BackgroundThe European level of alcohol consumption, and the subsequent burden of disease, is high compared to the rest of the world. While screening and brief interventions in primary healthcare are cost-effective, in most countries they have hardly been implemented in routine primary healthcare. In this study, we aim to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of three implementation interventions that have been chosen to address key barriers for improvement: training and support to address lack of knowledge and motivation in healthcare providers; financial reimbursement to compensate the time investment; and internet-based counselling to reduce workload for primary care providers.Methods/designIn a cluster randomized factorial trial, data from Catalan, English, Netherlands, Polish, and Swedish primary healthcare units will be collected on screening and brief advice rates for hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption. The three implementation strategies will be provided separately and in combination in a total of seven intervention groups and compared with a treatment as usual control group. Screening and brief intervention activities will be measured at baseline, during 12 weeks and after six months. Process measures include health professionals’ role security and therapeutic commitment of the participating providers (SAAPPQ questionnaire). A total of 120 primary healthcare units will be included, equally distributed over the five countries. Both intention to treat and per protocol analyses are planned to determine intervention effectiveness, using random coefficient regression modelling.DiscussionEffective interventions to implement screening and brief interventions for hazardous alcohol use are urgently required. This international multi-centre trial will provide evidence to guide decision makers.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov. Trial identifier: NCT01501552

Attitudes towards anabolics differ between users and nonusers. These aspects may be beneficial to focus on as one part of a more complex intervention program in order to change these attitudes and decrease the misuse of androgenic anabolic steroids.

In this study, we have evaluated the use of a screening instrument in the first phase of a population study of female alcoholism and alcohol problems. The instrument, called SWAG (Screening, Women, and Alcohol in Göteborg), is a 13-item questionnaire. It includes a modified version of CAGE. The study sample consisted of 3,130 women. Of these, a stratified sample of 479 were invited for interview. Validation was done against interview-based clinical diagnosis according to DSM-III-R (alcohol dependence and abuse), with additional use of medical record information. SWAG had similar sensitivity and specificity used on a population sample, as previously has been found for alcohol problem screening instruments tested in clinical settings. Positive predictive value, rarely reported in studies of other alcohol screening instruments, was 40 to 50%. With logistic regression, we developed a promising set of criteria, called SWAG-L, that had similar sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value as the longer version SWAG-1, at the same time it consisted of only four items. CAGE had considerably lower sensitivity than SWAG. SWAG can, so far, be recommended for use in epidemiological studies. It may also prove valuable in clinical settings, although that requires a different scoring method. The question, "I have/have had alcohol problems" was the single item that best predicted alcohol dependence and abuse.

No abstract

From a public health perspective, there is a lack of evidence that non-systematic or semi-systematic methods can substitute systematic screening in terms of numbers of risky drinkers detected. If early signs are going to be used to identify risky drinkers, or those to be screened for risky drinking, more focus should be on psychological and social signs because they appear earlier than somatic signs.