Skip Navigation
American College of Physicians Logo
  • Subscribe
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Sign In
    Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
    INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
    Sign In|Set Up Account
    You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
    INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN
    Open Athens|Shibboleth|Log In
    Annals of Internal Medicine
    SUBSCRIBE
    Subscribe to Annals of Internal Medicine.
    You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your purchase.
Annals of Internal Medicine Logo Menu
  • Latest
  • Issues
  • Channels
  • CME/MOC
  • In the Clinic
  • Journal Club
  • Web Exclusives
  • Author Info
Advanced Search
  • ‹ PREV ARTICLE
  • This Issue
  • NEXT ARTICLE ›
Reviews |6 November 2012

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; Russell P. Harris, MD, MPH

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

Russell P. Harris, MD, MPH

Article, Author, and Disclosure Information
Author, Article, and Disclosure 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.

×
  • ‹ PREV ARTICLE
  • This Issue
  • NEXT ARTICLE ›
Jump To
  • Full Article
  • FULL ARTICLE
  • FULL ARTICLE
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
      1. References
  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplements
  • Audio/Video
  • Summary for Patients
  • Clinical Slide Sets
  • CME / MOC
  • Comments
  • Twitter Link
  • Facebook Link
  • Email Link
More
  • LinkedIn Link
  • CiteULike Link

Abstract

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 (1–3), is associated with numerous health and social problems and more than 85 000 deaths per year in the United States (4, 5). 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 (7–9). 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, 10–12).

Table 1.

Definitions of the Spectrum of Alcohol Misuse

Table 1.
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 (14, 15). 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, 17, 18). 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).

Appendix Table 1.

Key Questions for This Systematic Review

Appendix Table 1.

Methods

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.
Appendix Figure 1.

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

KQ = key question.

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 (22, 23). 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 (26, 27). 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.

Appendix Table 2.

Definitions of the Grades of Overall Strength of Evidence

Appendix Table 2.

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.

Results

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.
Appendix Figure 2.

Summary of evidence search and selection.

Appendix Table 3.

Characteristics of Included Trials Comparing Behavioral Counseling Interventions With Control Groups

Appendix Table 3.
Fourteen of the interventions (29–50) were delivered by a primary care physician alone or with a health educator or nurse. Three (51–54) were delivered by a nurse or physician assistant, 1 by a psychologist (55–57), 2 by a researcher (58–62), and 1 by unspecified interventionists (63). Two interventions in college students (64–66) were conducted via a computer. Most trials tested brief multicontact interventions (31–34, 42, 46, 50, 51, 53, 64, 65) or brief interventions (29, 49, 52, 58, 60, 62–66); 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 (64–66), or a booklet about preventing alcohol problems (48). We summarize the main findings by population and outcome and report the SOE for each.

Appendix Table 4.

Description of Behavioral Counseling Interventions, by Intervention Intensity

Appendix Table 4.

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 2.

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

Table 2.
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.

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 3.

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

Table 3.

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, 33, 34, 39, 41, 49, 50), 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 (64–66).

Discussion

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, 35–37, 39, 42, 43) 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 (35, 36, 43) and also show improvement for some utilization outcomes, such as fewer hospital days (35, 36) 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 (67–84). 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 (87, 88). 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.

References

  1. Saitz
    R
    .  
    Clinical practice. Unhealthy alcohol use.
    N Engl J Med
    2005
    352
    596-607
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. Mokdad
    AH
    ,  
    Marks
    JS
    ,  
    Stroup
    DF
    ,  
    Gerberding
    JL
    .  
    Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000.
    JAMA
    2004
    291
    1238-45
    PubMed
    PubMed
  5. 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
    PubMed
    CrossRef
  6. 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.
  7. 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
    PubMed
  8. 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
    PubMed
  9. Schuckit
    MA
    .  
    Alcohol-use disorders.
    Lancet
    2009
    373
    492-501
    PubMed
    PubMed
  10. Isaac
    M
    ,  
    Janca
    A
    ,  
    Sartorius
    N
    .  
    ICD-10 Symptom Glossary for Mental Disorders.
    Geneva
    World Health Organization
    1994
  11. 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
  12. American Psychiatric Association
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition.
    Washington, DC
    American Psychiatric Assoc
    1994
  13. 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
    PubMed
  14. 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
    PubMed
  15. 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.
  16. 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
    PubMed
  17. 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.
  18. Dawson
    DA
    ,  
    Grant
    BF
    ,  
    Li
    TK
    .  
    Quantifying the risks associated with exceeding recommended drinking limits.
    Alcohol Clin Exp Res
    2005
    29
    902-8
    PubMed
    PubMed
  19. 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
    PubMed
  20. 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
    PubMed
  21. 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
  22. Counsell
    C
    .  
    Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews.
    Ann Intern Med
    1997
    127
    380-7
    PubMed
    PubMed
    CrossRef
  23. 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
  24. 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
    PubMed
  25. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
    Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare.
    York, UK
    Univ York
    2009
  26. Higgins
    JP
    ,  
    Thompson
    SG
    .  
    Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.
    Stat Med
    2002
    21
    1539-58
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  27. Higgins
    JP
    ,  
    Thompson
    SG
    ,  
    Deeks
    JJ
    ,  
    Altman
    DG
    .  
    Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.
    BMJ
    2003
    327
    557-60
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  28. 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
    PubMed
  29. Anderson
    P
    ,  
    Scott
    E
    .  
    The effect of general practitioners' advice to heavy drinking men.
    Br J Addict
    1992
    87
    891-900
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  30. 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
    PubMed
  31. 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
    PubMed
  32. 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
    PubMed
  33. 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
    PubMed
  34. 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
    PubMed
  35. 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
    PubMed
  36. 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
    PubMed
  37. 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
    PubMed
  38. 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
    PubMed
  39. 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
    PubMed
  40. 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
    PubMed
  41. 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
    PubMed
  42. 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
    PubMed
  43. 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
    PubMed
  44. 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
    PubMed
  45. 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
    PubMed
  46. 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
    PubMed
  47. 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
    PubMed
    CrossRef
  48. 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
  49. 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
    PubMed
  50. 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
    PubMed
  51. 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
    PubMed
  52. 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
    PubMed
  53. 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
    PubMed
  54. 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
    PubMed
  55. 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
    PubMed
  56. 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
    PubMed
  57. 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
    PubMed
  58. 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
    PubMed
  59. 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
    PubMed
  60. 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
    PubMed
  61. 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
    PubMed
  62. 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
    PubMed
  63. WHO Brief Intervention Study Group
    A cross-national trial of brief interventions with heavy drinkers.
    Am J Public Health
    1996
    86
    948-55
    PubMed
    PubMed
  64. 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
    PubMed
  65. 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
    PubMed
  66. 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
    PubMed
  67. 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
    PubMed
  68. 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
    PubMed
  69. 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
    PubMed
  70. 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
    PubMed
  71. 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
    PubMed
  72. 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
    PubMed
  73. 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
    PubMed
  74. 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
    PubMed
  75. 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
    PubMed
  76. 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
    PubMed
  77. 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
    PubMed
  78. 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
    PubMed
  79. O'Connor
    MJ
    ,  
    Whaley
    SE
    .  
    Brief intervention for alcohol use by pregnant women.
    Am J Public Health
    2007
    97
    252-8
    PubMed
    PubMed
  80. 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
    PubMed
  81. 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
    PubMed
  82. Halmesmäki
    E
    .  
    Alcohol counselling of 85 pregnant problem drinkers: effect on drinking and fetal outcome.
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol
    1988
    95
    243-7
    PubMed
    PubMed
  83. Waterson
    EJ
    ,  
    Murray-Lyon
    IM
    .  
    Preventing alcohol related birth damage: a review.
    Soc Sci Med
    1990
    30
    349-64
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  84. 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
    PubMed
  85. 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
    PubMed
  86. Miller
    WR
    ,  
    Walters
    ST
    ,  
    Bennett
    ME
    .  
    How effective is alcoholism treatment in the United States?
    J Stud Alcohol
    2001
    62
    211-20
    PubMed
    PubMed
  87. 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
    PubMed
  88. Del Boca
    FK
    ,  
    Noll
    JA
    .  
    Truth or consequences: the validity of self-report data in health services research on addictions.
    Addiction
    2000
    95
    Suppl 3
    S347-60
    PubMed
    PubMed
  89. 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
This article was published at www.annals.org on 25 September 2012.
Appendix Figure 1.

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

KQ = key question.

Appendix Figure 2.

Summary of evidence search and selection.

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.

Table 1.

Definitions of the Spectrum of Alcohol Misuse

Table 1.

Appendix Table 1.

Key Questions for This Systematic Review

Appendix Table 1.

Appendix Table 2.

Definitions of the Grades of Overall Strength of Evidence

Appendix Table 2.

Appendix Table 3.

Characteristics of Included Trials Comparing Behavioral Counseling Interventions With Control Groups

Appendix Table 3.

Appendix Table 4.

Description of Behavioral Counseling Interventions, by Intervention Intensity

Appendix Table 4.

Table 2.

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

Table 2.

Table 3.

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

Table 3.

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.

This feature is available only to Registered Users

Subscribe/Learn More
Submit a Comment

1 Comment

Richard Saitz, MD

Boston University

March 20, 2013

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.

Alcohol "Misuse" is a misuse of "misuse"

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.

PDF
Not Available
Citations
Citation

Jonas DE, Garbutt JC, Amick HR, Brown JM, Brownley KA, Council CL, et al. Behavioral Counseling After Screening for Alcohol Misuse in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. ;157:645–654. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-9-201211060-00544

Download citation file:

  • Ris (Zotero)
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • Medlars
  • ProCite
  • RefWorks
  • Reference Manager

© 2019

×
Permissions

Published: Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(9):645-654.

DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-9-201211060-00544

207 Citations

Related Articles

Screening and Behavioral Counseling Interventions in Primary Care To Reduce Alcohol Misuse: Recommendation Statement
Annals of Internal Medicine; 140 (7): 554-556
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
Annals of Internal Medicine; 140 (7): 557-568
Counseling about Proper Use of Motor Vehicle Occupant Restraints and Avoidance of Alcohol Use while Driving: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Annals of Internal Medicine; 147 (3): 194-206
Primary Care Behavioral Interventions to Prevent or Reduce Illicit Drug Use and Nonmedical Pharmaceutical Use in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Annals of Internal Medicine; 160 (9): 612-620
View MoreView Less

Journal Club

Intensive weight management in primary care improved weight loss and remission of type 2 diabetes
Annals of Internal Medicine; 168 (6): JC30
Review: In primary care, CRP testing, shared decision making, and procalcitonin reduce antibiotic prescribing for ARI
Annals of Internal Medicine; 168 (2): JC11
Review: In primary care, screening with the GAD-7 detected anxiety disorder; the PHQ detected panic disorder
Annals of Internal Medicine; 161 (10): JC13
In long-term benzodiazepine users, primary care–based, structured, tapering interventions reduced use
Annals of Internal Medicine; 161 (6): JC3
View MoreView Less

Related Point of Care

Substance Use Disorders
Annals of Internal Medicine; 164 (7): ITC49-ITC64
Alcohol Use
Annals of Internal Medicine; 150 (5): ITC3-1
Alcohol Use
Annals of Internal Medicine; 164 (1): ITC1-ITC16
View MoreView Less

Related Topics

Prevention/Screening
Tobacco, Alcohol, and Other Substance Abuse

Prevention/Screening, Tobacco, Alcohol, and Other Substance Abuse.

PubMed Articles

A Multicentered Randomized Study on Early versus Rescue Calsurf Administration for the Treatment of Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Preterm Infants.
Am J Perinatol 2019.
View More

Results provided by: PubMed

CME/MOC Activity Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
The Comments Feature Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
link to top

Content

  • Home
  • Latest
  • Issues
  • Channels
  • CME/MOC
  • In the Clinic
  • Journal Club
  • Web Exclusives

Information For

  • Author Info
  • Reviewers
  • Press
  • Readers
  • Institutions / Libraries / Agencies
  • Advertisers

Services

  • Subscribe
  • Renew
  • Alerts
  • Current Issue RSS
  • Latest RSS
  • In the Clinic RSS
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • Help
  • About Annals
  • About Mobile
  • Patient Information
  • Teaching Tools
  • Annals in the News
  • Share Your Feedback

Awards and Cover

  • Personae (Cover Photo)
  • Junior Investigator Awards
  • Poetry Prize

Other Resources

  • ACP Online
  • Career Connection
  • ACP Advocate Blog
  • ACP Journal Wise

Follow Annals On

  • Twitter Link
  • Facebook Link
acp link acp
silverchair link silverchair

Copyright © 2019 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.

Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704

Privacy Policy

|

Conditions of Use

This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
×

You need a subscription to this content to use this feature.

×
PDF Downloads Require Access to the Full Article.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN
Open Athens|Shibboleth|Log In
Annals of Internal Medicine
PURCHASE OPTIONS
Buy This Article|Subscribe
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
Access to this Free Content Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In. Please Choose One of the Following Options
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×