Sara Wallhed Finn1, Anders Hammarberg2, Sven Andreasson1. 1. Department of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Stockholm Health Care Services, Riddargatan 1, Mottagningen för alkohol och hälsa, Riddargatan 1, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Karolinska Institutet, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Stockholm Health Care Services, Riddargatan 1, Mottagningen för alkohol och hälsa, Riddargatan 1, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
AIM: To investigate if treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care is as effective as specialist addiction care. METHOD: Randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, between groups parallel design, not blinded. The non-inferiority limit was set to 50 grams of alcohol per week. About 288 adults fulfilling ICD-10 criteria for alcohol dependence were randomized to treatment in primary care (men n = 82, women n = 62) or specialist care (men n = 77, women n = 67). General practitioners at 12 primary care centers received 1-day training in a treatment manual for alcohol dependence. Primary outcome was change in weekly alcohol consumption at 6-months follow-up compared with baseline, as measured with timeline follow back. Secondary outcomes were heavy drinking days, severity of dependence, consequences of drinking, psychological health, quality of life, satisfaction with treatment and biomarkers. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analysis (n = 228) was statistically inconclusive, and could not confirm non-inferiority for the primary outcome, since the high end of the confidence interval exceeded 50 grams (estimated mean weekly alcohol consumption was 30 grams higher in primary care compared with specialist care; 95% confidence interval -10.20; 69.72). However, treatment in specialist care was not significantly superior to primary care (P = 0.146). Subanalysis suggests that specialist care was superior to primary care only for patients with high severity of dependence. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care is a promising approach, especially for individuals with low to moderate dependence. This may be a way to broaden the base of treatment for alcohol dependence, reducing the current treatment gap.
AIM: To investigate if treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care is as effective as specialist addiction care. METHOD: Randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, between groups parallel design, not blinded. The non-inferiority limit was set to 50 grams of alcohol per week. About 288 adults fulfilling ICD-10 criteria for alcohol dependence were randomized to treatment in primary care (men n = 82, women n = 62) or specialist care (men n = 77, women n = 67). General practitioners at 12 primary care centers received 1-day training in a treatment manual for alcohol dependence. Primary outcome was change in weekly alcohol consumption at 6-months follow-up compared with baseline, as measured with timeline follow back. Secondary outcomes were heavy drinking days, severity of dependence, consequences of drinking, psychological health, quality of life, satisfaction with treatment and biomarkers. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analysis (n = 228) was statistically inconclusive, and could not confirm non-inferiority for the primary outcome, since the high end of the confidence interval exceeded 50 grams (estimated mean weekly alcohol consumption was 30 grams higher in primary care compared with specialist care; 95% confidence interval -10.20; 69.72). However, treatment in specialist care was not significantly superior to primary care (P = 0.146). Subanalysis suggests that specialist care was superior to primary care only for patients with high severity of dependence. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment for alcohol dependence in primary care is a promising approach, especially for individuals with low to moderate dependence. This may be a way to broaden the base of treatment for alcohol dependence, reducing the current treatment gap.
Authors: Dan V Blalock; Sophia A Berlin; Jonathan R Young; Shannon M Blakey; Patrick S Calhoun; Eric A Dedert Journal: Curr Hypertens Rep Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 4.592
Authors: Megan A O'Grady; Joseph Conigliaro; Svetlana Levak; Jeanne Morley; Sandeep Kapoor; Melanie Ritter; Christina Marini; Jon Morgenstern Journal: J Prim Care Community Health Date: 2021 Jan-Dec
Authors: Susan A Rombouts; James H Conigrave; Richard Saitz; Eva Louie; Paul Haber; Kirsten C Morley Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2020-12-05 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Nicolas A Barticevic; Fernando Poblete; Soledad M Zuzulich; Victoria Rodriguez; Laura Bradshaw Journal: Trials Date: 2020-07-31 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Joseph E Glass; Jennifer F Bobb; Amy K Lee; Julie E Richards; Gwen T Lapham; Evette Ludman; Carol Achtmeyer; Ryan M Caldeiro; Rebecca Parrish; Emily C Williams; Paula Lozano; Katharine A Bradley Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Karin Hyland; Anders Hammarberg; Erik Hedman-Lagerlöf; Magnus Johansson; Sven Andreasson Journal: Trials Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Magnus Johansson; Kristina Sinadinovic; Mikael Gajecki; Philip Lindner; Anne H Berman; Ulric Hermansson; Sven Andréasson Journal: Addiction Date: 2020-10-13 Impact factor: 6.526