Computerized Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention May Reduce Hazardous Drinking
Web-based strategies have the potential to improve delivery of alcohol screening and brief intervention. In a recent controlled study, researchers randomized 429 university students who screened positive for hazardous or harmful drinking* to either a single web-based brief intervention, a web-based brief intervention with follow-up interventions at 1 and 6 months, or a control group receiving an educational pamphlet only. Interventions included alcohol assessments and personalized feedback. Participants completed web-based outcome assessments at 6 and 12 months.
- Compared with controls, participants in the single intervention group reported significantly lower frequency of drinking at 6 months (rate ratio [RR], 0.79), lower total alcohol consumption at 6 and 12 months (RR, 0.77 at both times), and fewer academic consequences at 6 and 12 months (RR, 0.76 and 0.80, respectively).
- Participants in the multidose group had similar results as the single-dose group but also reported fewer drinks on drinking days at 6 months (RR, 0.85), lower frequency of heavy drinking episodes at 6 months (RR 0.65), and fewer adverse consequences of heavy drinking at 12 months (RR, 0.81).
*Subjects scored 8 or higher on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT).
Comments:
These findings suggest computerized web-based interventions have potential to increase the use of alcohol screening and brief intervention in outpatient settings without sacrificing the efficacy of face-to-face interventions. Because the study’s computerized interventions occurred in a university health clinic before a clinical visit, it is possible the intervention prompted participants to have further alcohol discussions with their clinicians. This technology will require further testing in other settings and populations.
Kevin L. Kraemer, MD, MSc
Reference:
Kypri K, Langley JD, Saunders JB, et al. Randomized controlled trial of web-based alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(5):530–536.