Dataset Information

Effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems: findings of the randomised UK alcohol treatment trial (UKATT).

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of social behaviour and network therapy, a new treatment for alcohol problems, with that of the proved motivational enhancement therapy.

Design

Pragmatic randomised trial.

Setting

Seven treatment sites around Birmingham, Cardiff, and Leeds.

Participants

742 clients with alcohol problems; 689 (93.0%) were interviewed at three months and 617 (83.2%) at 12 months.

Interventions

Social behaviour and network therapy and motivational enhancement therapy.

Main outcome measures

Changes in alcohol consumption, alcohol dependence, and alcohol related problems over 12 months.

Results

Both groups reported substantial reductions in alcohol consumption, dependence, and problems, and better mental health related quality of life over 12 months. Between groups we found only one significant difference in outcome, probably due to chance: the social network group showed significantly better physical health at three months. Non-significant differences at 12 months in the motivational group relative to the social network group included: the number of drinks consumed per drinking day had decreased by an extra 1.1 (95% confidence interval -1.0 to 3.2); scores on the Leeds dependence questionnaire had improved by an extra 0.6 (-0.7 to 2.0); scores on the alcohol problems questionnaire had improved by an extra 0.5 (-0.4 to 1.4); but the number of days abstinent from drinking had increased by 1.2% less (-4.5% to 6.9%).

Conclusion

The novel social behaviour and network therapy for alcohol problems did not differ significantly in effectiveness from the proved motivational enhancement therapy.

SUBMITTER: UKATT Research Team

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1200586 | biostudies-literature | 2005 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems: findings of the randomised UK alcohol treatment trial (UKATT).

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20050901 7516

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the effectiveness of social behaviour and network therapy, a new treatment for alcohol problems, with that of the proved motivational enhancement therapy.<h4>Design</h4>Pragmatic randomised trial.<h4>Setting</h4>Seven treatment sites around Birmingham, Cardiff, and Leeds.<h4>Participants</h4>742 clients with alcohol problems; 689 (93.0%) were interviewed at three months and 617 (83.2%) at 12 months.<h4>Interventions</h4>Social behaviour and network therapy and motiva ...[more]

PMID: 16150764

Similar Datasets

Project description:Musculoskeletal shoulder problems are common after breast cancer treatment. Early postoperative exercises targeting the upper limb may improve shoulder function. This protocol describes a National Institute for Health Research-funded randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an early supervised structured exercise programme compared with usual care, for women at high risk of developing shoulder problems after breast cancer surgery.MethodsThis pragmatic two-armed, multicentre RCT is underway within secondary care in the UK. PRevention Of Shoulder ProblEms tRial (PROSPER) aims to recruit 350 women from approximately 15 UK centres with follow-up at 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Recruitment processes and intervention development were optimised through qualitative research during a 6-month internal pilot phase. Participants are randomised to the PROSPER intervention or best practice usual care only. The PROSPER intervention is delivered by physiotherapists and incorporates three main components: shoulder-specific exercises targeting range of movement and strength; general physical activity and behavioural strategies to encourage adherence and support exercise behaviour. The primary outcome is upper arm function assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire at 12 months postrandomisation. Secondary outcomes include DASH subscales, acute and chronic pain, complications, health-related quality of life and healthcare resource use. We will interview a subsample of 20 participants to explore their experiences of the trial interventions.DiscussionThe PROSPER study is the first multicentre UK clinical trial to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of supported exercise in the prevention of shoulder problems in high-risk women undergoing breast cancer surgery. The findings will inform future clinical practice and provide valuable insight into the role of physiotherapy-supported exercise in breast cancer rehabilitation.Protocol versionVersion 2.1; dated 11 January 2017 TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN35358984; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundCounselling for Alcohol Problems (CAP), a brief intervention delivered by lay counsellors, enhanced remission and abstinence over 3 months among male primary care attendees with harmful drinking in a setting in India. We evaluated the sustainability of the effects after treatment termination, the cost-effectiveness of CAP over 12 months, and the effects of the hypothesized mediator 'readiness to change' on clinical outcomes.Methods and findingsMale primary care attendees aged 18-65 years screening with harmful drinking on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) were randomised to either CAP plus enhanced usual care (EUC) (n = 188) or EUC alone (n = 189), of whom 89% completed assessments at 3 months, and 84% at 12 months. Primary outcomes were remission and mean standard ethanol consumed in the past 14 days, and the proposed mediating variable was readiness to change at 3 months. CAP participants maintained the gains they showed at the end of treatment through the 12-month follow-up, with the proportion with remission (AUDIT score < 8: 54.3% versus 31.9%; adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.71 [95% CI 1.32, 2.22]; p < 0.001) and abstinence in the past 14 days (45.1% versus 26.4%; adjusted odds ratio 1.92 [95% CI 1.19, 3.10]; p = 0.008) being significantly higher in the CAP plus EUC arm than in the EUC alone arm. CAP participants also fared better on secondary outcomes including recovery (AUDIT score < 8 at 3 and 12 months: 27.4% versus 15.1%; aPR 1.90 [95% CI 1.21, 3.00]; p = 0.006) and percent of days abstinent (mean percent [SD] 71.0% [38.2] versus 55.0% [39.8]; adjusted mean difference 16.1 [95% CI 7.1, 25.0]; p = 0.001). The intervention effect for remission was higher at 12 months than at 3 months (aPR 1.50 [95% CI 1.09, 2.07]). There was no evidence of an intervention effect on Patient Health Questionnaire 9 score, suicidal behaviour, percentage of days of heavy drinking, Short Inventory of Problems score, WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score, days unable to work, or perpetration of intimate partner violence. Economic analyses indicated that CAP plus EUC was dominant over EUC alone, with lower costs and better outcomes; uncertainty analysis showed a 99% chance of CAP being cost-effective per remission achieved from a health system perspective, using a willingness to pay threshold equivalent to 1 month's wages for an unskilled manual worker in Goa. Readiness to change level at 3 months mediated the effect of CAP on mean standard ethanol consumption at 12 months (indirect effect -6.014 [95% CI -13.99, -0.046]). Serious adverse events were infrequent, and prevalence was similar by arm. The methodological limitations of this trial are the susceptibility of self-reported drinking to social desirability bias, the modest participation rates of eligible patients, and the examination of mediation effects of only 1 mediator and in only half of our sample.ConclusionsCAP's superiority over EUC at the end of treatment was largely stable over time and was mediated by readiness to change. CAP provides better outcomes at lower costs from a societal perspective.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN76465238.

Project description:ObjectiveTo 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.DesignPragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.SettingPrimary care practices in the north east and south east of England and in London.Participants3562 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.InterventionsPractices 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 measuresThe 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.ResultsPatient 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.ConclusionsAll 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 registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.

Project description:BACKGROUND:We examined the effectiveness of integrated stepped alcohol treatment (ISAT) on alcohol use and HIV outcomes among patients living with HIV and alcohol use disorder. METHODS:In this multisite, randomised controlled trial, conducted in five Veterans Affairs-based HIV clinics in the USA (Atlanta, GA; Brooklyn-Manhattan, NY; Dallas and Houston, TX; and Washington, DC), we recruited people living with HIV and an alcohol use disorder who were not otherwise receiving formal alcohol treatment. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, HIV positive, English speaking, and met criteria for alcohol use disorder by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-IV criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence. Key exclusion criteria included if the patient was acutely suicidal or had a psychiatric condition that affected their ability to participate in counselling interventions, or if they had any medical conditions that would preclude completing the study or cause harm during the course of the study. Using a web-based clinical trial management system, we randomly assigned participants (1:1) to receive ISAT or treatment as usual; patients, investigators, and clinicians were unmasked to allocation. ISAT involved three steps: step 1, addiction physician management, comprising eight sessions; step 2, addiction physician management plus motivational enhancement therapy, comprising four sessions; and step 3, specialty referral. Participants were stepped up at weeks 4 and 12 if they exceeded a priori drinking criteria. Treatment as usual involved referral to substance use treatment services. The primary outcome was number of drinks per week over the past 30 days at week 24 by use of the timeline followback method, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Adverse events were tracked throughout the study period in all randomly assigned participants. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01410123. FINDINGS:Between Jan 28, 2013, and July 14, 2017, 128 of 351 patients assessed for eligibility were eligible and randomly assigned to receive ISAT (n=63) or treatment as usual (n=65). Mean age was 54 years (range 23-70), 125 (98%) of 128 participants were men, and 101 (79%) were black. 25 (20%) were lost to follow-up. In the ISAT group, of 57 participants who did not die or withdraw, 30 (52%) advanced to step 2, and 17 (57%) of 30 advanced to step 3. 32 (51%) of 63 participants assigned to ISAT versus 17 (26%) of 65 assigned to treatment as usual received at least one alcohol treatment medication (p=0·004). Participants in both groups decreased their alcohol consumption, but at week 24 we did not detect a difference in number of drinks per week between the groups (least squares mean 10·4 drinks per week [SD 16·5] in the ISAT group vs 15·6 drinks per week [SD 17·6] in the treatment as usual group; adjusted mean difference -4·2, 95% CI -9·4 to 0·9; p=0·11). One adverse event occurred that was possibly related to treatment occurred in the ISAT group (headache). INTERPRETATION:ISAT increases the receipt of alcohol treatment medications and counselling without changes in drinking at week 24. Strategies to implement and enhance ISAT are needed. Future efforts should focus on promoting ISAT with attention to enhancing patient engagement and retention in alcohol-related care. FUNDING:US National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the clinical effectiveness, effect on waiting times, and patient acceptability of PhysioDirect services in patients with musculoskeletal problems, compared with usual care.DesignPragmatic randomised controlled trial to assess equivalence in clinical effectiveness. Patients were individually randomised in a 2:1 ratio to PhysioDirect or usual care.SettingFour physiotherapy services in England.ParticipantsAdults (aged ≥ 18 years) referred by general practitioners or self referred for musculoskeletal physiotherapy.InterventionsPhysioDirect services invited patients to telephone a physiotherapist for initial assessment and advice, followed by face-to-face physiotherapy if necessary. Usual care involved patients joining a waiting list for face-to-face treatment.Main outcome measuresNumbers of appointments, waiting time for treatment, and non-attendance rates. Primary outcome was physical health (SF-36v2 physical component score) at six months. Secondary outcomes included four other measures of health outcome, mental component score and scales from the SF-36v2, time lost from work, and patient satisfaction and preference. Participants were not blind to allocation, but outcome data were collected blind to allocation.ResultsOf 1506 patients allocated to PhysioDirect and 743 to usual care, 85% provided primary outcome data at six months (1283 and 629 patients, respectively). PhysioDirect patients had fewer face-to-face appointments than usual care patients (mean 1.91 v 3.11; incidence rate ratio 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.65)), a shorter waiting time (median 7 days v 34 days; arm time ratio 0.32 (0.29 to 0.35)), and lower rates of non-attendance (incidence rate ratio 0.55 (0.41 to 0.73)). After six months' follow-up, the SF-36v2 physical component score was equivalent between groups (adjusted difference in means -0.01 (-0.80 to 0.79)). Health outcome measures suggested a trend towards slightly greater improvement in the PhysioDirect arm at six week follow-up and no difference at six months. There was no difference in time lost from work. PhysioDirect patients were no more satisfied with access to physiotherapy than usual care patients, but had slightly lower satisfaction overall at six months (difference in satisfaction -3.8% (-7.3% to -0.3%); P=0.031). PhysioDirect patients were more likely than usual care patients to prefer PhysioDirect in future. No adverse events were detected.ConclusionsPhysioDirect is equally clinically effective compared with usual care, provides faster access to physiotherapy, and seems to be safe. However, it could be associated with slightly lower patient satisfaction.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN55666618.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Less than 20% of adolescents globally meet recommended levels of physical activity, and not meeting these recommended levels is associated with social disadvantage and rising disease risk. The determinants of physical activity in adolescents are multilevel and poorly understood, but the school's social environment likely plays an important role. We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a school-based programme (GoActive) to increase moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) among adolescents. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Non-fee-paying, co-educational schools including Year 9 students in the UK counties of Cambridgeshire and Essex were eligible for inclusion. Within participating schools (n = 16), all Year 9 students were eligible and invited to participate. Participants were 2,862 13- to 14-year-olds (84% of eligible students). After baseline assessment, schools were computer-randomised, stratified by school-level pupil premium funding (below/above county-specific median) and county (control: 8 schools, 1,319 participants, mean [SD] participants per school n = 165 [62]; intervention: 8 schools, 1,543 participants, n = 193 [43]). Measurement staff were blinded to allocation. The iteratively developed, feasibility-tested 12-week intervention, aligned with self-determination theory, trained older adolescent mentors and in-class peer-leaders to encourage classes to conduct 2 new weekly activities. Students and classes gained points and rewards for engaging in any activity in or out of school. The primary outcome was average daily minutes of accelerometer-assessed MVPA at 10-month follow-up; a mixed-methods process evaluation evaluated implementation. Of 2,862 recruited participants (52.1% male), 2,167 (76%) attended 10-month follow-up measurements; we analysed the primary outcome for 1,874 participants (65.5%). At 10 months, there was a mean (SD) decrease in MVPA of 8.3 (19.3) minutes in the control group and 10.4 (22.7) minutes in the intervention group (baseline-adjusted difference [95% confidence interval] -1.91 minutes [-5.53 to 1.70], p = 0.316). The programme cost £13 per student compared with control; it was not cost-effective. Overall, 62.9% of students and 87.3% of mentors reported that GoActive was fun. Teachers and mentors commented that their roles in programme delivery were unclear. Implementation fidelity was low. The main methodological limitation of this study was the relatively affluent and ethnically homogeneous sample. CONCLUSIONS:In this study, we observed that a rigorously developed school-based intervention was no more effective than standard school practice at preventing declines in adolescent physical activity. Interdisciplinary research is required to understand educational-setting-specific implementation challenges. School leaders and authorities should be realistic about expectations of the effect of school-based physical activity promotion strategies implemented at scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN31583496.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems: findings of the randomised UK alcohol treatment trial (UKATT).

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems: findings of the randomised UK alcohol treatment trial (UKATT).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets