This article has a correction
- Anders Beich (a.beich{at}gpract.ku.dk), research fellow1,
- Thorkil Thorsen, senior researcher1,
- Stephen Rollnick, professor2
- 1Central Research Unit and Department of General Practice, University of Copenhagen, Panum Institute, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
- 2Communication Skills Unit, Department of General Practice, University of Wales College of Medicine, Llanedeyrn Health Centre, Cardiff CF23 9PN
- Correspondence to: A Beich
- Accepted 9 July 2003
Abstract
Objective To determine the effectiveness of programmes of screening in general practice for excessive alcohol use and providing brief interventions.
Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that used screening as a precursor to brief intervention.
Setting General practice.
Main outcome measures Number needed to treat, proportion of patients positive on screening, proportion given brief interventions, and effect of screening.
Results The eight studies included for meta-analysis all used health questionnaires for screening, and the brief interventions included feedback, information, and advice. The studies contained several sources of bias that might lead to overestimates of the effects of intervention. External validity was compromised because typically three out of four people identified by screening as excessive users of alcohol did not qualify for the intervention after a secondary assessment. Overall, in 1000 screened patients, 90 screened positive and required further assessment, after which 25 qualified for brief intervention; after one year 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 3.4) reported they drank less than the maximum recommended level.
Conclusions Although even brief advice can reduce excessive drinking, screening in general practice does not seem to be an effective precursor to brief interventions targeting excessive alcohol use. This meta-analysis raises questions about the feasibility of screening in general practice for excessive use of alcohol.
Footnotes
-
Contributors AB and TT planned the study and carried out the literature searches. All three authors were involved in the analysis. AB drafted the manuscript, while all authors jointly prepared the final manuscript. AB is guarantor for the study.
-
Funding Alkoholpuljen, Alkoholpolitisk Kontaktudvalg (Danish Ministry and Board of Health) and Forskningsfonden (Association of County Councils in Denmark). The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of the funding bodies.
-
Conflict of interest None declared.
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm: should we lower the intervention cut-off point?
Published 20 May 2012
Re: The 15 minute consultation
Published 20 May 2012
Re: The comforts of spiritualism
Published 20 May 2012
Re: Euthanasia: or, Medical Treatment in Aid of an Easy Death
Published 20 May 2012
Re: Familial hypercholesterolaemia
Published 20 May 2012
Most responses
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (8 responses)
Published 2 May 2012
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (6 responses)
Published 2 May 2012
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (6 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32