| Literature DB >> 11823551 |
Ronan Hearne1, Anita Connolly, John Sheehan.
Abstract
Despite a high prevalence of alcohol-related disabilities and the availability of cost-effective interventions, alcohol abuse and dependence commonly go undetected in hospital inpatients. In a university teaching hospital we compared three well validated screening methods for sensitivity and specificity-the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT, with various cut-off scores), CAGE (a four-question screening tool), and a 10-question version of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (BMAST). A subset of patients also completed the DSM IV structured clinical interview for diagnosis. 1133 adult patients were randomly selected from all hospital admissions, with exclusion of day cases and patients too ill to be interviewed. Two-thirds of the patients were interviewed, most of the remainder being unavailable at the time. 30% of the men and 8% of the women met the DSM IV criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence. Sensitivities and specificities of the screening tools were as follows: AUDIT (with cut-off score >8) 89% and 91%; CAGE 77% and 99%; BMAST 37% and 100%. 255 case records of patients scoring above the cut-off on one or more questionnaires were subsequently reviewed. The admitting team recognized an alcohol problem in only 46, of whom 17 were referred for appropriate follow up. As in previous hospital surveys, alcohol abuse and dependence was not receiving proper attention. The most efficient screening tool was the CAGE questionnaire.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2002 PMID: 11823551 PMCID: PMC1279317 DOI: 10.1177/014107680209500208
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J R Soc Med ISSN: 0141-0768 Impact factor: 18.000