No abstract

Whilst brief screening and brief intervention have been shown to be effective in some settings, this review has identified a number of barriers and facilitators to implementation. Adequate resources, training and the identification of those at risk without stereotyping are the main facilitators in primary care. More research is needed to assess implementation in other settings.

Published paper

SummaryBackgroundSeveral countries are considering a minimum price policy for alcohol, but concerns exist about the potential effects on drinkers with low incomes. We aimed to assess the effect of a £0·45 minimum unit price (1 unit is 8 g/10 mL ethanol) in England across the income and socioeconomic distributions.MethodsWe used the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model (SAPM) version 2.6, a causal, deterministic, epidemiological model, to assess effects of a minimum unit price policy. SAPM accounts for alcohol purchasing and consumption preferences for population subgroups including income and socioeconomic groups. Purchasing preferences are regarded as the types and volumes of alcohol beverages, prices paid, and the balance between on-trade (eg, bars) and off-trade (eg, shops). We estimated price elasticities from 9 years of survey data and did sensitivity analyses with alternative elasticities. We assessed effects of the policy on moderate, hazardous, and harmful drinkers, split into three socioeconomic groups (living in routine or manual households, intermediate households, and managerial or professional households). We examined policy effects on alcohol consumption, spending, rates of alcohol-related health harm, and opportunity costs associated with that harm. Rates of harm and costs were estimated for a 10 year period after policy implementation. We adjusted baseline rates of mortality and morbidity to account for differential risk between socioeconomic groups.FindingsOverall, a minimum unit price of £0·45 led to an immediate reduction in consumption of 1·6% (−11·7 units per drinker per year) in our model. Moderate drinkers were least affected in terms of consumption (−3·8 units per drinker per year for the lowest income quintile vs 0·8 units increase for the highest income quintile) and spending (increase in spending of £0·04 vs £1·86 per year). The greatest behavioural changes occurred in harmful drinkers (change in consumption of −3·7% or −138·2 units per drinker per year, with a decrease in spending of £4·01), especially in the lowest income quintile (−7·6% or −299·8 units per drinker per year, with a decrease in spending of £34·63) compared with the highest income quintile (−1·0% or −34·3 units, with an increase in spending of £16·35). Estimated health benefits from the policy were also unequally distributed. Individuals in the lowest socioeconomic group (living in routine or manual worker households and comprising 41·7% of the sample population) would accrue 81·8% of reductions in premature deaths and 87·1% of gains in terms of quality-adjusted life-years.InterpretationIrrespective of income, moderate drinkers were little affected by a minimum unit price of £0·45 in our model, with the greatest effects noted for harmful drinkers. Because harmful drinkers on low incomes purchase more alcohol at less than the minimum unit price threshold compared with other groups, they would be affected most by this policy. Large reductions in consumption in this group would however coincide with substantial health gains in t...

No abstract

BackgroundToo few young people engage in behaviours that reduce the risk of morbidity and premature mortality, such as eating healthily, being physically active, drinking sensibly and not smoking. This study sought to assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a theory-based online health behaviour intervention (based on self-affirmation theory, the Theory of Planned Behaviour and implementation intentions) targeting these behaviours in new university students, in comparison to a measurement-only control.MethodsTwo-weeks before starting university all incoming undergraduates at the University of Sheffield were invited to take part in a study of new students’ health behaviour. A randomised controlled design, with a baseline questionnaire, and two follow-ups (1 and 6 months after starting university), was used to evaluate the intervention. Primary outcomes were measures of the four health behaviours targeted by the intervention at 6-month follow-up, i.e., portions of fruit and vegetables, metabolic equivalent of tasks (physical activity), units of alcohol, and smoking status.ResultsThe study recruited 1,445 students (intervention n = 736, control n = 709, 58% female, Mean age = 18.9 years), of whom 1,107 completed at least one follow-up (23% attrition). The intervention had a statistically significant effect on one primary outcome, smoking status at 6-month follow-up, with fewer smokers in the intervention arm (8.7%) than in the control arm (13.0%; Odds ratio = 1.92, p = .010). There were no significant intervention effects on the other primary outcomes (physical activity, alcohol or fruit and vegetable consumption) at 6-month follow-up.ConclusionsThe results of the RCT indicate that the online health behaviour intervention reduced smoking rates, but it had little effect on fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity or alcohol consumption, during the first six months at university. However, engagement with the intervention was low. Further research is needed before strong conclusions can be made regarding the likely effectiveness of the intervention to promote health lifestyle habits in new university students.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials, ISRCTN67684181.

Background: The social meanings, settings and habitual nature of health-related activities and their integration into our daily lives are often overlooked in quantitative public health research. This reflects an overly individualised approach to epidemiological surveillance and evaluations of public health interventions, based on models of behaviour that are rooted in social cognition and rational choice theories. This paper calls for a new approach to alcohol epidemiology and intervention research informed by theories of practice.Argument: Practices are conceptualised as routinized types of human activity that are made up of, and can be recognised by, the coming together of several interwoven elements in the same situation (e.g. materials, meanings, skills, locations, timings). Different practices are interconnected they can occur simultaneously (e.g. drinking and eating), hold each other in place (e.g. after-work drinks) or compete for time (e.g. parenting versus socialising). Applying these principles to alcohol research means shifting attention away from individuals and their behaviours and instead making drinking practices an important unit of analysis. Studying how drinking practices emerge, persist and decay over time, how they spread through populations and local or social networks, and how they relate to other activities of everyday life promises new insights into how, why, where, when and with whom drinking and getting drunk occur. Conclusions:Theories of practice provide a framework for generating new explanations of stability and change in alcohol consumption and other health behaviours. This framework offers potential for novel insights into the persistence of health inequalities, unanticipated consequences of policies and interventions, and new interventions targets through understanding which elements of problematic practices are likely to be most modifiable. SUMMARY STATEMENTSApplying theories of practice principles to research on alcohol consumption would mean shifting our attention from average drinking volumes and frequencies to drinking practices as a core unit of analysis to gain insight into how, why, where, when and with whom we drink and get drunk.We hope this will generate novel insights into the emergence and decay of drinking practices over time and into the geographical and socio-demographic patterning of drinking.Theories of practice-informed research would consider how alcohol policies and population-level interventions might differentially affect different drinking practices.

Context and aims Internationally, the repertoire of alcohol pricing policies has expanded to include targeted taxation, inflation-linked taxation, taxation based on alcohol-by-volume (ABV), minimum pricing policies (general or targeted), bans of below-cost selling and restricting price-based promotions. Policy makers clearly need to consider how options compare in reducing harms at the population level, but are also required to demonstrate proportionality of their actions, which necessitates a detailed understanding of policy effects on different population subgroups. This paper presents selected findings from a policy appraisal for the UK government and discusses the importance of accounting for population heterogeneity in such analyses. Method We have built a causal, deterministic, epidemiological model which takes account of differential preferences by population subgroups defined by age, gender and level of drinking (moderate, hazardous, harmful). We consider purchasing preferences in terms of the types and volumes of alcoholic beverages, prices paid and the balance between bars, clubs and restaurants as opposed to supermarkets and off-licenses. Results Age, sex and level of drinking fundamentally affect beverage preferences, drinking location, prices paid, price sensitivity and tendency to substitute for other beverage types. Pricing policies vary in their impact on different product types, price points and venues, thus having distinctly different effects on subgroups. Because population subgroups also have substantially different risk profiles for harms, policies are differentially effective in reducing health, crime, work-place absence and unemployment harms. Conclusion Policy appraisals must account for population heterogeneity and complexity if resulting interventions are to be well considered, proportionate, effective and cost-effective.