Dataset Information

Disseminating alcohol screening and brief intervention at trauma centers: a policy-relevant cluster randomized effectiveness trial.

ABSTRACT: In 2005 the American College of Surgeons passed a mandate requiring that level I trauma centers have mechanisms to identify and intervene with problem drinkers. The aim of this investigation was to determine if a multi-level trauma center intervention targeting both providers and patients would lead to higher-quality alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) when compared with trauma center mandate compliance without implementation enhancements.Cluster randomized trial in which intervention site (site n = 10, patient n = 409) providers received 1-day workshop training on evidence-based motivational interviewing (MI) alcohol interventions and four 30-minute feedback and coaching sessions; control sites (site n = 10, patient n = 469) implemented the mandate without study team training enhancements.Trauma centers in the United States of America.A total of 878 blood alcohol-positive in-patients with and without traumatic brain injury (TBI).MI skills of providers were assessed with fidelity coded standardized patient interviews. All patients were interviewed at baseline and 6- and 12-months post-injury with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT).Intervention site providers consistently demonstrated enhanced MI skills compared with control providers. Intervention patients demonstrated an 8% reduction in AUDIT hazardous drinking relative to controls over the course of the year after injury (relative risk = 0.88, 95%, confidence interval = 0.79, 0.98). Intervention patients were more likely to demonstrate improvements in alcohol use problems in the absence of traumatic brain injury (TBI) (P = 0.002).Trauma center providers can be trained to deliver higher-quality alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) than untrained providers, which is associated with modest reductions in alcohol use problems, particularly among patients without TBI.

SUBMITTER: Zatzick D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4014067 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Disseminating alcohol screening and brief intervention at trauma centers: a policy-relevant cluster randomized effectiveness trial.

Zatzick Douglas D Donovan Dennis M DM Jurkovich Gregory G Gentilello Larry L Dunn Chris C Russo Joan J Wang Jin J Zatzick Christopher D CD Love Jeff J McFadden Collin C Rivara Frederick P FP

Addiction (Abingdon, England) 20140228 5

<h4>Background and aims</h4>In 2005 the American College of Surgeons passed a mandate requiring that level I trauma centers have mechanisms to identify and intervene with problem drinkers. The aim of this investigation was to determine if a multi-level trauma center intervention targeting both providers and patients would lead to higher-quality alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) when compared with trauma center mandate compliance without implementation enhancements.<h4>Design</h4>Clu ...[more]

PMID: 24450612

Similar Datasets

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:ObjectiveScreening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for adolescent alcohol and drug (AOD) use is recommended to occur with adolescents admitted to pediatric trauma centers. Most metrics on SBIRT service delivery only reference medical record documentation. In this analysis we examined changes in adolescents' perception of SBIRT services and concordance of adolescent-report and medical record data, among a sample of adolescents admitted before and after institutional SBIRT implementation.MethodsWe implemented SBIRT for adolescent AOD use using the Science to Service Laboratory implementation strategy and enrolled adolescents at 9 pediatric trauma centers. The recommended clinical workflow was for nursing to screen, social work to provide adolescents screening positive with brief intervention and referral to their PCP for continued AOD discussions with those. Adolescents screening as high-risk also referred to specialty services. Adolescents were enrolled and contacted 30 days after discharge and asked about their perception of any SBIRT services received. Data were also extracted from enrolled patient's medical record.ResultsThere were 430 adolescents enrolled, with 424 that were matched to their EHR data and 329 completed the 30-day survey. In this sample, EHR documented screening increased from pre-implementation to post-implementation (16.3%-65.7%) and brief interventions increased (27.1%-40.7%). Adolescents self-reported higher rates of being asked about alcohol or drug use than in EHR data both pre- and post-implementation (80.7%-81%). Both EHR data and adolescent self-reported data demonstrated low referral back to PCP for continued AOD discussions.ConclusionsImplementation of SBIRT at pediatric trauma centers was not associated with change in adolescent perceptions of SBIRT, despite improved documentation of delivery of AOD screening and interventions. Adolescents perceived being asked about AOD use more often than was documented. Referral to PCP or specialty care for continued AOD discussion remains an area of needed attention.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03297060.

Project description:BackgroundInternational guidelines for the management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding have not been widely adopted in clinical practice. We sought to determine whether a national, multifaceted intervention could improve adherence to guidelines, especially for patients at high risk of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.MethodsIn this randomized trial, we stratified hospitals by region and size and allocated sites to either the control or experimental group. Health care workers in the experimental group were given published guidelines, generic algorithms, stratification scoring systems and written reminders and attended multidisciplinary guideline education groups and case-based workshops. These interventions were implemented over a 12-month period after randomization, with performance feedback and benchmarking. The primary outcome of adherence rates to key guidelines in endoscopic and pharmacologic management, determined by chart review, was adjusted according to site characteristics and possible within-site dependencies. We also report the rates of adherence to other recommendations.ResultsForty-three sites were randomized to the experimental (n=21) or control (n=22) groups. In our primary analysis, we compared patients before (experimental group: n=402 patients; control group: n=424 patients) and after (experimental group: n=361 patients; control group: n=389 patients) intervention. Patient-level analysis revealed no significant difference in adherence rates to the guidelines after the intervention (experimental group: 9.8%; control group: 4.8%; p=0.99) after adjustment for the rate of adherence before the intervention (experimental group: 13.2%; control group: 7.1%). The adherence rates to other guidelines were similar and decreased over time, varying between 5% and 93%.InterpretationThis national knowledge translation-based trial suggests poor adherence to guidelines on nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Adherence was not improved by an educational intervention, which highlights both the complexity and poor predictability of attempting to alter the behaviour of health care providers (Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. MCT-88113).

Project description:BackgroundThe American College of Surgeons mandates universal screening for alcohol misuse and delivery of an intervention for those screening positive as a requirement for certification as a level 1 trauma center. Though this requirement has been mandated for over a decade, its implementation has been challenging. Our research team completed an implementation study supporting seven pediatric trauma centers' compliance with the requirement by developing and implementing an institutional alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) policy for adolescent trauma patients. A mixed-methods approach indicated that SBIRT adoption rates increased at all sites; however, providers' fidelity to the SBIRT intervention was variable, and providers reported a number of barriers to SBIRT implementation. The goal of this study is to conduct a fully powered type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial to test the effectiveness of a comprehensive implementation strategy in increasing the implementation of SBIRT for alcohol and other drug use (AOD) in pediatric trauma centers.MethodsOur implementation strategy is based on the Science to Service Laboratory (SSL), an approach developed by the SAMHSA-funded Addiction Technology Transfer Centers that consists of three core elements (i.e., didactic training + performance feedback + leadership coaching). Utilizing a stepped wedge design, a national cohort of 10 pediatric trauma centers will receive the SSL implementation strategy. At six distinct time points, each of the 10 sites will provide data from 30 electronic medical records (n = 1800 in total). A subset of adolescents will also report on fidelity of intervention delivery and linkage to care (i.e., continued AOD discussion and/or treatment with a primary care provider) 1 month after hospital discharge. In addition, nurses, social workers, and leaders will report on organizational readiness for implementation at four distinct time points.DiscussionThis protocol proposes a unique opportunity to examine whether a comprehensive implementation strategy can improve the fidelity of SBIRT delivery across a national cohort of pediatric trauma centers. With injured adolescents, this could optimize the detection and intervention of AOD use and improve adolescent health.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03297060 .

Project description:BACKGROUND:The implementation of trauma systems in many high-income countries over the last 50 years has led to important reductions in injury mortality and disability in many healthcare jurisdictions. Injury organizations including the American College of Surgeons and the Trauma Association of Canada as well as the World Health Organization provide consensus-based recommendations on resources and processes for optimal injury care. Many hospitals treating trauma patients seek verification to demonstrate that they meet these recommendations. This process may be labeled differently across jurisdictions. In Canada for example, it is called accreditation, but it has the same objective and very similar modalities. The objective of the study described in this protocol is to systematically review evidence on the effectiveness of trauma center verification for improving clinical processes and patient outcomes in injury care. METHODS:We will perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the association between trauma center verification and hospital mortality (primary outcome), as well as morbidity, resource utilization, and processes of care (secondary outcomes). We will search CINAHL, EMBASE, HealthStar, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases, as well as key injury organization websites for gray literature. We will assess the methodological quality of studies using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool. We are planning to conduct a meta-analysis if feasible based on the number of included studies and their heterogeneity. We will evaluate the quality of cumulative evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology. DISCUSSION:This review will provide a synthesis of the body of evidence on trauma center verification effectiveness. Results could reinforce current verification modalities and may suggest ways to optimize them. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at an international clinical conference. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018107083.

Dataset Information

Disseminating alcohol screening and brief intervention at trauma centers: a policy-relevant cluster randomized effectiveness trial.

Publications

Disseminating alcohol screening and brief intervention at trauma centers: a policy-relevant cluster randomized effectiveness trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets