT-CJS intervention was no more clinically effective or cost-effective than treatment as usual in reducing substance use among adolescents involved in the criminal justice system. Future research: The RISKIT-CJS intervention was considered more acceptable, and adherence was higher, in pupil referral units and substance misuse teams than in youth offending teams. Stakeholders in youth offending teams thought that the intervention was too late in the trajectory for their population. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN77037777. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 11, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

We explored how useful a psychological intervention was in reducing substance use among young people who had some involvement in the criminal justice system. We recruited young people aged between 13 and 17 years in four areas of England (i.e. South East, London, North West and North East). Young people were recruited from youth offending teams, pupil referral units and substance misuse teams. Those young people who were willing to participate were offered usual treatment and half, chosen at random, were offered an opportunity to take part in the RISKIT-Criminal Justice System (RISKIT-CJS) programme. The RISKIT-CJS programme had four distinct parts. The first was a 1-hour session that used an approach called motivational interviewing to explore the young person's substance use and discuss different strategies to change their behaviour. This was followed by two group sessions delivered over 2 consecutive weeks. These group sessions addressed risks associated with substance use, what triggers use and the health and social consequences. In addition, young people were taught new skills to help them manage in situations in which they might normally use substances. At the end of the group sessions, the young people had another motivational interview. Twelve months after participants started, we found that the frequency of substance use had decreased in both groups; however, the RISKIT-CJS intervention was no better than treatment as usual. When we spoke with young people who had taken part and staff involved with this population, we got a mixed picture. In some settings, particularly pupil referral units, the RISKIT-CJS intervention was well received by young people and staff, and staff felt that it was a useful additional resource to the work that they were currently undertaking. On the other hand, in the youth offending teams, the staff thought that the programme was too different from their normal work to be implemented easily and they considered the population they work with too established in their substance use and criminal activity to benefit from the programme.

A novel Artificial Intelligence-based tool to assess anticholinergic burden: a survey.

BACKGROUND: many medications possess anticholinergic activity. Their use is associated with a number of serious adverse effects including cognitive effects. The cumulative anticholinergic effect of medications as assessed by tools such as the anticholinergic burden scale (AchB) can identify people particularly at risk of anticholinergic side-effects. Currently, >20 tools are available for clinicians to use, but there is no consensus on the most appropriate tool. METHODS: a newly created online tool-International Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Tool (IACT)-based on natural language processing and chemical structure analysis, was developed and made available for clinicians to test its functions. We carried out a survey (between 8th of February and 31st of March 2021) to assess the overall need for an assessment tool as well as the usability of the IACT. RESULTS: a total of 110 responses were received from different countries and practitioners' groups. The majority of the participants (86.11%) stated they would use a tool for AchB assessment if available and when they were asked to rate the IACT against other tools, amongst 34 responders, 20.59% rated it better and 8.82% rated it significantly better, 44.12% rated it neither better, nor worse, 14.71% rated it worse and 11.76% somewhat worse. CONCLUSION: there is a need for an anticholinergic burden calculator to assess the anticholinergicity of medications. Tools such as the IACT potentially could meet this demand due to its ability to assign scores to current and new medications appearing on the market based both on their chemical structure and reported adverse pharmacological effects.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of face-to-face and electronic brief interventions versus screening alone to reduce alcohol consumption among high-risk adolescents presenting to emergency departments: three-arm pragmatic randomized trial (SIPS Junior high risk trial).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alcohol use increases throughout adolescence. Emergency department (ED) attendance is an opportunity for alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI), which is effective for adults. This trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ASBI compared with screening alone (SA) in high-risk adolescents. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Multi-centre, three-group, single-blind, individually randomized trial with follow-ups after 6 and 12 months in 10 ED settings in England. From October 2014 to May 2015 we screened 3327 adolescents aged 14 to 18 years, of whom 756 (22.7%) scored at least 3 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: consumption (AUDIT-C) and consented to participate in this trial. Mean age was 16.1 years; 50.2% were female and 84.9% were white. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions were personalized feedback and brief advice (PFBA), personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention (eBI) and SA. MEASURES: The primary outcome was the weekly alcohol consumed in standard UK units (8 g ethanol) at 12 months post-randomization, derived from extended AUDIT-C. Economic outcomes included quality of life and service use, from perspectives of both the National Health Service and personal social services (NHS&PSS) and society. FINDINGS: At 12 months, mean weekly consumption was 2.99 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.38-3.70] standard units for the SA group, 3.56 (95% CI = 2.90, 4.32) for PFBA and 3.18 (95% CI = 2.50, 3.97) for eBI, showing no significant differences. The PFBA group consumed mean 0.57 (-0.36, 1.70) units more than SA; and eBIs consumed 0.19 (-0.71, 1.30) more. Bayes factors suggested lack of effectiveness explained non-significance. From the NHS&PSS perspective, economic analysis showed that PFBA and eBI were not cost-effective compared with SA: PFBA yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £6213 (-£736 843, £812 884), with the intervention having 54% probability of being cost-effective compared with SA at the £20 000 WTP threshold. CONCLUSIONS: In emergency departments in England, neither personalized feedback and brief advice nor personalized feedback plus electronic brief intervention showed evidence of being effective or cost-effective when compared with screening alone in reducing alcohol consumption among adolescents.

Alcohol Misuse among English Youth, Are Harms Attributable to Alcohol or to Underlying Disinhibitory Characteristics?

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol use by young people is associated with a range of psychological and physical harms. However, similar harms are also reported with disinhibitory conditions such as conduct problems that are said to precede and predispose to alcohol misuse. We explored whether alcohol use or indicators of underlying disinhibition predict psychological and physical harms in a cohort of young people. METHODS: We used data from a randomised controlled intervention trial that identified young people who consumed alcohol (n = 756), mean age = 15.6 years, attending emergency departments (EDs) in England. Disinhibition was measured by the self-report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire hyperactivity and conduct problem items, and alcohol-related harms by questions from the ESPAD, a major European school survey. We conducted a mediation analysis with a primary outcome of frequency of engaging in alcohol-related harms 12 months after screening in ED, exploring for the mediating influence of alcohol consumed at six months. We included age, gender, allocated group and baseline consumption as covariates and adjusted for the multi-level nature of the study, where young people were nested within EDs. RESULTS: Conduct problems and to a lesser extent hyperactivity predicted harms at twelve months. This effect was not mediated by alcohol consumed at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Among young drinkers underlying behavioural attributes predict harm independently of alcohol use. This suggests that the harms associated with alcohol use are attributable more to underlying disinhibitory characteristics than the quantity of alcohol consumed.

A two-arm parallel-group individually randomised prison pilot study of a male remand alcohol intervention for self-efficacy enhancement: the APPRAISE study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of at-risk drinking is far higher among those in contact with the criminal justice system (73%) than the general population (35%). However, there is little evidence on the effectiveness of alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) in reducing risky drinking among those in the criminal justice system, including the prison system and, in particular, those on remand. Building on earlier work, A two-arm parallel group individually randomised Prison Pilot study of a male Remand Alcohol Intervention for Self-efficacy Enhancement (APPRAISE) is a pilot study designed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of an ABI, delivered to male prisoners on remand. The findings of APPRAISE should provide the information required to design a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: APPRAISE will use mixed methods, with two linked phases, across two prisons in the UK, recruiting 180 adult men on remand: 90 from Scotland and 90 from England. Phase I will involve a two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomised pilot study. The pilot evaluation will provide data on the likely impact of A two-arm parallel group individually randomised Prison Pilot study of a male Remand Alcohol Intervention for Self-efficacy Enhancement (APPRAISE), which will be used to inform a future definitive multicentre RCT. Phase II will be a process evaluation assessing how the ABI has been implemented to explore the change mechanisms underpinning the ABI (figure 1) and to assess the context within which the ABI is delivered. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The APPRAISE protocol has been approved by the East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (19/ES/0068), National Offender Management System (2019-240), Health Board Research and Development (2019/0268), Scottish Prison Service research and ethics committee, and by the University of Edinburgh's internal ethics department. The findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal publications, presentations at local, national and international conferences, infographics and shared with relevant stakeholders through meetings and events. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27417180.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of public health interventions with impacts on health and criminal justice: An applied cross-sectoral analysis of an alcohol misuse intervention.

Cost-effectiveness analyses of health care programs often focus on maximizing health and ignore nonhealth impacts. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of public health interventions from a narrow health care perspective would likely underestimate their full impact, and potentially lead to inefficient decisions about funding. The aim of this study is to provide a practical application of a recently proposed framework for the economic evaluation of public health interventions, evaluating an intervention to reduce alcohol misuse in criminal offenders. This cross-sectoral analysis distinguishes benefits and opportunity costs for different sectors, makes explicit the value judgments required to consider alternative perspectives, and can inform heterogeneous decision makers with different objectives in a transparent manner. Three interventions of increasing intensity are compared: client information leaflet, brief advice, and brief lifestyle counseling. Health outcomes are measured in quality-adjusted life-years and criminal justice outcomes in reconvictions. Costs considered include intervention costs, costs to the NHS and costs to the criminal justice system. The results are presented for four different perspectives: "narrow" health care perspective; criminal justice system perspective; "full" health care perspective; and joint "full" health and criminal justice perspective. Conclusions and recommendations differ according to the normative judgment on the appropriate perspective for the evaluation.

Brief interventions to prevent excessive alcohol use in adolescents at low-risk presenting to Emergency Departments: Three-arm, randomised trial of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption and related harm increase rapidly from the age of 12 years. We evaluated whether alcohol screening and brief intervention is effective and cost-effective in delaying hazardous or harmful drinking amongst low-risk or abstaining adolescents attending Emergency Departments (EDs). METHODS: This ten-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, pragmatic, individually randomised trial screened ED attenders aged between 14 and 17 years for alcohol consumption. We sampled at random one third of those scoring at most 2 on AUDIT-C who had access to the internet and, if aged under 16, were Gillick competent or had informed consent from parent or guardian. We randomised them between: screening only (control intervention); one session of face-to-face Personalised Feedback and Brief Advice (PFBA); and PFBA plus an electronic brief intervention (eBI) on smartphone or web. We conducted follow-up after six and 12 months. The principal outcomes were alcohol consumed over the 3 months before 12-month follow up, measured by AUDIT-C; and quality-adjusted life-years. FINDINGS: Between October 2014 and May 2015, we approached 5,016 eligible patients of whom 3,326 consented to be screened and participate in the trial; 2,571 of these were low-risk drinkers or abstainers, consuming an average 0.14 units per week. We randomised: 304 to screening only; 285 to PFBA; and 294 to PFBA and eBI. We found no significant difference between groups, notably in weekly alcohol consumption: those receiving screening only drank 0.10 units (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.18); PFBA 0.12 (0.06 to 0.21); PFBA and eBI 0.10 (0.05 to 0.19). INTERPRETATION: While drinking levels remained low in this population, this trial found no evidence that PFBA with or without eBI was more effective than screening alone in reducing or delaying alcohol consumption.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of mifepristone on cognition and depression in alcohol dependence.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol dependence is a significant issue contributing to disease burden. Changes in cortisol concentrations during alcohol withdrawal are associated with cognitive deficits and symptoms of depression. Current treatments are only successful for a small proportion of people and do not target cognitive deficits and symptoms of depression experienced by those who are alcohol dependent. The aim of this research is to determine the potential efficacy of mifepristone, a type II glucocorticoid receptor antagonist, to prevent symptoms of depression and cognitive deficits following alcohol detoxification. METHODS: This was a phase 2 therapeutic use trial. It was a double-blind randomised controlled clinical trial of mifepristone versus inactive placebo treatment. The trial aimed to recruit 120 participants who met the inclusion criteria: (1) male, (2) aged 18-60 years inclusive, and (3) alcohol dependent for 5 or more years. Participants were randomised to 600 mg a day mifepristone (200 mg morning, afternoon, and evening) for 7 days and 400 mg for the subsequent 7 days (200 mg morning and evening) or the equivalent number of placebo tablets for 14 days. Primary outcome measures were cognitive function (measured using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB)) and symptoms of depression (measured using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)) at 4 weeks post-randomisation. RESULTS: Difficulties recruiting participants due to significant changes in the provision of inpatient care for alcohol dependence resulted in only 27 participants recruited to the trial, with data available for 21 participants. Fourteen participants were randomised to receive mifepristone and 13 to receive placebo. CONCLUSION: Larger trials would be needed to draw conclusions about the efficacy of mifepristone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN54001953 . Registered on 29 September 2011.

Adolescent perspectives about their participation in alcohol intervention research in emergency care: A qualitative exploration using ethical principles as an analytical framework.

AIMS: To explore adolescents' experiences of consenting to, and participating in, alcohol intervention trials when attending for emergency care. METHODS: In-depth semi-structured interviews with 27 adolescents (16 males; aged 14-17 years (Mage = 15.7)) who had taken part in one of two linked brief alcohol intervention trials based in 10 accident and emergency departments in England. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and subject to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Research and intervention methods were generally found to be acceptable though confidentiality was important and parental presence could hinder truthful disclosures regarding alcohol use. Participants discussed the importance of being involved in research that was relevant to them and recognised alcohol consumption as a normative part of adolescence, highlighting the importance of having access to appropriate health information. Beyond this, they recognised the benefits and risks of trial participation for themselves and others with the majority showing a degree of altruism in considering longer term implications for others as well as themselves. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol screening and intervention in emergency care is both acceptable and relevant to adolescents but acceptability is reliant on confidentiality being assured and may be inhibited by parental presence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Number: 45300218.

Burden of Alcohol Disorders on Emergency Department Attendances and Hospital Admissions in England.

AIMS: This study aims to estimate the prevalence and burden of alcohol disorders on Emergency Department (ED) and hospital inpatients in England through the exploratory analysis of NHS data. METHODS: ED attendances and admission data were linked using hospital episode statistics. Diagnoses were preserved at a patient level to identify individuals who had an alcohol attributable diagnosis. Four groups were identified; a) individuals with no alcohol disorder (NAD), b) acute alcohol disorder (AAD), c) chronic alcohol disorder (CAD) and d) those with any alcohol disorder (AD) (b) and c) combined). Associations between ED diagnosis and alcohol disorders were examined using logistic regression adjusted for hospital provider, age and sex. Non-parametric tests were employed examining ED and hospital service use. Cost differences by group was explored using a propensity scored match sample. RESULTS: Of the 1.2million subjects 6.7% were identified as having one or more AD accounting for 11.7% of ED attendances, 9.2% of hospital admissions and 7.2% total bed days. Bootstrapped derived means identified that hospital service use varied significantly between AAD and CAD. Whilst AAD accounted for greater attendances than NAD (2.78; 95% CI 2.680-2.879) those with CAD accounted for even greater attendances (4.33; 95% CI. 4.136-4.515), admissions (2.56; 95% CI. 2.502-2.625) and total bed days (15.14; 95% CI. 14.716-15.559). CONCLUSIONS: AD place a disproportionate impact on hospital services with CAD exerting the greatest burden on hospital utilization. The complexity and burden of CAD suggests this group should be a priority for intervention.

Opportunistic screening for alcohol use problems in adolescents attending emergency departments: an evaluation of screening tools.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate and compare the optimal cut-off score of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and AUDIT-C in identifying at-risk alcohol consumption, heavy episodic alcohol use, ICD-10 alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence in adolescents attending ED in England. DESIGN: Opportunistic cross-sectional survey. SETTING: 10 emergency departments across England. PARTICIPANTS: Adolescents (n = 5377) aged between their 10th and 18th birthday who attended emergency departments between December 2012 and May 2013. MEASURES: Scores on the AUDIT and AUDIT-C. At-risk alcohol consumption and monthly episodic alcohol consumption in the past 3 months were derived using the time-line follow back method. Alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence was assessed in accordance with ICD-10 criteria using the MINI-KID. FINDINGS: AUDIT-C with a score of 3 was more effective for at-risk alcohol use (AUC 0.81; sensitivity 87%, specificity 97%), heavy episodic use (0.84; 76%, 98%) and alcohol abuse (0.98; 91%, 90%). AUDIT with a score of 7 was more effective in identifying alcohol dependence (0.92; 96%, 94%). CONCLUSIONS: The 3-item AUDIT-C is more effective than AUDIT in screening adolescents for at-risk alcohol use, heavy episodic alcohol use and alcohol abuse. AUDIT is more effective than AUDIT-C for the identification of alcohol dependence.

Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention in Police Custody Suites: Pilot Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial (AcCePT).

AIMS: There is a clear association between alcohol use and offending behaviour and significant police time is spent on alcohol-related incidents. This study aimed to test the feasibility of a trial of screening and brief intervention in police custody suites to reduce heavy drinking and re-offending behaviour. SHORT SUMMARY: We achieved target recruitment and high brief intervention delivery if this occurred immediately after screening. Low rates of return for counselling and retention at follow-up were challenges for a definitive trial. Conversely, high consent rates for access to police data suggested at least some outcomes could be measured remotely. METHODS: A three-armed pilot Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial with an embedded qualitative interview-based process evaluation to explore acceptability issues in six police custody suites (north east and south west of the UK). Interventions included: 1. Screening only (Controls), 2. 10 min Brief Advice 3. Brief Advice plus 20 min of brief Counselling. RESULTS: Of 3330 arrestees approached: 2228 were eligible for screening (67%) and 720 consented (32%); 386 (54%) scored 8+ on AUDIT; and 205 (53%) were enroled (79 controls, 65 brief advice and 61 brief counselling). Follow-up rates at 6 and 12 months were 29% and 26%, respectively. However, routinely collected re-offending data were obtained for 193 (94%) participants. Indices of deprivation data were calculated for 184 (90%) participants; 37.6% of these resided in the 20% most deprived areas of UK. Qualitative data showed that all arrestees reported awareness that participation was voluntary, that the trial was separate from police work, and the majority said trial procedures were acceptable. CONCLUSION: Despite hitting target recruitment and same-day brief intervention delivery, a future trial of alcohol screening and brief intervention in a police custody setting would only be feasible if routinely collected re-offending and health data were used for outcome measurement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN number: 89291046.