Brief interventions for alcohol use disorders in low- and middle-income countries: barriers and potential solutions

Abstract

Global alcohol consumption and harmful use of alcohol is projected to increase in the coming decades, and most of the increase will occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); which calls for cost-effective measures to reduce alcohol exposure in these countries. One such evidence based measure is screening and brief intervention (BI) for alcohol problems. Some of the characteristics of BI make them a particularly appealing choice of interventions in low-resource settings. However, despite evidence of effectiveness, implementation of BI in LMICs is rare. In this paper we discuss barriers to implementation of BI in LMICs, with examples from Latin America and India. Key barriers to implementation of BI in LMICs are the lack of financial and structural resources. Specialized services for alcohol use disorders are limited or non-existent. Hence primary care is often the only possible alternative to implement BI. However, health professionals in such settings generally lack training to deal with these disorders. In our review of BI research in these countries, we find some promising results, primarily in countries from Latin America, but so far there is limited research on effectiveness. Appropriate evaluation of efficacy and effectiveness of BI is undermined by lack of generalisability and methodological limitations. No systematic and scientific efforts to explore the implementation and evaluation of BI in primary and community platforms of care have been published in India. Innovative strategies need to be deployed to overcome supply side barriers related to specialist manpower shortages in LMICs. There is a growing evidence on the effectiveness of non-specialist health workers, including lay counsellors, in delivering frontline psychological interventions for a range of disorders including alcohol use disorders in LMICs. This paper is intended to stimulate discussion among researchers, practitioners and policy-makers in LMICs because increasing access to evidence based care for alcohol use disorders in LMICs would need a concerted effort from all these stakeholders.

A systematic review of factors prolonging or reducing the duration of untreated psychosis for people with psychosis in low‐ and middle‐income countries

“…The first example is taken from Davis et al (2016) who demonstrated an association between a longer DUP and the use of amphetamines or Mandrax. Substance use disorders are prevalent public health problems in LMICs (Sarkar et al, 2021) and are projected to increase in coming years (Nadkarni et al, 2022). Given that substance use and psychosis are common co‐occurring disorders (Davis et al, 2016), brief psychosocial interventions to target substance use in LMICs (WHO, 2016) may be useful potential strategies for DUP reduction.…”

Using ADAPT‐ITT framework to tailor evidence‐based interventions for addressing methamphetamine use among methadone patients in Vietnam

“…SMS employs text messages to provide people who use drugs with useful information regarding harm reduction, treatment adherence and/or social support as well as selfmonitoring opportunities [15]. These EBIs have been evaluated largely in high-income countries in North America or North Europe [9,10] but have limited empirical evidence of their impact in low-and-middle-income countries where the available qualified workforce for substance use treatment is inadequate to the needs of the population [19,20]. In both resource-rich and resourceconstrained settings, however, there is a need to identify how best to combine these EBIs to ensure optimal and cost-effective treatment outcomes.…”

“A Man Never Cries”: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Gender Differences in Depression and Alcohol Use in Moshi, Tanzania

“…Mental health and AUD are poorly studied in many low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), with few resources and trained personnel available to treat disorders that arise within the general population (17)(18)(19). This healthcare gap is especially concerning given that alcohol use and AUD are rising in LMICs (12,(20)(21)(22). For example, there are only 55 psychologists and psychiatrists in Tanzania, a nation of more than 63 million people (23).…”