0
Reviews |

Behavioral Counseling After Screening for Alcohol Misuse in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force FREE

Daniel E. Jonas, MD, MPH; James C. Garbutt, MD; Halle R. Amick, MSPH; Janice M. Brown, PhD; Kimberly A. Brownley, PhD; Carol L. Council, MSPH; Anthony J. Viera, MD, MPH; Tania M. Wilkins, MS; Cody J. Schwartz, MPH; Emily M. Richmond, MPH; John Yeatts, MPH; Tammeka Swinson Evans, MOP; Sally D. Wood, BA; and Russell P. Harris, MD, MPH
[+] Article and Author Information

This article was published at www.annals.org on 25 September 2012.


From University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, Chapel Hill, and Research Triangle Institute International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article do not represent and should not be construed to represent a determination or policy of AHRQ or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Grant Support: By AHRQ, contract 290-2007-10056-I.

Potential Conflicts of Interest: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M11-3047.

Requests for Single Reprints: Daniel E. Jonas, MD, MPH, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Medicine, 5034 Old Clinic Building, CB 7110, Chapel Hill, NC 27599; e-mail, daniel_jonas@med.unc.edu.

Current Author Addresses: Dr. Jonas: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Medicine, 5034 Old Clinic Building, CB 7110, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.

Dr. Garbutt: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Psychiatry, CB 7160, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.

Ms. Amick, Ms. Wilkins, and Dr. Harris: Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 725 Martin Luther King Boulevard, CB 7590, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.

Dr. Brown: 6209 West Sugar Pine Trail, Tucson, AZ 85743.

Dr. Brownley: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Psychiatry, CB 7175, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.

Ms. Council and Ms. Evans: RTI International, 3040 Cornwallis Road, Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.

Dr. Viera: University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, 590 Manning Drive, CB 7595, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.

Mr. Schwartz: University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 1001 Bondurant Hall, CB 9535, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.

Ms. Richmond: 229 Cherrywood Avenue, San Leandro, CA 94577.

Mr. Yeatts: 444 South Blount Street 326, Raleigh, NC 27601.

Ms. Wood: 403 Pritchard Avenue, Chapel Hill, NC 27516.

Author Contributions: Conception and design: D.E. Jonas, J.C. Garbutt, H.R. Amick, K.A. Brownley, C.L. Council, E.M. Richmond, R.P. Harris.

Analysis and interpretation of the data: D.E. Jonas, J.C. Garbutt, H.R. Amick, J.M. Brown, K.A. Brownley, C.L. Council, A.J. Viera, T.M. Wilkins, C.J. Schwartz, E.M. Richmond, J. Yeatts, T.S. Evans, S.D. Wood, R.P. Harris.

Drafting of the article: D.E. Jonas, J.C. Garbutt, H.R. Amick, J.M. Brown, K.A. Brownley, C.L. Council, R.P. Harris.

Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: D.E. Jonas, J.C. Garbutt, H.R. Amick, C.L. Council, A.J. Viera, R.P. Harris.

Final approval of the article: D.E. Jonas, H.R. Amick, J.M. Brown, A.J. Viera, J. Yeatts, R.P. Harris.

Provision of study materials or patients: D.E. Jonas.

Statistical expertise: D.E. Jonas.

Obtaining of funding: D.E. Jonas.

Administrative, technical, or logistic support: H.R. Amick.

Collection and assembly of data: D.E. Jonas, H.R. Amick, K.A. Brownley, C.L. Council, A.J. Viera, C.J. Schwartz, E.M. Richmond, J. Yeatts, T.S. Evans, S.D. Wood.


Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(9):645-654. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-9-201211060-00544
Text Size: A A A

Background: Alcohol misuse, which includes the full spectrum from risky drinking to alcohol dependence, is a leading cause of preventable death in the United States.

Purpose: To evaluate the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions for adolescents and adults who misuse alcohol.

Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and reference lists of published literature (January 1985 through January 2012, limited to English-language articles).

Study Selection: Controlled trials at least 6 months' duration that enrolled persons with alcohol misuse identified by screening in primary care settings and evaluated behavioral counseling interventions.

Data Extraction: One reviewer extracted data and a second checked accuracy. Two independent reviewers assigned quality ratings and graded the strength of the evidence.

Data Synthesis: The 23 included trials generally excluded persons with alcohol dependence. The best evidence was for brief (10- to 15-minute) multicontact interventions. Among adults receiving behavioral interventions, consumption decreased by 3.6 drinks per week from baseline (weighted mean difference, 3.6 drinks/wk [95% CI, 2.4 to 4.8 drinks/wk]; 10 trials; 4332 participants), 12% fewer adults reported heavy drinking episodes (risk difference, 0.12 [CI, 0.07 to 0.16]; 7 trials; 2737 participants), and 11% more adults reported drinking less than the recommended limits (risk difference, 0.11 [CI, 0.08 to 0.13]; 9 trials; 5973 participants) over 12 months compared with control participants (moderate strength of evidence). Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about accidents, injuries, or alcohol-related liver problems. Trials enrolling young adults or college students showed reduced consumption and fewer heavy drinking episodes (moderate strength of evidence). Little or no evidence of harms was found.

Limitations: Results may be biased to the null because the behavior of control participants could have been affected by alcohol misuse assessments. In addition, evidence is probably inapplicable to persons with alcohol dependence and selective reporting may have occurred.

Conclusion: Behavioral counseling interventions improve behavioral outcomes for adults with risky drinking.

Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.


Alcohol misuse, which includes the full spectrum from risky or hazardous drinking to alcohol dependence (13), is associated with numerous health and social problems and more than 85 000 deaths per year in the United States (45). Alcohol misuse is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States, after tobacco use and being overweight (6). It contributes to hypertension, cirrhosis, gastritis, gastric ulcers, pancreatitis, breast cancer, neuropathy, cardiomyopathy, anemia, osteoporosis, cognitive impairment, depression, insomnia, anxiety, suicide, injury, and violence (79). The definitions of the spectrum of alcohol misuse (that is, unhealthy alcohol use [1]) continue to evolve. For this review, we use the definitions in Table 1(5, 1012).

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 1. 

Definitions of the Spectrum of Alcohol Misuse

About 30% of the U.S. population misuse alcohol, with most engaging in what is considered risky drinking (1). Recent U.S.-based data (13) revealed that 21.3% of primary care patients reported risky drinking.

Cross-sectional and cohort studies have consistently related high average alcohol consumption and heavy per-occasion use to short- or long-term health consequences (1415). A meta-analysis examining the association between all-cause mortality and average alcohol consumption (16) found that men who drank an average of at least 4 drinks per day and women who drank an average of at least 2 drinks per day had increased mortality relative to nondrinkers. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism has proposed guidelines (17) to limit the risks for drinking-related consequences. The maximum recommended consumption is 3 or fewer standard drinks per day (≤7 drinks/wk) for adult women and anyone older than 65 years, and 4 or fewer standard drinks per day (≤14 drinks/week) for men (15, 1718). These guidelines do not apply to persons for whom alcohol intake is contraindicated, such as pregnant women, persons with alcohol dependence or medical conditions that can be worsened by drinking, or those receiving medications that interact with alcohol.

Behavioral counseling interventions include the range of personal counseling and related behavior-change interventions that are used to help patients change health-related behaviors (19). “Counseling” here denotes a cooperative method of work that demands active participation from both patient and clinician and aims to facilitate the patient's independent initiative (19). The goal of behavioral interventions for alcohol misuse is to eliminate risky drinking practices (for example, by encouraging fewer drinks per occasion or not drinking before driving) rather than to achieve abstinence.

For the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and to assist the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in updating its 2004 recommendation statement (20), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of screening followed by behavioral counseling, with or without referral, for alcohol misuse in primary care settings (21). The full report (21) addressed 7 questions (Appendix Table 1).

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 1. 

Key Questions for This Systematic Review

We developed and followed a standard protocol. A technical report that details methods and includes search strategies and additional evidence tables is available at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.

Key Questions and Analytic Framework

The USPSTF and the AHRQ determined the focus of this review. Investigators developed key questions and created an analytic framework that incorporated the key questions and outlined patient populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes (including adverse effects), and settings (Appendix Figure 1). This report focuses on the key questions related to benefits and harms of behavioral interventions.

Grahic Jump Location
Appendix Figure 1.

Analytic framework for screening, behavioral counseling, and referral in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse.

KQ = key question.

Grahic Jump Location
Data Sources and Searches

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from 1 January 1985 to 31 January 2012, limited to English-language articles. The start date was selected on the basis of the earliest publication date found in previous reviews and expert opinion. We used Medical Subject Headings as search terms when available and keywords when appropriate, focusing on terms to describe relevant populations, screening, and behavioral interventions.

Study Selection

We developed inclusion and exclusion criteria with respect to populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes, timing, settings, and study designs (2223). For the question related to behavioral interventions, we included randomized, controlled trials of at least 6 months' duration that enrolled adults or adolescents with alcohol misuse identified by screening in primary care settings and that evaluated whether a counseling intervention improved behavioral or health outcomes.

Two investigators independently reviewed titles and abstracts, and then another 2 investigators independently reviewed the full text of all articles marked for possible inclusion during the initial review to determine final inclusion or exclusion. Disagreements were resolved with an experienced team member.

Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

We designed and used structured forms to extract pertinent information from each article, including information about the methods and populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes, timing, settings, and study designs. All data extractions were reviewed for completeness and accuracy by a second team member.

We assessed the quality (internal validity) of studies using predefined criteria based on those developed by the USPSTF (ratings of good, fair, or poor) (24) and the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (25). These included assessment of the adequacy of randomization, allocation concealment, similarity of groups at baseline, masking, attrition, and whether intention-to-treat analysis was used. Two independent reviewers assigned quality ratings for each study. Disagreements were resolved by an experienced member of the team.

Data Synthesis and Analysis

We stratified evidence by population (adults, older adults, young adults or college students, and pregnant women). Quantitative analyses were conducted of outcomes reported by a sufficient number of studies that were homogeneous enough to justify combining their results. We used random-effects models. For the outcome of alcohol consumption, the effect measure was mean difference between the intervention and control groups for change from baseline in drinks per week. The percentages of patients who had episodes of heavy drinking and those who achieved recommended drinking limits were compared (between intervention and control groups) with a risk difference. Because follow-up periods varied, the analysis for all-cause mortality was based on deaths per person-year and the comparison between intervention and control groups was calculated as a risk ratio. Analyses were conducted by using Comprehensive Meta Analysis, version 2.2.055 (BioStat, Englewood, New Jersey).

We used subgroup analyses to explore whether results differed by intensity, sex, country, deliverer of the intervention, or setting. The chi-square and I2 statistics were calculated to assess heterogeneity in effects between studies (2627). When quantitative analyses were not appropriate (for example, because of heterogeneity, insufficient number of similar studies, or insufficient or varied outcome reporting), we synthesized the data qualitatively.

To assess the differential effects of using more or less time and single or multiple contacts, we grouped interventions by intensity of counseling, as measured by the duration and number of contacts: very brief (≤5 minutes, single-contact), brief (6 to 15 minutes, single-contact), extended (>15 minutes, single-contact), brief multicontact (each contact ≤15 minutes), or extended multicontact (some contacts >15 minutes).

We then graded the strength of evidence (SOE) as high, moderate, low, or insufficient on the basis of the guidance established for the Evidence-based Practice Center Program (Appendix Table 2) (28). Two reviewers assessed each domain for each key outcome, and differences were resolved by consensus.

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 2. 

Definitions of the Grades of Overall Strength of Evidence

Role of the Funding Source

This review was funded by AHRQ. Staff of AHRQ and members of the USPSTF participated in developing the scope of the work and reviewed draft manuscripts. Approval from AHRQ for copyright assertion was required before the manuscript could be submitted for publication, but the authors are solely responsible for the content and the decision to submit it for publication.

We included 38 articles reporting on 23 randomized, controlled trials (Appendix Figure 2). Sample sizes ranged from 72 to 1559, and study durations ranged from 6 to 48 months (Appendix Table 3). Eleven studies were done solely in the United States, 2 focused on older adults, 5 focused on young adults or college students, and 1 enrolled pregnant women. We identified no studies of adolescents.

Grahic Jump Location
Appendix Figure 2.

Summary of evidence search and selection.

Grahic Jump Location
Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 3. 

Characteristics of Included Trials Comparing Behavioral Counseling Interventions With Control Groups

Fourteen of the interventions (2950) were delivered by a primary care physician alone or with a health educator or nurse. Three (5154) were delivered by a nurse or physician assistant, 1 by a psychologist (5557), 2 by a researcher (5862), and 1 by unspecified interventionists (63). Two interventions in college students (6466) were conducted via a computer. Most trials tested brief multicontact interventions (3134, 42, 46, 5051, 53, 6465) or brief interventions (29, 49, 52, 58, 60, 6266); fewer tested very brief (45, 63), extended (30), or extended multicontact interventions (38, 45, 48, 55, 60). Interventions were heterogeneous and included various counseling approaches, such as brief advice, feedback, or motivational interviews, and cognitive behavioral strategies, such as self-completed action plans, written health education or self-help materials, drinking diaries, or problem-solving exercises to complete at home (Appendix Table 4). Most comparator groups received screening or assessment followed by usual care or by provision of a general health pamphlet. A few studies included additional components in comparator groups that could have biased results toward the null, such as recording screening or assessment results on the chart (45) or forwarding them to physicians (60), advice from nurses on reducing drinking and a leaflet with benchmark alcohol guides (52), a pamphlet on the health effects of alcohol consumption (6466), or a booklet about preventing alcohol problems (48). We summarize the main findings by population and outcome and report the SOE for each.

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 4. 

Description of Behavioral Counseling Interventions, by Intervention Intensity

Screening

We found no studies meeting inclusion criteria that randomly assigned participants, practices, or providers to screening and a comparator (no studies addressing questions 1 or 3) (Appendix Table 1). We found adequate evidence that several screening instruments can detect alcohol misuse in adults with acceptable sensitivity and specificity (21). The full technical report includes additional details about the accuracy of screening tests.

Effectiveness for Improving Intermediate Outcomes

Table 2 summarizes the results of meta-analyses for consumption, heavy drinking, and recommended drinking limits, by population. The Figure shows the forest plots for 12-month outcomes from our meta-analyses for adults. Overall, evidence supports the effectiveness of behavioral interventions for improving several intermediate outcomes for adults, older adults, and young adults or college students. For pregnant women, the included study (250 participants) (30) did not provide evidence of effectiveness for improving intermediate outcomes over 6 months or longer (low or insufficient SOE, depending on the outcome). Subgroup analyses identified no significant differences between men and women. Brief multicontact interventions had the best evidence of effectiveness across populations and outcomes and had follow-up data spanning several years. Meta-analyses of studies in adults found very brief and brief single-contact interventions to be ineffective for some outcomes and less effective than brief multicontact interventions for others.

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 2. 

Effectiveness and Strength of Evidence of Behavioral Interventions Compared With Controls for Improving Intermediate Outcomes, by Population

Grahic Jump Location
Figure.

Forest plots for alcohol consumption, heavy drinking, and achieving recommended drinking limits for groups receiving behavioral counseling interventions compared with control groups.

BCI = behavioral counseling intervention; ELM = Early Lifestyle Modification; SIP = Screening and Intervention in Primary Care; TrEAT = Trial for Early Alcohol Treatment; WHO BISG = World Health Organization Brief Intervention Study Group.

Grahic Jump Location
Effectiveness for Reducing Morbidity, Reducing Mortality, or Changing Other Outcomes

Table 3 summarizes results, by population. Our meta-analyses found no statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality for adults (rate ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.24 to 1.7]; 4 trials) or for all age groups combined (rate ratio, 0.52 [CI, 0.22 to 1.2]; 6 trials). Point estimates trended toward favoring interventions, but few studies reported mortality and few long-term data were available. No studies that enrolled pregnant women and reported these outcomes were found (insufficient SOE).

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 3. 

Effectiveness and Strength of Evidence of Behavioral Interventions Compared With Controls for Improving Health, Utilization, and Other Outcomes, by Population

Potential Adverse Effects

We found no evidence of direct harms, aside from opportunity costs associated with interventions, which ranged from 5 minutes to 2 hours dispersed over several in-person or telephone visits (moderate SOE). We searched for evidence of potential adverse effects, such as illegal substance use, increased smoking, anxiety, stigma, labeling, discrimination, or interference with the physician–patient relationship. We found no evidence for most of these potential harms and very limited evidence reporting no difference between groups for smoking rates and anxiety (low SOE). Other than the results for opportunity costs, our results are limited by the few trials that reported any information; 5 of 23 reported smoking (29, 3334, 39, 41, 4950), and 2 reported anxiety (29, 49).

Health Care System Influences

Where the study was conducted (United States vs. non–United States) had no impact on the effectiveness of interventions for consumption outcomes. Data showed a tendency toward greater reduction in consumption for interventions delivered in academic- or research-oriented settings than for those delivered in community-based settings (weighted mean difference, −5.0 drinks/wk [CI, −7.6 to −2.5 drinks/wk] vs. −3.2 drinks/wk [CI, −4.3 to −2.2 drinks/wk]; 3 vs. 7 trials). Interventions delivered mostly by primary care providers showed a tendency toward greater reduction in consumption than did those delivered primarily by research personnel (weighted mean difference, −4.0 drinks/wk [CI, −5.4 to −2.6 drinks/wk] vs. −3.0 drinks/wk [CI, −5.0 to −1.0 drinks/wk]; 7 vs. 2 trials). Our consumption meta-analysis included only 1 intervention delivered by a nurse (52), and the reduction was not statistically significant in that study (weighted mean difference, −0.2 drinks/wk [CI, −8.9 to 8.6 drinks/wk]). Two other studies, each of which provided insufficient data for our consumption meta-analysis, reported benefits of interventions delivered primarily by nurses (51) or by nurses and physician assistants (53) for some consumption outcomes. In addition, 2 interventions conducted by computer reported some evidence of effectiveness for reduced consumption in college students (6466).

We found no studies that directly addressed our overarching question (key question 1)—no studies randomly assigned patients, practices, or providers to screening and comparator groups and subsequently provided interventions for those with positive screening results. All of the included studies randomly assigned patients after they had received positive screening results.

We found that behavioral counseling interventions improved drinking behavior outcomes (moderate SOE) and reduced hospital days (low SOE) for adults with risky drinking. For most health outcomes, available evidence either found no difference between intervention and control groups, such as for mortality (low SOE), or was insufficient to draw conclusions, such as for alcohol-related liver problems (insufficient SOE). Long-term outcomes from 2 studies (33, 3537, 39, 4243) revealed that participants in the intervention groups maintained reductions in consumption or continued to reduce consumption, but differences between intervention and control groups were no longer statistically significant by 48 months. Studies identified delayed reduction in consumption in control groups that could reflect the natural history of alcohol consumption, the cumulative effect of follow-up with the health care system, differential attrition (if more participants lost to follow-up in the control group were risky drinkers), or (late) regression to the mean.

The evidence for effectiveness in adults is strongest for brief multicontact interventions. The effect sizes for these interventions were greater than those for other intensities (although CIs often overlapped). In addition, the best studies show that the effect of brief multicontact interventions remains for several years (3536, 43) and also show improvement for some utilization outcomes, such as fewer hospital days (3536) and costs (benefit–cost ratio of 39:1 over 48 months [CI, 5.4 to 72.5]) (36).

The brief multicontact interventions generally lasted 10 to 15 minutes per contact. All of the brief multicontact interventions in our meta-analyses of behavioral outcomes at 12 months were delivered by primary care providers, sometimes with additional intervention from a nurse or health educator. For example, the intervention in Project TrEAT (Trial for Early Alcohol Treatment) (33) included two 15-minute visits with a primary care provider 1 month apart and two 5-minute follow-up phone calls from a nurse 2 weeks after each visit. The intervention also included feedback about health behaviors, a review of problem drinking prevalence, a list of the adverse effects of alcohol, a worksheet on drinking cues, a drinking agreement or prescription, and drinking diary cards. Of note, 2 studies of brief multicontact interventions in adults, both of which provided insufficient data for our meta-analyses, reported benefits of interventions delivered primarily by nurses (51) or by nurses and physician assistants (53) for some consumption outcomes.

Evidence suggests that very brief interventions (up to 5 minutes, single-contact) and brief interventions (up to 15 minutes, single-contact) are less effective or ineffective, depending on the outcome. Although extended multicontact interventions seem to be effective for improving intermediate outcomes, we found no evidence that they are more effective than brief multicontact interventions.

The only included study that enrolled pregnant women (250 participants) (30) found no difference in reduced consumption between groups but did find higher rates of continued abstinence among women who were abstinent before the assessment in the intervention group than among those in the control group. Our searches identified other studies focusing on pregnant women that did not meet our inclusion criteria (6784). Several took place in such settings as jails or specialized drug and alcohol treatment centers (75), and others lacked a control group or followed participants for fewer than 6 months (73, 84). Several of these studies reported benefits of interventions, including reduced consumption (73, 84), reduced risk for an alcohol-exposed pregnancy (75), higher rates of abstinence (79), and better fetal and newborn outcomes (higher birth weights and lengths and reduced fetal mortality rates [79]).

We have described several categories of alcohol misuse (such as risky or hazardous use and alcohol dependence). These categories are not all discrete (an individual may meet the definition for more than one). Included trials generally enrolled participants with risky or hazardous drinking, but the trials used varying terminology to describe the populations and often enrolled heterogeneous samples. Nevertheless, most investigators excluded participants with alcohol dependence or constructed their inclusion and exclusion criteria to substantially limit the number of such participants. Our best assessment is that our overall findings apply to risky or hazardous drinkers but not to persons with alcohol dependence. It is uncertain whether our findings apply to harmful drinkers or persons with alcohol abuse.

All interventions required support systems to provide screening; screening-related assessment; and in some cases, provider prompting. Screening assessments were often multistep processes that included interviews with research personnel that lasted up to 30 minutes. Less time would be required for screening and screening-related assessments in primary care practice. We estimate that 5 to 10 minutes would be required for persons who had positive screening results, with most of the time used to assess whether such persons have alcohol abuse or dependence (and should probably be referred for specialized treatment) as opposed to risky or hazardous drinking (for which behavioral counseling interventions in primary care may be effective). Nevertheless, support systems are probably required for effective screening and intervention. In addition, most interventions required training providers or staff.

It is unclear whether our findings apply to persons with certain comorbid conditions, and some researchers have suggested that brief behavioral interventions may be ineffective or less effective in people with comorbid psychiatric conditions. A subgroup analysis from a German study (56) found that brief interventions did not reduce drinking among 88 participants with comorbid anxiety or depression. Although most trials in our review did not exclude persons with depression, anxiety, or chronic pain, it is unclear how many participants with these conditions were included in most trials.

A previous systematic review (85) found no evidence of efficacy for brief behavioral interventions in patients with alcohol dependence in primary care settings. Our review also found no such evidence. Included studies that enrolled more than 10% of participants with alcohol dependence reported interventions to be ineffective or less effective than studies that did not enroll alcohol-dependent participants.

Screening for alcohol misuse will inevitably identify some alcohol-dependent individuals; thus, providers and those making recommendations need information about whether effective interventions are available for alcohol dependence. If complete abstinence is used as an outcome, 15% to 35% of patients have been reported to achieve 1 year of sobriety after such treatment approaches (86) as pharmacotherapy, motivational enhancement therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, 12-step facilitation, and therapy at alcoholism-treatment centers. Similar sobriety outcomes at 3 to 5 years or longer have been reported (9).

Our review has limitations. First, the scope of our review was limited to primary care settings. Second, most evidence involved self-report of alcohol use. Investigators in some trials verified self-reported use with other persons (such as family members). Self-report of alcohol use has been found to be accurate if collected carefully (8788). Third, the assessments conducted in the included trials could have concealed benefits of interventions (and biased results toward the null) by causing behavior changes. Control participants generally reduced alcohol consumption. Possible explanations include increased awareness of drinking, discussions with their provider about drinking that were prompted by the screening questions, receipt of some minimal intervention (control groups in the included studies often received some printed educational materials), or regression to the mean. A recent systematic review (89) concluded that answering questions on drinking in brief intervention trials seems to alter subsequent self-reported behavior, potentially generating bias by exposing nonintervention control groups to an integral component of the intervention. Finally, publication bias and selective reporting may be present.

In conclusion, behavioral counseling interventions improve intermediate outcomes, such as alcohol consumption, heavy drinking episodes, and drinking above recommended amounts (moderate SOE) and may reduce hospital days (low SOE) for adults with risky or hazardous drinking. For most health outcomes, available evidence found no difference between intervention and control groups, such as for mortality (low SOE), or was insufficient to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of behavioral interventions, such as for alcohol-related accidents or quality of life (insufficient SOE). Brief multicontact interventions (about 10 to 15 minutes per contact) have the best evidence of effectiveness for adults.

Saitz R. Clinical practice. Unhealthy alcohol use. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352:596-607.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.  AUDIT-C Frequently Asked Questions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; 2010. Accessed at www.queri.research.va.gov/tools/alcohol-misuse/alcohol-faqs.cfm on 8 June 2012.
 
Whitlock EP, Green CA, Polen MR. Behavioral Counseling Interventions in Primary Care to Reduce Risky/Harmful Alcohol Use. Systematic Evidence Review no. 30. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2004.
 
Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291:1238-45.
PubMed
 
Whitlock EP, Polen MR, Green CA, Orleans T, Klein J, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce risky/harmful alcohol use by adults: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140:557-68.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  FastStats: Alcohol Use. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2012. Accessed at www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm on 8 June 2012.
 
Cherpitel CJ, Ye Y. Alcohol-attributable fraction for injury in the U.S. general population: data from the 2005 National Alcohol Survey. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2008; 69:535-8.
PubMed
 
Corrao G, Bagnardi V, Zambon A, La Vecchia C. A meta-analysis of alcohol consumption and the risk of 15 diseases. Prev Med. 2004; 38:613-9.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Schuckit MA. Alcohol-use disorders. Lancet. 2009; 373:492-501.
PubMed
 
Isaac M, Janca A, Sartorius N. ICD-10 Symptom Glossary for Mental Disorders. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1994.
 
Janca A, Ustun TB, van Drimmelen J, Dittmann V, Isaac M. ICD-10 Symptom Checklist for Mental Disorders, version 1.1. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1994.
 
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Assoc; 1994.
 
Vinson DC, Manning BK, Galliher JM, Dickinson LM, Pace WD, Turner BJ. Alcohol and sleep problems in primary care patients: a report from the AAFP National Research Network. Ann Fam Med. 2010; 8:484-92.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Bondy SJ, Rehm J, Ashley MJ, Walsh G, Single E, Room R. Low-risk drinking guidelines: the scientific evidence. Can J Public Health. 1999; 90:264-70.
PubMed
 
Shalala DE.  10th Special Report to the U.S. Congress on Alcohol and Health: Highlights From Current Research: From the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2000. Accessed at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/10report/intro.pdf on 8 June 2012.
 
Holman CD, English DR, Milne E, Winter MG. Meta-analysis of alcohol and all-cause mortality: a validation of NHMRC recommendations. Med J Aust. 1996; 164:141-5.
PubMed
 
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.  Helping Patients Who Drink Too Much: A Clinician's Guide. Updated 2005 ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2005. Accessed at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/practitioner/cliniciansguide2005/guide.pdf on 8 June 2012.
 
Dawson DA, Grant BF, Li TK. Quantifying the risks associated with exceeding recommended drinking limits. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005; 29:902-8.
PubMed
 
Whitlock EP, Orleans CT, Pender N, Allan J. Evaluating primary care behavioral counseling interventions: an evidence-based approach. Am J Prev Med. 2002; 22:267-84.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse: recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140:554-6.
PubMed
 
Jonas DE, Garbutt JC, Brown JM, Amick HR, Brownley KA, Council CL, et al. Screening, Behavioral Counseling, and Referral in Primary Care to Reduce Alcohol Misuse. Comparative Effectiveness Review no. 64. AHRQ Publication no. 12-EHC055-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012.
 
Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 127:380-7.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ EHCP Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews of Medical Interventions. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010.
 
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM, et al, Methods Work Group, Third U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001; 20:21-35.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare. York, UK: Univ York; 2009.
 
Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21:1539-58.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003; 327:557-60.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Owens DK, Lohr KN, Atkins D, Treadwell JR, Reston JT, Bass EB, et al. AHRQ series paper 5: grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions—Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63:513-23.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Anderson P, Scott E. The effect of general practitioners' advice to heavy drinking men. Br J Addict. 1992; 87:891-900.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S, Goetz MA. Brief intervention for alcohol use in pregnancy: a randomized trial. Addiction. 1999; 94:1499-508.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Curry SJ, Ludman EJ, Grothaus LC, Donovan D, Kim E. A randomized trial of a brief primary-care–based intervention for reducing at-risk drinking practices. Health Psychol. 2003; 22:156-65.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Fleming MF, Balousek SL, Grossberg PM, Mundt MP, Brown D, Wiegel JR, et al. Brief physician advice for heavy drinking college students: a randomized controlled trial in college health clinics. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2010; 71:23-31.
PubMed
 
Fleming MF, Barry KL, Manwell LB, Johnson K, London R. Brief physician advice for problem alcohol drinkers. A randomized controlled trial in community-based primary care practices. JAMA. 1997; 277:1039-45.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Fleming MF, Manwell LB, Barry KL, Adams W, Stauffacher EA. Brief physician advice for alcohol problems in older adults: a randomized community-based trial. J Fam Pract. 1999; 48:378-84.
PubMed
 
Fleming MF, Mundt MP, French MT, Manwell LB, Stauffacher EA, Barry KL. Benefit-cost analysis of brief physician advice with problem drinkers in primary care settings. Med Care. 2000; 38:7-18.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Fleming MF, Mundt MP, French MT, Manwell LB, Stauffacher EA, Barry KL. Brief physician advice for problem drinkers: long-term efficacy and benefit-cost analysis. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2002; 26:36-43.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Grossberg PM, Brown DD, Fleming MF. Brief physician advice for high-risk drinking among young adults. Ann Fam Med. 2004; 2:474-80.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Lin JC, Karno MP, Tang L, Barry KL, Blow FC, Davis JW, et al. Do health educator telephone calls reduce at-risk drinking among older adults in primary care? J Gen Intern Med. 2010; 25:334-9.
PubMed
 
Manwell LB, Fleming MF, Mundt MP, Stauffacher EA, Barry KL. Treatment of problem alcohol use in women of childbearing age: results of a brief intervention trial. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2000; 24:1517-24.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Moore AA, Blow FC, Hoffing M, Welgreen S, Davis JW, Lin JC, et al. Primary care-based intervention to reduce at-risk drinking in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2011; 106:111-20.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Mundt MP, French MT, Roebuck MC, Manwell LB, Barry KL. Brief physician advice for problem drinking among older adults: an economic analysis of costs and benefits. J Stud Alcohol. 2005; 66:389-94.
PubMed
 
Ockene JK, Adams A, Hurley TG, Wheeler EV, Hebert JR. Brief physician- and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinkers: does it work? Arch Intern Med. 1999; 159:2198-205.
PubMed
 
Ockene JK, Reed GW, Reiff-Hekking S. Brief patient-centered clinician-delivered counseling for high-risk drinking: 4-year results. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 37:335-42.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Reiff-Hekking S, Ockene JK, Hurley TG, Reed GW. Brief physician and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinking. Results at 12-month follow-up. J Gen Intern Med. 2005; 20:7-13.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Richmond R, Heather N, Wodak A, Kehoe L, Webster I. Controlled evaluation of a general practice-based brief intervention for excessive drinking. Addiction. 1995; 90:119-32.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Rubio G, Jiménez-Arriero MA, Martínez I, Ponce G, Palomo T. Efficacy of physician-delivered brief counseling intervention for binge drinkers. Am J Med. 2010; 123:72-8.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Saitz R, Horton NJ, Sullivan LM, Moskowitz MA, Samet JH. Addressing alcohol problems in primary care: a cluster randomized, controlled trial of a systems intervention. The Screening and Intervention in Primary Care (SIP) study. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138:372-82.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Schaus JF, Sole ML, McCoy TP, Mullett N, O'Brien MC. Alcohol screening and brief intervention in a college student health center: a randomized controlled trial. J Stud Alcohol Drugs Suppl. 2009; 131-41.
PubMed
 
Scott E, Anderson P. Randomized controlled trial of general practitioner intervention in women with excessive alcohol consumption. Drug Alcohol Rev. 1991; 10:313-21.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Wallace P, Cutler S, Haines A. Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner intervention in patients with excessive alcohol consumption. BMJ. 1988; 297:663-8.
PubMed
 
Fleming MF, Lund MR, Wilton G, Landry M, Scheets D. The Healthy Moms Study: the efficacy of brief alcohol intervention in postpartum women. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2008; 32:1600-6.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Lock CA, Kaner E, Heather N, Doughty J, Crawshaw A, McNamee P, et al. Effectiveness of nurse-led brief alcohol intervention: a cluster randomized controlled trial. J Adv Nurs. 2006; 54:426-39.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Noknoy S, Rangsin R, Saengcharnchai P, Tantibhaedhyangkul U, McCambridge J. RCT of effectiveness of motivational enhancement therapy delivered by nurses for hazardous drinkers in primary care units in Thailand. Alcohol Alcohol. 2010; 45:263-70.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Wilton G, Moberg DP, Fleming MF. The effect of brief alcohol intervention on postpartum depression. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2009; 34:297-302.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Bischof G, Grothues JM, Reinhardt S, Meyer C, John U, Rumpf HJ. Evaluation of a telephone-based stepped care intervention for alcohol-related disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008; 93:244-51.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Grothues JM, Bischof G, Reinhardt S, Meyer C, John U, Rumpf HJ. Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions for general practice patients with problematic drinking behavior and comorbid anxiety or depressive disorders. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008; 94:214-20.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Reinhardt S, Bischof G, Grothues J, John U, Meyer C, Rumpf HJ. Gender differences in the efficacy of brief interventions with a stepped care approach in general practice patients with alcohol-related disorders. Alcohol Alcohol. 2008; 43:334-40.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Freeborn DK, Polen MR, Hollis JF, Senft RA. Screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking in an HMO: effects on medical care utilization. J Behav Health Serv Res. 2000; 27:446-53.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Gordon AJ, Conigliaro J, Maisto SA, McNeil M, Kraemer KL, Kelley ME. Comparison of consumption effects of brief interventions for hazardous drinking elderly. Subst Use Misuse. 2003; 38:1017-35.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Maisto SA, Conigliaro J, McNeil M, Kraemer K, Conigliaro RL, Kelley ME. Effects of two types of brief intervention and readiness to change on alcohol use in hazardous drinkers. J Stud Alcohol. 2001; 62:605-14.
PubMed
 
Maisto SA, Conigliaro J, McNeil M, Kraemer K, Kelley ME. The relationship between eligibility criteria for participation in alcohol brief intervention trials and other alcohol and health-related variables. Am J Addict. 2001; 10:218-31.
PubMed
 
Senft RA, Polen MR, Freeborn DK, Hollis JF. Brief intervention in a primary care setting for hazardous drinkers. Am J Prev Med. 1997; 13:464-70.
PubMed
 
WHO Brief Intervention Study Group. A cross-national trial of brief interventions with heavy drinkers. Am J Public Health. 1996; 86:948-55.
PubMed
 
Kypri K, Langley JD, Saunders JB, Cashell-Smith ML. Assessment may conceal therapeutic benefit: findings from a randomized controlled trial for hazardous drinking. Addiction. 2007; 102:62-70.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Kypri K, Langley JD, Saunders JB, Cashell-Smith ML, Herbison P. Randomized controlled trial of web-based alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2008; 168:530-6.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Kypri K, Saunders JB, Williams SM, McGee RO, Langley JD, Cashell-Smith ML, et al. Web-based screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2004; 99:1410-7.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Armstrong MA, Kaskutas LA, Witbrodt J, Taillac CJ, Hung YY, Osejo VM, et al. Using drink size to talk about drinking during pregnancy: a randomized clinical trial of Early Start Plus. Soc Work Health Care. 2009; 48:90-103.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Budd KW, Ross-Alaolmolki K, Zeller RA. Two prenatal alcohol use screening instruments compared with a physiologic measure. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2000; 29:129-36.
PubMed
 
Bull LB, Kvigne VL, Leonardson GR, Lacina L, Welty TK. Validation of a self-administered questionnaire to screen for prenatal alcohol use in Northern Plains Indian women. Am J Prev Med. 1999; 16:240-3.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, Goetz MA, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S. A brief intervention for prenatal alcohol use: an in-depth look. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2000; 18:365-9.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, Goetz MA, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S. Identifying prenatal alcohol use: screening instruments versus clinical predictors. Am J Addict. 1999; 8:87-93.
PubMed
 
Chang G, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S, Goetz MA, Behr H, Hiley A. Alcohol use and pregnancy: improving identification. Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 91:892-8.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, McNamara TK, Orav EJ, Koby D, Lavigne A, Ludman B, et al. Brief intervention for prenatal alcohol use: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 105:991-8.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, McNamara TK, Orav EJ, Wilkins-Haug L. Brief intervention for prenatal alcohol use: the role of drinking goal selection. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2006; 31:419-24.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Floyd RL, Sobell M, Velasquez MM, Ingersoll K, Nettleman M, Sobell L, et al, Project CHOICES Efficacy Study Group. Preventing alcohol-exposed pregnancies: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 32:1-10.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Flynn HA, Marcus SM, Barry KL, Blow FC. Rates and correlates of alcohol use among pregnant women in obstetrics clinics. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2003; 27:81-7.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Grant TM, Ernst CC, Streissguth A, Stark K. Preventing alcohol and drug exposed births in Washington state: intervention findings from three parent-child assistance program sites. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2005; 31:471-90.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Meberg A, Halvorsen B, Holter B, Ek IJ, Askeland A, Gaaserud W, et al. Moderate alcohol consumption—need for intervention programs in pregnancy? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1986; 65:861-4.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
O'Connor MJ, Whaley SE. Brief intervention for alcohol use by pregnant women. Am J Public Health. 2007; 97:252-8.
PubMed
 
Reynolds KD, Coombs DW, Lowe JB, Peterson PL, Gayoso E. Evaluation of a self-help program to reduce alcohol consumption among pregnant women. Int J Addict. 1995; 30:427-43.
PubMed
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Motivational intervention to reduce alcohol-exposed pregnancies—Florida, Texas, and Virginia, 1997-2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2003; 52:441-4.
PubMed
 
Halmesmäki E. Alcohol counselling of 85 pregnant problem drinkers: effect on drinking and fetal outcome. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1988; 95:243-7.
PubMed
 
Waterson EJ, Murray-Lyon IM. Preventing alcohol related birth damage: a review. Soc Sci Med. 1990; 30:349-64.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Handmaker NS, Miller WR, Manicke M. Findings of a pilot study of motivational interviewing with pregnant drinkers. J Stud Alcohol. 1999; 60:285-7.
PubMed
 
Saitz R. Alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care: Absence of evidence for efficacy in people with dependence or very heavy drinking. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2010; 29:631-40.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Miller WR, Walters ST, Bennett ME. How effective is alcoholism treatment in the United States? J Stud Alcohol. 2001; 62:211-20.
PubMed
 
Babor TF, Steinberg K, Anton R, Del Boca F. Talk is cheap: measuring drinking outcomes in clinical trials. J Stud Alcohol. 2000; 61:55-63.
PubMed
 
Del Boca FK, Noll JA. Truth or consequences: the validity of self-report data in health services research on addictions. Addiction. 2000; 95:Suppl 3S347-60.
PubMed
 
McCambridge J, Kypri K. Can simply answering research questions change behaviour? Systematic review and meta analyses of brief alcohol intervention trials. PLoS One. 2011; 6:23748.
PubMed
CrossRef
 

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Appendix Figure 1.

Analytic framework for screening, behavioral counseling, and referral in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse.

KQ = key question.

Grahic Jump Location
Grahic Jump Location
Appendix Figure 2.

Summary of evidence search and selection.

Grahic Jump Location
Grahic Jump Location
Figure.

Forest plots for alcohol consumption, heavy drinking, and achieving recommended drinking limits for groups receiving behavioral counseling interventions compared with control groups.

BCI = behavioral counseling intervention; ELM = Early Lifestyle Modification; SIP = Screening and Intervention in Primary Care; TrEAT = Trial for Early Alcohol Treatment; WHO BISG = World Health Organization Brief Intervention Study Group.

Grahic Jump Location

Tables

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 1. 

Definitions of the Spectrum of Alcohol Misuse

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 1. 

Key Questions for This Systematic Review

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 2. 

Definitions of the Grades of Overall Strength of Evidence

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 3. 

Characteristics of Included Trials Comparing Behavioral Counseling Interventions With Control Groups

Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table 4. 

Description of Behavioral Counseling Interventions, by Intervention Intensity

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 2. 

Effectiveness and Strength of Evidence of Behavioral Interventions Compared With Controls for Improving Intermediate Outcomes, by Population

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 3. 

Effectiveness and Strength of Evidence of Behavioral Interventions Compared With Controls for Improving Health, Utilization, and Other Outcomes, by Population

References

Saitz R. Clinical practice. Unhealthy alcohol use. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352:596-607.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.  AUDIT-C Frequently Asked Questions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; 2010. Accessed at www.queri.research.va.gov/tools/alcohol-misuse/alcohol-faqs.cfm on 8 June 2012.
 
Whitlock EP, Green CA, Polen MR. Behavioral Counseling Interventions in Primary Care to Reduce Risky/Harmful Alcohol Use. Systematic Evidence Review no. 30. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2004.
 
Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291:1238-45.
PubMed
 
Whitlock EP, Polen MR, Green CA, Orleans T, Klein J, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce risky/harmful alcohol use by adults: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140:557-68.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  FastStats: Alcohol Use. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2012. Accessed at www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm on 8 June 2012.
 
Cherpitel CJ, Ye Y. Alcohol-attributable fraction for injury in the U.S. general population: data from the 2005 National Alcohol Survey. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2008; 69:535-8.
PubMed
 
Corrao G, Bagnardi V, Zambon A, La Vecchia C. A meta-analysis of alcohol consumption and the risk of 15 diseases. Prev Med. 2004; 38:613-9.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Schuckit MA. Alcohol-use disorders. Lancet. 2009; 373:492-501.
PubMed
 
Isaac M, Janca A, Sartorius N. ICD-10 Symptom Glossary for Mental Disorders. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1994.
 
Janca A, Ustun TB, van Drimmelen J, Dittmann V, Isaac M. ICD-10 Symptom Checklist for Mental Disorders, version 1.1. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1994.
 
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Assoc; 1994.
 
Vinson DC, Manning BK, Galliher JM, Dickinson LM, Pace WD, Turner BJ. Alcohol and sleep problems in primary care patients: a report from the AAFP National Research Network. Ann Fam Med. 2010; 8:484-92.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Bondy SJ, Rehm J, Ashley MJ, Walsh G, Single E, Room R. Low-risk drinking guidelines: the scientific evidence. Can J Public Health. 1999; 90:264-70.
PubMed
 
Shalala DE.  10th Special Report to the U.S. Congress on Alcohol and Health: Highlights From Current Research: From the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2000. Accessed at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/10report/intro.pdf on 8 June 2012.
 
Holman CD, English DR, Milne E, Winter MG. Meta-analysis of alcohol and all-cause mortality: a validation of NHMRC recommendations. Med J Aust. 1996; 164:141-5.
PubMed
 
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.  Helping Patients Who Drink Too Much: A Clinician's Guide. Updated 2005 ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2005. Accessed at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/practitioner/cliniciansguide2005/guide.pdf on 8 June 2012.
 
Dawson DA, Grant BF, Li TK. Quantifying the risks associated with exceeding recommended drinking limits. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005; 29:902-8.
PubMed
 
Whitlock EP, Orleans CT, Pender N, Allan J. Evaluating primary care behavioral counseling interventions: an evidence-based approach. Am J Prev Med. 2002; 22:267-84.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce alcohol misuse: recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140:554-6.
PubMed
 
Jonas DE, Garbutt JC, Brown JM, Amick HR, Brownley KA, Council CL, et al. Screening, Behavioral Counseling, and Referral in Primary Care to Reduce Alcohol Misuse. Comparative Effectiveness Review no. 64. AHRQ Publication no. 12-EHC055-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012.
 
Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 127:380-7.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ EHCP Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews of Medical Interventions. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010.
 
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM, et al, Methods Work Group, Third U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001; 20:21-35.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare. York, UK: Univ York; 2009.
 
Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21:1539-58.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003; 327:557-60.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Owens DK, Lohr KN, Atkins D, Treadwell JR, Reston JT, Bass EB, et al. AHRQ series paper 5: grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions—Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63:513-23.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Anderson P, Scott E. The effect of general practitioners' advice to heavy drinking men. Br J Addict. 1992; 87:891-900.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S, Goetz MA. Brief intervention for alcohol use in pregnancy: a randomized trial. Addiction. 1999; 94:1499-508.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Curry SJ, Ludman EJ, Grothaus LC, Donovan D, Kim E. A randomized trial of a brief primary-care–based intervention for reducing at-risk drinking practices. Health Psychol. 2003; 22:156-65.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Fleming MF, Balousek SL, Grossberg PM, Mundt MP, Brown D, Wiegel JR, et al. Brief physician advice for heavy drinking college students: a randomized controlled trial in college health clinics. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2010; 71:23-31.
PubMed
 
Fleming MF, Barry KL, Manwell LB, Johnson K, London R. Brief physician advice for problem alcohol drinkers. A randomized controlled trial in community-based primary care practices. JAMA. 1997; 277:1039-45.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Fleming MF, Manwell LB, Barry KL, Adams W, Stauffacher EA. Brief physician advice for alcohol problems in older adults: a randomized community-based trial. J Fam Pract. 1999; 48:378-84.
PubMed
 
Fleming MF, Mundt MP, French MT, Manwell LB, Stauffacher EA, Barry KL. Benefit-cost analysis of brief physician advice with problem drinkers in primary care settings. Med Care. 2000; 38:7-18.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Fleming MF, Mundt MP, French MT, Manwell LB, Stauffacher EA, Barry KL. Brief physician advice for problem drinkers: long-term efficacy and benefit-cost analysis. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2002; 26:36-43.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Grossberg PM, Brown DD, Fleming MF. Brief physician advice for high-risk drinking among young adults. Ann Fam Med. 2004; 2:474-80.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Lin JC, Karno MP, Tang L, Barry KL, Blow FC, Davis JW, et al. Do health educator telephone calls reduce at-risk drinking among older adults in primary care? J Gen Intern Med. 2010; 25:334-9.
PubMed
 
Manwell LB, Fleming MF, Mundt MP, Stauffacher EA, Barry KL. Treatment of problem alcohol use in women of childbearing age: results of a brief intervention trial. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2000; 24:1517-24.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Moore AA, Blow FC, Hoffing M, Welgreen S, Davis JW, Lin JC, et al. Primary care-based intervention to reduce at-risk drinking in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2011; 106:111-20.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Mundt MP, French MT, Roebuck MC, Manwell LB, Barry KL. Brief physician advice for problem drinking among older adults: an economic analysis of costs and benefits. J Stud Alcohol. 2005; 66:389-94.
PubMed
 
Ockene JK, Adams A, Hurley TG, Wheeler EV, Hebert JR. Brief physician- and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinkers: does it work? Arch Intern Med. 1999; 159:2198-205.
PubMed
 
Ockene JK, Reed GW, Reiff-Hekking S. Brief patient-centered clinician-delivered counseling for high-risk drinking: 4-year results. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 37:335-42.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Reiff-Hekking S, Ockene JK, Hurley TG, Reed GW. Brief physician and nurse practitioner-delivered counseling for high-risk drinking. Results at 12-month follow-up. J Gen Intern Med. 2005; 20:7-13.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Richmond R, Heather N, Wodak A, Kehoe L, Webster I. Controlled evaluation of a general practice-based brief intervention for excessive drinking. Addiction. 1995; 90:119-32.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Rubio G, Jiménez-Arriero MA, Martínez I, Ponce G, Palomo T. Efficacy of physician-delivered brief counseling intervention for binge drinkers. Am J Med. 2010; 123:72-8.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Saitz R, Horton NJ, Sullivan LM, Moskowitz MA, Samet JH. Addressing alcohol problems in primary care: a cluster randomized, controlled trial of a systems intervention. The Screening and Intervention in Primary Care (SIP) study. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138:372-82.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Schaus JF, Sole ML, McCoy TP, Mullett N, O'Brien MC. Alcohol screening and brief intervention in a college student health center: a randomized controlled trial. J Stud Alcohol Drugs Suppl. 2009; 131-41.
PubMed
 
Scott E, Anderson P. Randomized controlled trial of general practitioner intervention in women with excessive alcohol consumption. Drug Alcohol Rev. 1991; 10:313-21.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Wallace P, Cutler S, Haines A. Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner intervention in patients with excessive alcohol consumption. BMJ. 1988; 297:663-8.
PubMed
 
Fleming MF, Lund MR, Wilton G, Landry M, Scheets D. The Healthy Moms Study: the efficacy of brief alcohol intervention in postpartum women. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2008; 32:1600-6.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Lock CA, Kaner E, Heather N, Doughty J, Crawshaw A, McNamee P, et al. Effectiveness of nurse-led brief alcohol intervention: a cluster randomized controlled trial. J Adv Nurs. 2006; 54:426-39.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Noknoy S, Rangsin R, Saengcharnchai P, Tantibhaedhyangkul U, McCambridge J. RCT of effectiveness of motivational enhancement therapy delivered by nurses for hazardous drinkers in primary care units in Thailand. Alcohol Alcohol. 2010; 45:263-70.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Wilton G, Moberg DP, Fleming MF. The effect of brief alcohol intervention on postpartum depression. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2009; 34:297-302.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Bischof G, Grothues JM, Reinhardt S, Meyer C, John U, Rumpf HJ. Evaluation of a telephone-based stepped care intervention for alcohol-related disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008; 93:244-51.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Grothues JM, Bischof G, Reinhardt S, Meyer C, John U, Rumpf HJ. Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions for general practice patients with problematic drinking behavior and comorbid anxiety or depressive disorders. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008; 94:214-20.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Reinhardt S, Bischof G, Grothues J, John U, Meyer C, Rumpf HJ. Gender differences in the efficacy of brief interventions with a stepped care approach in general practice patients with alcohol-related disorders. Alcohol Alcohol. 2008; 43:334-40.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Freeborn DK, Polen MR, Hollis JF, Senft RA. Screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking in an HMO: effects on medical care utilization. J Behav Health Serv Res. 2000; 27:446-53.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Gordon AJ, Conigliaro J, Maisto SA, McNeil M, Kraemer KL, Kelley ME. Comparison of consumption effects of brief interventions for hazardous drinking elderly. Subst Use Misuse. 2003; 38:1017-35.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Maisto SA, Conigliaro J, McNeil M, Kraemer K, Conigliaro RL, Kelley ME. Effects of two types of brief intervention and readiness to change on alcohol use in hazardous drinkers. J Stud Alcohol. 2001; 62:605-14.
PubMed
 
Maisto SA, Conigliaro J, McNeil M, Kraemer K, Kelley ME. The relationship between eligibility criteria for participation in alcohol brief intervention trials and other alcohol and health-related variables. Am J Addict. 2001; 10:218-31.
PubMed
 
Senft RA, Polen MR, Freeborn DK, Hollis JF. Brief intervention in a primary care setting for hazardous drinkers. Am J Prev Med. 1997; 13:464-70.
PubMed
 
WHO Brief Intervention Study Group. A cross-national trial of brief interventions with heavy drinkers. Am J Public Health. 1996; 86:948-55.
PubMed
 
Kypri K, Langley JD, Saunders JB, Cashell-Smith ML. Assessment may conceal therapeutic benefit: findings from a randomized controlled trial for hazardous drinking. Addiction. 2007; 102:62-70.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Kypri K, Langley JD, Saunders JB, Cashell-Smith ML, Herbison P. Randomized controlled trial of web-based alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2008; 168:530-6.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Kypri K, Saunders JB, Williams SM, McGee RO, Langley JD, Cashell-Smith ML, et al. Web-based screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2004; 99:1410-7.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Armstrong MA, Kaskutas LA, Witbrodt J, Taillac CJ, Hung YY, Osejo VM, et al. Using drink size to talk about drinking during pregnancy: a randomized clinical trial of Early Start Plus. Soc Work Health Care. 2009; 48:90-103.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Budd KW, Ross-Alaolmolki K, Zeller RA. Two prenatal alcohol use screening instruments compared with a physiologic measure. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2000; 29:129-36.
PubMed
 
Bull LB, Kvigne VL, Leonardson GR, Lacina L, Welty TK. Validation of a self-administered questionnaire to screen for prenatal alcohol use in Northern Plains Indian women. Am J Prev Med. 1999; 16:240-3.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, Goetz MA, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S. A brief intervention for prenatal alcohol use: an in-depth look. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2000; 18:365-9.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, Goetz MA, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S. Identifying prenatal alcohol use: screening instruments versus clinical predictors. Am J Addict. 1999; 8:87-93.
PubMed
 
Chang G, Wilkins-Haug L, Berman S, Goetz MA, Behr H, Hiley A. Alcohol use and pregnancy: improving identification. Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 91:892-8.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, McNamara TK, Orav EJ, Koby D, Lavigne A, Ludman B, et al. Brief intervention for prenatal alcohol use: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 105:991-8.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Chang G, McNamara TK, Orav EJ, Wilkins-Haug L. Brief intervention for prenatal alcohol use: the role of drinking goal selection. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2006; 31:419-24.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Floyd RL, Sobell M, Velasquez MM, Ingersoll K, Nettleman M, Sobell L, et al, Project CHOICES Efficacy Study Group. Preventing alcohol-exposed pregnancies: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 32:1-10.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Flynn HA, Marcus SM, Barry KL, Blow FC. Rates and correlates of alcohol use among pregnant women in obstetrics clinics. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2003; 27:81-7.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Grant TM, Ernst CC, Streissguth A, Stark K. Preventing alcohol and drug exposed births in Washington state: intervention findings from three parent-child assistance program sites. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2005; 31:471-90.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Meberg A, Halvorsen B, Holter B, Ek IJ, Askeland A, Gaaserud W, et al. Moderate alcohol consumption—need for intervention programs in pregnancy? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1986; 65:861-4.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
O'Connor MJ, Whaley SE. Brief intervention for alcohol use by pregnant women. Am J Public Health. 2007; 97:252-8.
PubMed
 
Reynolds KD, Coombs DW, Lowe JB, Peterson PL, Gayoso E. Evaluation of a self-help program to reduce alcohol consumption among pregnant women. Int J Addict. 1995; 30:427-43.
PubMed
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Motivational intervention to reduce alcohol-exposed pregnancies—Florida, Texas, and Virginia, 1997-2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2003; 52:441-4.
PubMed
 
Halmesmäki E. Alcohol counselling of 85 pregnant problem drinkers: effect on drinking and fetal outcome. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1988; 95:243-7.
PubMed
 
Waterson EJ, Murray-Lyon IM. Preventing alcohol related birth damage: a review. Soc Sci Med. 1990; 30:349-64.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Handmaker NS, Miller WR, Manicke M. Findings of a pilot study of motivational interviewing with pregnant drinkers. J Stud Alcohol. 1999; 60:285-7.
PubMed
 
Saitz R. Alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care: Absence of evidence for efficacy in people with dependence or very heavy drinking. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2010; 29:631-40.
PubMed
CrossRef
 
Miller WR, Walters ST, Bennett ME. How effective is alcoholism treatment in the United States? J Stud Alcohol. 2001; 62:211-20.
PubMed
 
Babor TF, Steinberg K, Anton R, Del Boca F. Talk is cheap: measuring drinking outcomes in clinical trials. J Stud Alcohol. 2000; 61:55-63.
PubMed
 
Del Boca FK, Noll JA. Truth or consequences: the validity of self-report data in health services research on addictions. Addiction. 2000; 95:Suppl 3S347-60.
PubMed
 
McCambridge J, Kypri K. Can simply answering research questions change behaviour? Systematic review and meta analyses of brief alcohol intervention trials. PLoS One. 2011; 6:23748.
PubMed
CrossRef
 

Letters

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Comments

Submit a Comment
Alcohol "Misuse" is a misuse of "misuse"
Posted on March 20, 2013
Richard Saitz, MD
Boston University
Conflict of Interest: Dr. Saitz is employed by for Boston University as a Professor focused on alcohol-related research and education. He provides clinical services at Boston Medical Center (BMC), an institution that cares for patients with unhealthy alcohol use. He is supported via BMC by grants for alcohol-related research and consults for NIH-supported alcohol-related studies at other academic institutions in the US and abroad. He has consulted for National Development and Research Institutes and Medical Directions Inc. on alcohol-related research and education studies. He has been compensated for grand rounds at academic institutions and plenary lectures at professional societies related to unhealthy alcohol use and has provided expert opinion on legal cases involving identification and management of unhealthy alcohol use. He was a member in 2011 of the Technical Expert Panel for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) that provided input for the report commented on here.

Jonas et al's excellent review missed an opportunity to clarify terminology.  We screen for "unhealthy alcohol use."  “Misuse” is confusing.  Some believe it means risky use without dependence.  Others (e.g. Jonas et al, which ironically references an article titled "unhealthy alcohol use" to define "misuse")(1) use it to mean the spectrum that includes dependence.  In fact the annals.org home page demonstrates how easy it is to confuse—“counseling patients about alcohol misuse reduces unhealthy drinking” (accessed 9/25/2012).  Actually, counseling was not beneficial for misuse or unhealthy use; it only affected drinking among those with risky use, not the full spectrum of “misuse” or “unhealthy use” a key point made by Jonas et al.

 In addition to the lack of clarity, it is problematic to refer to people who have a brain disease (those with chronic dependence) as "misusing" alcohol, as if it were an accident or misjudgment. Those who use risky amounts also may not be “misusing;” like people may choose to eat a cheeseburger, they may be using alcohol after considering the risks.  “Misuse” distances alcohol-related conditions from how we discuss other health risks. We don’t talk of cheeseburger misuse or heroin misuse.

 Addiction patients and clinicians are outside of mainstream health care, much to their detriment, and "misuse" doesn't help integrate care.  "Unhealthy" encompasses all use that affects health adversely, and calls it like it is.  Some may worry “unhealthy” implies the existence of healthy use, but it doesn’t. A similar objection could be raised for “misuse,” which could imply there is a correct way to use alcohol.

 The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services incentivizes screening for "unhealthy alcohol use" in its Physician Quality Reporting Initiative. The Centers for Disease Control has published a guide for screening and brief intervention for "unhealthy alcohol use" (2). National Institutes of Health publications call it "unhealthy alcohol use" (3), and numerous peer-reviewed papers have done so.

 How we communicate matters—for clinical reasons, but perhaps even more so, outside of medicine in policy circles and in the general public.  "Misuse" is confusing, sends the wrong messages both about use of risky amounts of alcohol and about dependence, and distances alcohol, one of the leading causes of preventable death and disability in the world, from health and healthcare.  Calling it what it is--unhealthy--is likely to contribute to the best approaches for patients, clinicians and the general public.

 

  1. Saitz R. Unhealthy alcohol use. N Engl J Med 2005;352:596-607.
  2. Higgins-Biddle J, Hungerford D, Cates-Wessel K. Screening and Brief Interventions (SBI) for Unhealthy Alcohol Use: A Step-By-Step Implementation Guide for Trauma Centers. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2009.
  3. O’Malley SS, O’Connor PG.  Medications for unhealthy alcohol use. Alcohol Res Health 2011;33:300-12.
Submit a Comment

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

Toolkit

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Advertisement
Related Articles
Related Point of Care
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.
(Required)
(Required)