Mid and long-term effects of a SBIRT program for at-risk drinkers attending to an emergency department. Follow-up results from a randomized controlled trial.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: SBIRT programs (Screening Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment) for at-risk drinkers in emergency departments (ED) have shown to be effective, particularly at short term. In this article, we report mid and long-term follow-up results of a specialized SBIRT program. A short-term follow-up after 1.5 months showed encouraging results, with more than a 20% greater reduction of at-risk drinking in the intervention group and more than double of successful referrals to specialized treatment. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the mid and long-term efficacy of an SBIRT program conducted by psychiatrist specialists in addictive disorders and motivational interviewing in the ED of a tertiary hospital. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a previously published randomized controlled trial of an SBIRT program conducted by alcohol specialists for at-risk drinkers presenting to the ED, measured with the AUDIT-C scale. INTERVENTION OR EXPOSURE: Patients were randomized into two groups, with the control group receiving two leaflets: one regarding alcohol use and the other giving information about the study protocol. The intervention group received the same leaflets as well as a brief motivational intervention on alcohol use and, where appropriate, a referral to specialized treatment. OUTCOMES MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: Long-term assessment primary outcome was the proportion of at-risk alcohol use measured by AUDIT-C scale. The main effectiveness analysis at 18 weeks and 12 months' follow-up was conducted with multilevel logistic regression analyses. Missing values were imputed with the last observation carried forward. MAIN RESULTS: Of 200 patients included in the study, 133 (66.5%) and 131 (65.5%) completed 18 weeks and 1-year follow-up respectively. Although the proportion of risky drinkers was substantially lower in the intervention group (38.5 vs. 57.4% at 4.5 months and 58.5 vs 68.2% at 1 year), these results did not reach statistical significance (OR = 2.15; CI, 0.87-5.33). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis for mid- and long-term effects of a specialized SBIRT program, there was no significant difference in the reduction of risky drinkers at 18 weeks and 1 year. The small size of the studied sample and the low retention rate precluded any significant conclusion, although point estimates suggest a positive effect. Overall, SBIRT programs are an effective tool to reduce alcohol use at short time and to refer patients to specialized treatment; however, its effects seem to decay over time.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».