Alcohol screening in 22 Australian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations: Clinical context and who is screened.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol screening among Indigenous Australians is important to identify individuals needing support to reduce their drinking. Understanding clinical contexts in which clients are screened, and which clients are more or less likely to be screened, could help identify areas of services and communities that might benefit from increased screening. METHODS: We analysed routinely collected data from 22 Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations Australia-wide. Data collected between February 2016 and February 2021 were analysed using R, and aggregated to describe screening activity per client, within 2-monthly extraction periods. Descriptive analyses were performed to identify contexts in which clients received an Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test consumption (AUDIT-C) screen. Multi-level logistic regression determined demographic factors associated with receiving an AUDIT-C screen. Three models are presented to examine if screening was predicted by: (i) age; (ii) age and gender; (iii) age, gender and service remoteness. RESULTS: We observed 83,931 occasions where AUDIT-C was performed at least once during a 2-monthly extraction period. Most common contexts were adult health check (55.0%), followed by pre-consult examination (18.4%) and standalone item (9.9%). For every 10 years' increase in client age, odds of being screened with AUDIT-C slightly decreased (odds ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98, 0.99). Women were less likely to be screened with AUDIT-C (odds ratio 0.95; 95% CI 0.93, 0.96) than men. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: This study identified areas where alcohol screening can be increased (e.g., among women). Increasing AUDIT-C screening across entire communities could help reduce or prevent alcohol-related harms. Future Indigenous-led research could help identify strategies to increase screening rates.

Walking side-by-side: Supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians to lead the way in alcohol research.

Several initiatives have sought to increase the number of First Nations individuals with a higher degree in research (i.e., PhD or research masters)-in Australia and in similarly colonised countries. However, little has been written on day-to-day support structures and mechanisms that might help First Nations Australian candidates thrive in postgraduate research degrees and beyond. For sensitive research fields such as alcohol, emerging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers must grapple with topics which are stigmatising and in some instances associated with traumatic associations. There is also a lack of studies internationally that describe optimal support for First Nations students undertaking a higher degree by research with a primary focus on alcohol. Here we discuss what we have learned from the support offered through the Centre of Research Excellence in Indigenous Health and Alcohol-from the perspective of academic staff, students, trainees and early career researchers. We consider what may be generalisable lessons from this experience.

Prevalence and correlates of alcohol dependence in an Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representative sample: Using the Grog Survey App.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the prevalence of current alcohol dependence in Indigenous Australian communities. Here we identify the frequency of reported symptoms, estimate the prevalence and describe the correlates of current alcohol dependence. METHODS: A representative sample of Indigenous Australians (16+ years) was recruited from an urban and remote community in South Australia. Data were collected between July and October 2019 via a tablet computer-based application. Participants were likely dependent if they reported two or more dependence symptoms (ICD-11; in the last 12 -months), weekly or more frequently. Chi-square tests described the relationship between demographics, remoteness and alcohol dependence. Spearman correlations estimated the relationship between symptoms of dependence, consumption characteristics and demographics. RESULTS: A total of 775 Indigenous Australians participated. The most frequently reported symptoms were prioritising alcohol over other things and loss of control. Overall, 2.2% were likely dependent on alcohol (n = 17/775). Prevalence did not vary by remoteness. Participants who drank more and more frequently tended to report more frequent symptoms of dependence. In the urban site, men tended to report more frequent symptoms of dependence than women. Age, income and schooling were not linked to dependence. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of current alcohol dependence in this representative sample was similar to that of the general Australian and international estimates. Understanding risk factors for current alcohol dependence will be useful to inform the allocation of funding and support. Accurate estimates of the prevalence of current alcohol dependence are important to better identify specialist treatment needs.

Alcohol dependence in a community sample of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: harms, getting help and awareness of local treatments.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined links between current alcohol dependence and specific harms among Indigenous Australians. We investigated these associations as well as help seeking for drinking, awareness of local treatments and recommendations to help family or friends cut down or stop drinking in two Indigenous communities. METHODS: A representative sample of Indigenous Australians was surveyed in one urban and one remote community in South Australia. Data were collected via the Grog Survey App. Participants were dependent if they reported two or more symptoms of alcohol dependence (ICD-11). Pearson chi-square tests were used to describe relationships between employment by gender, and dependence by awareness of medicines and local treatment options. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to predict the odds of dependent drinkers experiencing harms and getting help for drinking, controlling for age, gender, schooling and income. RESULTS: A total of 775 Indigenous Australians took part in the study. After controlling for confounders, dependent drinkers were nearly eight times more likely to report a harm and nearly three times more likely to get help for their drinking-compared with non-dependent drinkers. Participants recommended accessing local support from an Aboriginal alcohol and other drugs worker, or a detoxification/ rehabilitation service. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: More support and funding is needed for Indigenous Australians to ensure local treatment options for dependent drinkers are readily available, appropriate and accessible. Involvement of local Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander health professionals in delivery of care can help ensure that it is appropriate to an individual's culture and context.

What is the prevalence of current alcohol dependence and how is it measured for Indigenous people in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol affects Indigenous communities globally that have been colonised. These effects are physical, psychological, financial and cultural. This systematic review aims to describe the prevalence of current (12-month) alcohol dependence in Indigenous Peoples in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America, to identify how it is measured, and if tools have been validated in Indigenous communities. Such information can help inform estimates of likely treatment need. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was completed in six electronic databases for reports on current alcohol dependence (moderate to severe alcohol use disorder) published between 1 January 1989-9 July 2020. The following data were extracted: (1) the Indigenous population studied; country, (2) prevalence of dependence, (3) tools used to screen, assess or diagnose current dependence, (4) tools that have been validated in Indigenous populations to screen, assess or diagnose dependence, and (5) quality of the study, assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies met eligibility criteria. Eight were cross-sectional surveys, one cohort study, and two were validation studies. Nine studies reported on the prevalence of current (12-month) alcohol dependence, and the range varied widely (3.8-33.3% [all participants], 3-32.8% [males only], 1.3-7.6% [females only]). Eight different tools were used and none were Indigenous-specific. Two tools have been validated in Indigenous (Native American) populations. CONCLUSION: Few studies report on prevalence of current alcohol dependence in community or household samples of Indigenous populations in these four countries. Prevalence varies according to sampling method and site (for example, specific community versus national). Prior work has generally not used tools validated in Indigenous contexts. Collaborations with local Indigenous people may help in the development of culturally appropriate ways of measuring alcohol dependence, incorporating local customs and values. Tools used need to be validated in Indigenous communities, or Indigenous-specific tools developed, validated and used. Prevalence findings can inform health promotion and treatment needs, including funding for primary health care and specialist treatment services.

Asking about the last four drinking occasions on a tablet computer as a way to record alcohol consumption in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: a validation.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption among Indigenous Australians can be irregular, depending on social and geographic context. The Finnish method uses the last four drinking occasions to estimate drinking quantity and pattern. The Grog Survey App is an interactive and visual tablet computer application which uses touch-screen technology to deliver questions on drinking. METHODS: Alcohol consumption recorded on the Grog Survey App using the last four occasions (Finnish) method was compared with a clinical interview conducted by an Indigenous Australian health professional. To assess convergent validity, Spearman's ranked correlations between consumption estimates from the App and from interview were calculated. Sensitivity and specificity analyses were used to compare how well the App and clinical interview agreed when classifying drinkers' risk. To assess criterion validity, average grams alcohol per day as estimated by the App (and by interview) were compared against presence of self-reported withdrawal tremors (from App or interview). Test-retest reliability was assessed by correlations between measures of alcohol consumption recorded on two occasions. RESULTS: The App recorded higher numbers of standard drinks consumed per drinking occasion than the interview. There was reasonable agreement between the App and interview across common reference periods (sensitivity 92.7%, specificity 69.8%, short-term risk; sensitivity 70.7%, specificity 68.8%, long-term risk). Average consumption recorded by the App was as good or better predictor of withdrawal tremors than consumption as estimated by interview. CONCLUSIONS: The Finnish method, as delivered by the App, offers an innovative way to collect survey data on alcohol in a population with an intermittent drinking pattern.