Injury prevention/original researchDIAL: A Telephone Brief Intervention for High-Risk Alcohol Use With Injured Emergency Department Patients
Introduction
Alcohol has a well-documented role in injury occurrence.1 There is a particularly strong connection between alcohol use and motor vehicle crashes, with alcohol involved in approximately 41% of fatal motor vehicle crashes and 256,000 persons being injured in alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes.2 The resultant economic costs of impaired driving are staggering and estimated to be more than $50 billion.3 Thus, impaired driving is a public health problem with significant human suffering and societal cost that necessitates further efforts at control.
Emergency departments (EDs) are an opportune setting for identifying persons using alcohol in a risky manner, especially in those presenting for injury4 or from a motor vehicle crash.5 Injury has also been identified as a motivator to change alcohol use.6 In patients admitted to a trauma service, a brief intervention for alcohol has been found to reduce injury recidivism7 and subsequent impaired driving arrests.8 With injured patients being treated in an ED and discharged to home, Longabaugh et al9 found that those with hazardous alcohol use who received brief intervention for alcohol while in the ED and a follow-up booster brief intervention within 2 weeks reduced alcohol-related negative consequences and alcohol-related injuries more than those who received only standard ED care. This effect was not dependent on whether the patients had consumed alcohol before their injury. Furthermore, the treatment effect was greatest in those patients being treated in the ED after a motor vehicle crash.10 All of these studies7, 8, 9, 10 used a brief intervention that was based on the technique of motivational interviewing.11 Thus, injured ED patients, motor vehicle crash patients in particular, appear to be a group to target for screening and a brief intervention for alcohol problems.
Although organizations have advocated for brief intervention for alcohol to be done within the clinical practice of the ED,12, 13 barriers exist that have prevented its universal adoption. In the busy environment of the ED, diagnosis and treatment of acute medical illness and injury regularly usurp prevention efforts. ED staff may perceive this as not being part of their clinical care of the injured patients or may not have the skills or additional resources to address alcohol use problems. For patients, the ED may not be the ideal environment for a brief intervention because it is a noisy, chaotic, stressful, and uncomfortable setting. While in the ED, the patient is likely to be fatigued, in pain, and possibly under the influence of alcohol, which may affect the efficacy of the intervention. The “teachable moment” perhaps does not only exist in the ED, but opportunities to offer an intervention for alcohol use may extend to a period beyond the initial ED visit. This view has led us to now explore whether brief intervention for alcohol would be effective with ED patients after discharge from the ED. A practical mechanism for reaching patients after discharge from the ED would be using the telephone. Telephone interventions have demonstrated efficacy as a modality to change behavior. Programs that include a telephone intervention component have addressed varied health issues, including alcohol use in a primary care setting,14 management of chronic diseases,15 depressive symptoms,16, 17 agoraphobia,18 nutrition,19 and smoking cessation.20, 21, 22 Midanik et al23 have also found, in comparing telephone and face-to-face interviews assessing alcohol-related harm, that the telephone survey yielded significantly higher rates of self-reported alcohol-related harm compared with the in-person survey, possibly because of increased anonymity with telephone surveys. Although only some of these telephone interventions are motivational interviewing–based brief intervention and none use an ED population, the existing barriers to brief intervention being done in the ED and the practicality of the telephone necessitates telephone-delivered brief intervention testing with an ED population.
We do not know which ED patients would benefit from a brief intervention. If brief intervention is found to be effective with certain subgroups of ED patients, limited resources could be concentrated with those groups. Previous research has demonstrated a more pronounced effect of brief intervention with ED motor vehicle crash patients than other injured patients.10 This finding, along with the prevalence of alcohol use problems in motor vehicle crash patients,5 yields utility for this subgroup to be examined for treatment effect with a telephone brief intervention for alcohol. Also, we lack data on the number of alcohol problems among injured ED patients that provide the floor and ceiling for brief intervention to be effective. It may be that brief intervention has a differential effect on ED patients that depends on their alcohol problem severity. Using the Alcohol Use Disorders Inventory Test (AUDIT)24 screening data from a treatment-seeking sample, Donovan et al25 found that classifying patients according to 4 AUDIT score zones produced a linear relationship between the zone and measures of alcohol problem severity. Thus, AUDIT score zones appear to be a reliable instrument to divide patients into groups based on the number of alcohol problems and could be used to examine whether ED patients' alcohol problem severity predicts their response to brief intervention.
With the telephone being used successfully in counseling and having potential advantages for delivering brief intervention with ED patients, we decided to alter the locus of brief intervention for ED patients. The primary aim of the present study is to test the effect of brief intervention given by telephone soon after the patient's ED visit and followed by a “booster” brief intervention telephone session 2 weeks later on the extent of hazardous drinking and frequency of impaired driving at a 3-month follow-up. The secondary aims are to test whether the effectiveness of brief intervention given by telephone is moderated by the patient's initial alcohol problem severity and to test whether ED motor vehicle crash patients are more responsive to brief intervention given by telephone than are other injured ED patients.
Section snippets
Study Design
DIAL, Decreasing Injuries from ALcohol, is a randomized clinical trial using a 2-group design for injured ED patients discharged to home. All participants were recruited while in the ED, but enrollment, assessment, randomization, and all interventions were done by telephone in the days after discharge. The treatment group received a brief intervention about their high-risk alcohol use during that same telephone call and a subsequent brief telephone booster brief intervention session. The
Characteristics of Study Subjects
From November 2003 to June 2006, 17,234 patients were treated in the EDs while research assistants were present. The majority of patients were ineligible for our study because they were there for treatment of a medical illness, were to be admitted to the hospital, or were too clinically unstable to be screened. During this period, there were 6,335 motor vehicle crash and other injured ED patients for the research assistants to screen for eligibility. Research assistants did not screen 249
Limitations
The most significant limitation of our study was the large number of patients who were excluded from it, in part because of the many ED patients who were ineligible for our protocol because they were presenting for treatment of illnesses and not an injury. Future research in this area should address the efficacy of brief intervention for noninjured ED patients.
Despite our having a certificate of confidentiality from National Institutes of Health and assuring patients of the confidentially of
Discussion
Previous research31 has demonstrated the effectiveness of brief intervention delivered in an ED setting. Outcomes have included a decrease of negative consequences from alcohol use with injured ED patients9 and a decrease in reported impaired driving after a brief intervention delivered in the ED to alcohol-using adolescents.28 Our study expands on these results by demonstrating decreased impaired driving after a telephone brief intervention on hazardous alcohol use with adult injured ED
References (39)
- et al.
Emergency department brief motivational interventions for alcohol with motor vehicle crash patients
Ann Emerg Med
(2005) - et al.
Efficacy of telephone-administered behavioral therapy for panic disorder with agoraphobia
Behav Res Ther
(1995) - et al.
A comparison of driver- and passenger-based estimates of alcohol-impaired driving
Am J Prev Med
(1999) Alcohol and Injury in the Emergency Department: Summary of the Report From the WHO Collaborative Study on Alcohol and Injuries
(2007)Motor vehicle traffic crash fatality counts and estimates of people injured for 2006. September 2007
- et al.
The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes 2000Washington, DC
NHTSA
(2002) - et al.
Alcohol use among subcritically injured emergency department patients
Acad Emerg Med
(1995) - et al.
Alcohol abuse/dependence in motor vehicle crash victims presenting to the emergency department
Acad Emerg Med
(1997) - et al.
Injury as a motivator to reduce drinking
Acad Emerg Med
(1995) - et al.
Alcohol interventions in a trauma center as a means of reducing the risk of injury recurrence
Ann Surg
(1999)
Trauma center brief interventions for alcohol disorders decrease subsequent driving under the influence arrests
J Trauma
Evaluating the effects of a brief motivational intervention for injured drinkers in the emergency department
J Stud Alcohol
Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change
Alcohol screening in the emergency department (Policy #400346, Approved January 2005)
Identification and Referral of Impaired Drivers Through Emergency Department Protocols
Brief physician advice for problem drinkers: long-term efficacy and benefit-cost analysis
Alcohol Clin Exp Res
Electronic communication with patientsEvaluation of distance medicine technology
JAMA
Telephone-administered cognitive behavioral therapy for the treatment of depressive symptoms in multiple sclerosis
J Consult Clin Psychol
Telephone psychotherapy and telephone care management for primary care patients starting antidepressant treatment: a randomized controlled trial
JAMA
Cited by (56)
Telehealth interventions to reduce alcohol use in men with HIV who have sex with men: Protocol for a factorial randomized controlled trial
2019, Contemporary Clinical Trials CommunicationsExamining the reach of a brief alcohol intervention service in routine practice at a level 1 trauma center
2017, Journal of Substance Abuse TreatmentAlcohol Electronic Screening and Brief Intervention: A Community Guide Systematic Review
2016, American Journal of Preventive MedicineCitation Excerpt :Six studies were excluded for limited quality of execution.31–36 The remaining 31 studies with 36 study arms were included in this review.37–67 All included studies were RCTs; 24 had fair quality of execution38,39,41,43–53,55–57,60,61,63–67 and seven had good quality.37,40,42,54,58,59,62
A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Telephone Intervention for Alcohol Misuse with Injured Emergency Department Patients
2016, Annals of Emergency MedicineCitation Excerpt :Participants received $20 for completion of initial assessments in the ED, $20 for each intervention call, and $40 for completion of subsequent outcome assessments at 4, 8, and 12 months. Telephone brief motivational intervention is a semistructured motivational interviewing–based brief intervention for alcohol use, modified from our previous telephone intervention.12,13 The study team developed the manualized protocol, and a total of 6 interventionists were trained and supervised during the course of the study by a study investigator who is a licensed psychologist and member of the motivational interviewing network of trainers.
The remote brief intervention and referral to treatment model: Development, functionality, acceptability, and feasibility
2015, Drug and Alcohol DependenceCitation Excerpt :This suggests that in vivo models may be optimally positioned to ensure completion. These findings contrast with Mello and colleagues’ (2008) who reported successfully contacting 70% of their sample for post-discharge telehealth SBIRT. The reasons for these differences between the two studies are difficult to discern.
Supervising editor: Debra E. Houry, MD, MPH
Author contributions: MJM, RL, TN, and RW conceived and designed the study. MJM obtained funding. All authors participated in the conduct of the study. JB provided statistical assistance. MJM drafted the article, and all authors contributed substantially to its revisions. MJM takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. The study was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (R49/CCR1232280; Mello, principal investigator) and is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00457548).
Disclaimer: The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessary represent the official views of the CDC.
Publication dates: Available online April 23, 2008.
Reprints not available from authors.