Examining the hospital costs of children born into relative deprivation in England.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between being born into relative deprivation and hospital costs during childhood. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: We created a birth cohort using Hospital Episode Statistics for children born in NHS hospitals in 2003/2004. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) rank at birth was missing from 75% of the baby records, so we linked mother and baby records to obtain the IMD decile from the mother's record. We aggregated and costed each child's hospital inpatient admissions, and outpatient and emergency department (ED) attendances up to 15 years of age. We used 2019/2020 NHS tariffs to assign costs. We constructed an additional cohort, all children born in 2013/2014, to explore any changes over time, comparing the utilisation and costs up to 5 years of age. RESULTS: Our main cohort comprised 567 347 babies born in 2003/2004, of which we could include 91%. Up to the age of 15 years, children born into the most deprived areas used more hospital services than those born in the least deprived, reflected in higher costs of inpatient, outpatient and ED care. The highest costs and greatest differences are in the year following birth. Comparing this with the later cohort (up to age 5 years), the average cost per child increased across all deprivation deciles, but differences between the most and least deprived deciles appeared to narrow slightly. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare utilisation and costs are consistently higher for children who are born into the most deprived areas compared with the least.

Exploring gender differences in uptake of GP partnership roles: a qualitative mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The unadjusted gender pay gap in general practice is reported to be 33.5%. This reflects partly the differential rate at which women become partners, but evidence exploring gender differences in GPs' career progression is sparse. AIM: To explore factors affecting uptake of partnership roles, focusing particularly on gender differences. DESIGN AND SETTING: Convergent mixed-methods research design using data from UK GPs. METHOD: Secondary analysis of qualitative interviews and social media analysis of UK GPs' Twitter commentaries, which informed the conduct of asynchronous online focus groups. Findings were combined using methodological triangulation. RESULTS: The sample comprised 40 GP interviews, 232 GPs tweeting about GP partnership roles, and seven focus groups with 50 GPs. Factors at individual, organisational, and national levels influence partnership uptake and career decisions of both men and women GPs. Desire for work-family balance (particularly childcare responsibilities) presented the greatest barrier, for both men and women, as well as workload, responsibility, financial investment, and risk. Greater challenges were, however, reported by women, particularly regarding balancing work-family lives, as well as prohibitive working conditions (including maternity and sickness pay) and discriminatory practices perceived to favour men and full-time GPs. CONCLUSION: There are some long-standing gendered barriers that continue to affect the career decisions of women GPs. The relative attractiveness of salaried, locum, or private roles in general practice appears to discourage both men and women from partnerships presently. Promoting positive workplace cultures through strong role models, improved flexibility in roles, and skills training could potentially encourage greater uptake.

Are serum hsCRP and IL-6 prognostic markers in somatic symptom disorder and related disorders? An exploratory analysis in a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the roles of hsCRP and IL-6 as prognostic markers for treatment outcome in SSRD. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 237 consecutive outpatients diagnosed with SSRD at the Clinical Centre of Excellence for Body Mind and Health, the Netherlands were assessed. At intake, venepuncture was performed for serum hsCRP and IL-6. Baseline scores for PHQ-9, GAD7, physical symptom score (PSQ-51) and BPI questionnaires were obtained. Patients were followed up at the end of their usual treatment programme, which lasted approximately 12 months. RESULTS: Higher baseline hsCRP was associated with high physical symptom scores (PSQ-51), but not BPI, GAD-7 and PHQ-9 questionnaire scores at end of treatment. No association was identified between baseline IL-6 and follow-up symptom questionnaire scores after treatment. Adjustment for age, gender and somatic comorbidity showed no significant change in the association. CONCLUSION: This exploratory analysis provides some evidence that in patients with SSRD, high baseline serum hsCRP may predict poorer treatment outcomes in physical symptoms but not depression, anxiety or pain symptoms. Baseline serum hsCRP may therefore be a useful factor in identifying SSRD patients who are at risk of a persistent high physical symptom burden.

General practitioners' wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: Novel methods with social media data.

BACKGROUND: It is difficult to engage busy healthcare professionals in research. Yet during the COVID-19 pandemic, gaining their perspectives has never been more important. OBJECTIVE: To explore social media data for insights into the wellbeing of UK General Practitioners (GPs) during the Covid-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used a combination of search approaches to identify 381 practising UK NHS GPs on Twitter. Using a two stage social media analysis, we firstly searched for key themes from 91,034 retrieved tweets (before and during the pandemic). Following this we used qualitative content analysis to provide in-depth insights from 7145 tweets related to wellbeing. RESULTS: Social media proved a useful tool to identify a cohort of UK GPs; following their tweets longitudinally to explore key themes and trends in issues related to GP wellbeing during the pandemic. These predominately related to support, resources and public perceptions and fluctuations were identified at key timepoints during the pandemic, all achieved without burdening busy GPs. CONCLUSION: Social media data can be searched to identify a cohort of GPs to explore their wellbeing and changes over time.

GP wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Doctors' organisations in the UK have reported worrying levels of work-related stress and burnout in the GP workforce for some time, and the COVID-19 pandemic has presented clear new challenges. AIM: To synthesise international evidence exploring the impact of COVID-19 on primary care doctors' mental health and wellbeing, and identify risk factors associated with their psychological wellbeing during this time. DESIGN AND SETTING: Mixed-methods systematic review. METHOD: Six bibliographic databases, Google Scholar, and MedRxiv were searched on 19 November 2020 and 3 June 2021 to identify studies of GP psychological wellbeing during the pandemic. Reference checking was also conducted. Two reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of studies using standardised tools. Heterogeneity in outcomes, setting, and design prohibited statistical pooling; studies were combined using a convergent integrated thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies were included. Multiple sources of stress were identified including changed working practices; risk, exposure, and inadequate personal protective equipment (PPE); information overload; pandemic preparedness; and cohesion across sectors. Studies demonstrated an impact on psychological wellbeing, with some GPs experiencing stress, burnout, anxiety, depression, fear of COVID-19, lower job satisfaction, and physical symptoms. Studies reported gender and age differences: women GPs had poorer psychological outcomes across all domains, and older GPs reported greater stress and burnout. Use of outcome measures and reporting practice varied greatly. CONCLUSION: This review of international evidence demonstrates that the COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected GPs' wellbeing around the world. Further research could explore gender and age differences, identifying interventions targeted to these groups.

Support and follow-up needs of patients discharged from intensive care after severe COVID-19: a mixed-methods study of the views of UK general practitioners and intensive care staff during the pandemic's first wave.

OBJECTIVES: To identify follow-up services planned for patients with COVID-19 discharged from intensive care unit (ICU) and to explore the views of ICU staff and general practitioners (GPs) regarding these patients' future needs and care coordination. DESIGN: This is a sequential mixed-methods study using online surveys and semistructured interviews. Interview data were inductively coded and thematically analysed. Survey data were descriptively analysed. SETTING: GP surgeries and acute National Health Service Trusts in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: GPs and clinicians leading care for patients discharged from ICU. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Usual follow-up practice after ICU discharge, changes in follow-up during the pandemic, and GP awareness of follow-up and support needs of patients discharged from ICU. RESULTS: We obtained 170 survey responses and conducted 23 interviews. Over 60% of GPs were unaware of the follow-up services generally provided by their local hospitals and whether or not these were functioning during the pandemic. Eighty per cent of ICUs reported some form of follow-up services, with 25% of these suspending provision during the peak of the pandemic and over half modifying their provision (usually to provide the service remotely). Common themes relating to barriers to provision of follow-up were funding complexities, remit and expertise, and communication between ICU and community services. Discharge documentation was described as poor and lacking key information. Both groups mentioned difficulties accessing services in the community and lack of clarity about who was responsible for referrals and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has highlighted long-standing issues of continuity of care and complex funding streams for post-ICU follow-up care. The large cohort of ICU patients admitted due to COVID-19 highlights the need for improved follow-up services and communication between specialists and GPs, not only for patients with COVID-19, but for all those discharged from ICU.

The effect of a peer-led problem-support mentor intervention on self-harm and violence in prison: An interrupted time series analysis using routinely collected prison data.

BACKGROUND: Levels of mental disorder, self-harm and violent behaviour are higher in prisons than in the community. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a brief peer-led problem-support mentor intervention could reduce the incidence of self-harm and violence in an English prison. METHODS: An existing intervention was adapted using a theory of change model and eligible prisoners were trained to become problem-support mentors. Delivery of the intervention took two forms: (i) promotion of the intervention to fellow prisoners, offering support and raising awareness of the intervention but not delivering the skills and (ii) delivery of the problem-solving therapy skills to selected individual prisoners. Training and intervention adherence was measured using mentor log books. We used an Interrupted Time Series (ITS) design utilizing prison data over a 31 month period. Three ITS models and sensitivity analyses were used to address the impact across the whole prison and in the two groups by intervention delivery. Outcomes included self-harm and violent behaviour. Routine data were collected at monthly intervals 16 months pre-, 10 months during and six months post-intervention. Qualitative data measured the acceptability, feasibility, impact and sustainability of the intervention. A matched case-control study followed people after release to assess the feasibility of formal evaluation of the impact on re-offending up to 16 months. FINDINGS: Our causal map identified that mental health and wellbeing in the prison were associated with environmental and social factors. We found a significant reduction in the incidence of self-harm for those receiving the full problem-solving therapy skills. No significant reduction was found for incidence of violent behaviour. INTERPRETATION: Universal prison-wide strategies should consider a series of multi-level interventions to address mental health and well-being in prisons. FUNDING: Research Champions Fund and the Economic and Social Research Council Impact Acceleration Account Fund, University of York, UK.

Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Opportunistic Screening and Stepped-care Interventions for Older Alcohol Users in Primary Care.

AIMS: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care intervention versus a minimal intervention for the treatment of older hazardous alcohol users in primary care. METHOD: Multi-centre, pragmatic RCT, set in Primary Care in UK. Patients aged ≥ 55 years scoring ≥ 8 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test were allocated either to 5-min of brief advice or to 'Stepped Care': an initial 20-min of behavioural change counselling, with Step 2 being three sessions of Motivational Enhancement Therapy and Step 3 referral to local alcohol services (progression between each Step being determined by outcomes 1 month after each Step). Outcome measures included average drinks per day, AUDIT-C, alcohol-related problems using the Drinking Problems Index, health-related quality of life using the Short Form 12, costs measured from a NHS/Personal Social Care perspective and estimated health gains in quality adjusted life-years measured assessed EQ-5D. RESULTS: Both groups reduced alcohol consumption at 12 months but the difference between groups was small and not significant. No significant differences were observed between the groups on secondary outcomes. In economic terms stepped care was less costly and more effective than the minimal intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Stepped care does not confer an advantage over a minimal intervention in terms of reduction in alcohol use for older hazardous alcohol users in primary care. However, stepped care has a greater probability of being more cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN52557360. SHORT SUMMARY: A stepped care approach was compared with brief intervention for older at-risk drinkers attending primary care. While consumption reduced in both groups over 12 months there was no significant difference between the groups. An economic analysis indicated the stepped care which had a greater probability of being more cost-effective than brief intervention.

Screening for At-Risk Alcohol Consumption in Primary Care: A Randomized Evaluation of Screening Approaches.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to explore the relative efficiency and effectiveness of targeted versus universal screening for at-risk alcohol use in a primary care population in the UK. METHODS: The study was a randomized evaluation of screening approach (targeted versus universal) for consecutive attendees at primary care aged 18 years or more. Targeted screening involved screening any patient attending with one of the targeted presentations, conditions associated with excessive alcohol consumption: mental health, gastrointestinal, hypertension, minor injuries or a new patient registration. In the universal arm of the study all presentations in the recruitment period were included. Universal screening included all patients presenting to allocated practices. RESULTS: A total of 3562 potential participants were approached. The odds ratio of being screen positive was higher for the targeted group versus the universal group. Yet the vast majority of those screening positive in the universal group of the study would have been missed by a targeted approach. A combination of age and gender was a more efficient approach than targeting by clinical condition or context. CONCLUSIONS: While screening targeted by age and gender is more efficient than universal screening, targeting by clinical condition or presentation is not. Further universal screening is more effective in identifying the full range of patients who could benefit from brief alcohol interventions, and would therefore have greater public health impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.

Does the timing of cardiac rehabilitation impact fitness outcomes? An observational analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain the characteristics associated with delayed cardiac rehabilitation (CR) and determine if an association between CR timing and fitness outcomes exists in patients receiving routine care. METHODS: The study used data from the UK National Audit of Cardiac Rehabilitation, a data set which captures information on routine CR practice and patient outcomes. Data from 1 January 2012 to 8 September 2015 were included. Logistic regression models were used to explore the relationship between timing of CR and fitness-related outcomes as measured by patient-reported exercise level (150 min/week: yes/no), Dartmouth quality of life physical fitness scale and the incremental shuttle-walk test. RESULTS: Based on UK data current CR practice shows that programmes do not always adhere to recommendations on the start of prompt CR, that is, start CR within 28 days of referral (42 days for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)). Wait time exceeded recommendations in postmyocardial infarction (post-MI), elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), MI-PCI and post-CABG surgery patients. This was particularly pronounced in the medically managed post-MI group, median wait time 40 days. Furthermore, statistical analysis revealed that delayed CR significantly impacts fitness outcomes. For every 1-day increase in CR wait time, patients were 1% less likely to improve across all fitness-related measures (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: With the potential for suboptimal patient outcome if starting CR is delayed, efforts should be made to identify and overcome barriers to timely CR provision.

Observational study of the relationship between volume and outcomes using data from the National Audit of Cardiac Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based intervention delivered by a wide range of high-volume and low-volume centres; however, the extent of volume-outcome relationship is yet to be studied. There is a lack of consensus about the effect of volume on outcomes, with evidence of mixed effects in acute and chronic care. The aim of this study is, to investigate the extent of association of outcomes in CR with patient volume. METHODS: Data was validated and extracted from the national audit from 2012 to 2013 for each CR centre. Volume was calculated as the total number of patients entering outpatient CR. Hierarchical multiple regression models were used to test for relationships between volume and outcomes. The outcomes included body mass index, blood pressure, psychosocial well-being, cholesterol, smoking cessation and physical activity. The analyses were adjusted for centre and patient characteristics and confounders. RESULTS: The number of patients included in the volume analysis was 48 476, derived from 178 CR centres. The average age per centre was 66 years with a 70% male distribution of patients enrolled. Regression analysis revealed no volume-outcome relationship, additionally no statistical significance existed. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike cardiac surgery this study, after accounting for staffing, age, gender and comorbidity, shows no effect of volume on outcome following CR delivered by high-volume and low-volume programmes. Based on our data there is no support for centralisation of services. Our findings and methodology can be used as a benchmark for future volume-outcome relationship studies in CR.

ADAPTA: A pilot randomised controlled trial of an alcohol-focused intervention versus a healthy living intervention for problem drinkers identified in a general hospital setting.

AIM: To examine the relative feasibility, acceptability, applicability, effectiveness and explore cost-effectiveness of a healthy living focused intervention (HL) compared to an alcohol-focused intervention (AF) for problem drinkers identified in hospital. METHODS: A pragmatic, randomised, controlled, open pilot trial. Feasibility and acceptability were measured by recruitment, attrition, follow-up rates and number of treatment sessions attended. Effectiveness was measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score at six months. Additional economic and secondary outcome measures were collected. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants were randomised and 72% (n=62) were retained in full participation. Forty-one participants attended at least one treatment session (48%). A greater proportion in the HL group attended all four treatment sessions (33% vs 19%). Follow-up rates were 29% at six months and 22% at twelve months. There was no evidence of a difference in AUDIT score between treatment groups at six months. Mean cost of health care and social services, policing and the criminal justice system use decreased while EQ-5D scores indicated minor improvement in both arms. However, this pilot trial was not powered to detect differences in either measure between groups. CONCLUSIONS: While no treatment effect was observed, this study demonstrated a potential to engage patients drinking at harmful or dependent levels in a healthy living intervention. However, recruitment proved challenging and follow-up rates were poor. Better ways need to be found to help these patients recognise the harms associated with their drinking and overcome the evident barriers to their engagement with specialist treatment.

Confidence in the face of risk: the Risk Assessment and Management Self-Efficacy Study (RAMSES).

Aims and method To evaluate a comprehensive risk management programme. A Risk Assessment and Management Self-Efficacy Scale (RAMSES) was used to evaluate the impact of a clinical guideline and training course. Fifty-three psychological therapists were randomly allocated to training v. waiting list in a controlled, delayed-intervention design. Differences in mean self-efficacy scores between groups were examined using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Results The RAMSES measure had adequate factor structure, internal consistency and construct validity. When adjusting for baseline scores and cluster design, the group exposed to training had a higher mean self-efficacy score than controls. Mean differences between groups were not significant after the control group received training, nor at 6 months' follow-up. Clinical implications Exposure to training and clinical guidelines can improve self-efficacy in risk assessment and management. An important advance put forward by this study is the specification of areas of competence in risk assessment and management, which can be measured using a psychometrically sound tool.

Alcohol screening and brief interventions for offenders in the probation setting (SIPS Trial): a pragmatic multicentre cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of different brief intervention strategies at reducing hazardous or harmful drinking in the probation setting. Offender managers were randomized to three interventions, each of which built on the previous one: feedback on screening outcome and a client information leaflet control group, 5 min of structured brief advice and 20 min of brief lifestyle counselling. METHODS: A pragmatic multicentre factorial cluster randomized controlled trial. The primary outcome was self-reported hazardous or harmful drinking status measured by Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) at 6 months (negative status was a score of <8). Secondary outcomes were AUDIT status at 12 months, experience of alcohol-related problems, health utility, service utilization, readiness to change and reduction in conviction rates. RESULTS: Follow-up rates were 68% at 6 months and 60% at 12 months. At both time points, there was no significant advantage of more intensive interventions compared with the control group in terms of AUDIT status. Those in the brief advice and brief lifestyle counselling intervention groups were statistically significantly less likely to reoffend (36 and 38%, respectively) than those in the client information leaflet group (50%) in the year following intervention. CONCLUSION: Brief advice or brief lifestyle counselling provided no additional benefit in reducing hazardous or harmful drinking compared with feedback on screening outcome and a client information leaflet. The impact of more intensive brief intervention on reoffending warrants further research.

The effectiveness of alcohol screening and brief intervention in emergency departments: a multicentre pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol misuse is common in people attending emergency departments (EDs) and there is some evidence of efficacy of alcohol screening and brief interventions (SBI). This study investigated the effectiveness of SBI approaches of different intensities delivered by ED staff in nine typical EDs in England: the SIPS ED trial. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Pragmatic multicentre cluster randomized controlled trial of SBI for hazardous and harmful drinkers presenting to ED. Nine EDs were randomized to three conditions: a patient information leaflet (PIL), 5 minutes of brief advice (BA), and referral to an alcohol health worker who provided 20 minutes of brief lifestyle counseling (BLC). The primary outcome measure was the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) status at 6 months. Of 5899 patients aged 18 or more presenting to EDs, 3737 (63·3%) were eligible to participate and 1497 (40·1%) screened positive for hazardous or harmful drinking, of whom 1204 (80·4%) gave consent to participate in the trial. Follow up rates were 72% (n = 863) at six, and 67% (n = 810) at 12 months. There was no evidence of any differences between intervention conditions for AUDIT status or any other outcome measures at months 6 or 12 in an intention to treat analysis. At month 6, compared to the PIL group, the odds ratio of being AUDIT negative for brief advice was 1·103 (95% CI 0·328 to 3·715). The odds ratio comparing BLC to PIL was 1·247 (95% CI 0·315 to 4·939). A per protocol analysis confirmed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: SBI is difficult to implement in typical EDs. The results do not support widespread implementation of alcohol SBI in ED beyond screening followed by simple clinical feedback and alcohol information, which is likely to be easier and less expensive to implement than more complex interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 93681536.

An alcohol-focused intervention versus a healthy living intervention for problem drinkers identified in a general hospital setting (ADAPTA): study protocol for a randomized, controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol misuse is a major cause of premature mortality and ill health. Although there is a high prevalence of alcohol problems among patients presenting to general hospital, many of these people are not help seekers and do not engage in specialist treatment. Hospital admission is an opportunity to steer people towards specialist treatment, which can reduce health-care utilization and costs to the public sector and produce substantial individual health and social benefits. Alcohol misuse is associated with other lifestyle problems, which are amenable to intervention. It has been suggested that the development of a healthy or balanced lifestyle is potentially beneficial for reducing or abstaining from alcohol use, and relapse prevention. The aim of the study is to test whether or not the offer of a choice of health-related lifestyle interventions is more acceptable, and therefore able to engage more problem drinkers in treatment, than an alcohol-focused intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a pragmatic, randomized, controlled, open pilot study in a UK general hospital setting with concurrent economic evaluation and a qualitative component. Potential participants are those admitted to hospital with a diagnosis likely to be responsive to addiction interventions who score equal to or more than 16 on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). The main purpose of this pilot study is to evaluate the acceptability of two sorts of interventions (healthy living related versus alcohol focused) to the participants and to assess the components and processes of the design. Qualitative research will be undertaken to explore acceptability and the impact of the approach, assessment, recruitment and intervention on trial participants and non-participants. The effectiveness of the two treatments will be compared at 6 months using AUDIT scores as the primary outcome measure. There will be additional economic, qualitative and secondary outcome measurements. DISCUSSION: Development of the study was a collaboration between academics, commissioners and clinicians in general hospital and addiction services, made possible by the Collaboration in Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) program of research. CLAHRC was a necessary vehicle for overcoming the barriers to answering an important NHS question--how better to engage problem drinkers in a hospital setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN47728072.

Effectiveness of screening and brief alcohol intervention in primary care (SIPS trial): pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of different brief intervention strategies at reducing hazardous or harmful drinking in primary care. The hypothesis was that more intensive intervention would result in a greater reduction in hazardous or harmful drinking. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Primary care practices in the north east and south east of England and in London. PARTICIPANTS: 3562 patients aged 18 or more routinely presenting in primary care, of whom 2991 (84.0%) were eligible to enter the trial: 900 (30.1%) screened positive for hazardous or harmful drinking and 756 (84.0%) received a brief intervention. The sample was predominantly male (62%) and white (92%), and 34% were current smokers. INTERVENTIONS: Practices were randomised to three interventions, each of which built on the previous one: a patient information leaflet control group, five minutes of structured brief advice, and 20 minutes of brief lifestyle counselling. Delivery of the patient leaflet and brief advice occurred directly after screening and brief lifestyle counselling in a subsequent consultation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was patients' self reported hazardous or harmful drinking status as measured by the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) at six months. A negative AUDIT result (score <8) indicated non-hazardous or non-harmful drinking. Secondary outcomes were a negative AUDIT result at 12 months, experience of alcohol related problems (alcohol problems questionnaire), health utility (EQ-5D), service utilisation, and patients' motivation to change drinking behaviour (readiness to change) as measured by a modified readiness ruler. RESULTS: Patient follow-up rates were 83% at six months (n=644) and 79% at 12 months (n=617). At both time points an intention to treat analysis found no significant differences in AUDIT negative status between the three interventions. Compared with the patient information leaflet group, the odds ratio of having a negative AUDIT result for brief advice was 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.39) and for brief lifestyle counselling was 0.78 (0.48 to 1.25). A per protocol analysis confirmed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: All patients received simple feedback on their screening outcome. Beyond this input, however, evidence that brief advice or brief lifestyle counselling provided important additional benefit in reducing hazardous or harmful drinking compared with the patient information leaflet was lacking. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.

Screening for alcohol use in criminal justice settings: an exploratory study.

AIMS: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of alcohol screening and delivery of brief interventions within criminal justice settings. METHODS: A quantitative survey of those aged 18 or over in English criminal justice settings (three custody suites within police stations, three prisons and three probation offices). MEASUREMENTS: The Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) and a modified version of the Single Alcohol Screening Question (M-SASQ) were compared with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as the 'gold standard'. Participants completed a health status questionnaire (EQ5D), questions on service utilization and the Readiness to Change Questionnaire. Questions relating to the acceptability and feasibility of delivering brief interventions and about perception of coercion were included. FINDINGS: Five hundred and ninety-two individuals were approached and 251 were eligible. Of these, 205 (82%) consented to take part in the study. The mean AUDIT score was 19.9 (SD 13.5) and 73% scored 8 or more on AUDIT. A higher percentage of those approached in the probation setting consented to take part (81%: prison 36%, police setting 10%). Those scoring AUDIT positive were more likely to be involved in violent offences (36.5 vs 9.4%; P < 0.001) and less likely to be involved in offences involving property (27.7 vs 45.3%; P = 0.03). Three quarters of the sample (74%) reported that they would not feel coerced to engage in an intervention about their alcohol use. FAST and M-SASQ had acceptable screening properties when compared with AUDIT with area under the curves of 0.97 and 0.92, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm that there is a major problem with alcohol use in the criminal justice system and this impacts on health and criminal behaviour. Of the three criminal justice settings, probation was found to be the most suitable for screening. Participants were positive about receiving interventions for their alcohol use in probation settings.

Brief case finding tools for anxiety disorders: validation of GAD-7 and GAD-2 in addictions treatment.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety disorders are the most common mental health problems and often co-exist with substance use. Little evidence exists to support the use of brief screening tools for anxiety disorders in routine addictions treatment. This is the first study to test the validity and reliability of GAD-7 and GAD-2 in an outpatient drugs treatment population. METHODS: A sample of 103 patients completed brief screening questionnaires and took part in structured diagnostic assessments using CIS-R. A subgroup of 60 patients completed retests after 4 weeks. The results of brief questionnaires were compared to those of gold-standard diagnostic interviews using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves. Psychometric properties were also calculated to evaluate the validity and reliability of self-completed questionnaires. RESULTS: A GAD-7 score ≥ 9 had a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 86% for any anxiety disorder, also displaying adequate temporal stability at repeated measurements (intra-class correlation=0.85) and high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.91). A GAD-2 score ≥ 2 had 94% sensitivity and 53% specificity, with adequate internal consistency (0.82). CONCLUSIONS: GAD-7 adequately detected the presence of an anxiety disorder in drug and alcohol users; although this study was limited by sample size to determine its reliability for specific diagnoses. Results in this small sample suggest that GAD-7 may be a useful screening tool in addiction services, although replication in a larger sample is warranted.