Bradley Katharine A, Rubinsky Anna D, Lapham Gwen T, Berger Douglas, Bryson Christopher, Achtmeyer Carol, Hawkins Eric J, Chavez Laura J, Williams Emily C, Kivlahan Daniel R
Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, Seattle, WA, USA.
Center of Excellence in Substance Abuse Treatment and Education (CESATE), Veterans Affairs (VA) Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA.
Addiction. 2016 Nov;111(11):1975-1984. doi: 10.1111/add.13505. Epub 2016 Aug 2.
To evaluate the association between Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) alcohol screening scores, collected as part of routine clinical care, and three outcomes in the following year (Aim 1), and the association between changes in AUDIT-C risk group at 1-year follow-up and the same outcomes in the subsequent year (Aim 2).
Cohort study.
Twenty-four US Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare systems (2004-07), before systematic implementation of brief intervention.
A total of 486 115 out-patients with AUDIT-Cs documented in their electronic health records (EHRs) on two occasions ≥ 12 months apart ('baseline' and 'follow-up').
Independent measures were baseline AUDIT-C scores and change in standard AUDIT-C risk groups (no use, low-risk use and mild, moderate, severe misuse) from baseline to follow-up. Outcome measures were (1) high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), (2) alcohol-related gastrointestinal hospitalizations ('GI hospitalizations') and (3) physical trauma, each in the years after baseline and follow-up.
Baseline AUDIT-C scores had a positive association with outcomes in the following year. Across AUDIT-C scores 0-12, mean HDL ranged from 41.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 41.3-41.5] to 53.5 (95% CI = 51.4-55.6) mg/l, and probabilities of GI hospitalizations from 0.49% (95% CI = 0.48-0.51%) to 1.8% (95% CI = 1.3-2.3%) and trauma from 3.0% (95% CI = 2.95-3.06%) to 6.0% (95% CI = 5.2-6.8%). At follow-up, patients who increased to moderate or severe alcohol misuse had consistently higher mean HDL and probabilities of subsequent GI hospitalizations or trauma compared with those who did not (P-values all < 0.05). For example, among those with baseline low-risk use, in those with persistent low-risk use versus severe misuse at follow-up, the probabilities of subsequent trauma were 2.65% (95% CI = 2.54-2.75%) versus 5.15% (95% CI = 3.86-6.45%), respectively. However, for patients who decreased to lower AUDIT-C risk groups at follow-up, findings were inconsistent across outcomes, with only mean HDL decreasing in most groups that decreased use (P-values all < 0.05).
When AUDIT-C screening is conducted in clinical settings, baseline AUDIT-C scores and score increases to moderate-severe alcohol misuse at follow-up screening appear to have predictive validity for HDL cholesterol, alcohol-related gastrointestinal hospitalizations and physical trauma. Decreasing AUDIT-C scores collected in clinical settings appear to have predictive validity for only HDL.
评估作为常规临床护理一部分收集的酒精使用障碍识别测试-消耗量(AUDIT-C)酒精筛查分数与次年的三个结局之间的关联(目标1),以及1年随访时AUDIT-C风险组的变化与随后一年相同结局之间的关联(目标2)。
队列研究。
在美国24个退伍军人事务(VA)医疗系统(2004 - 2007年),在系统实施简短干预之前。
共有486115名门诊患者,其电子健康记录(EHR)中有两次间隔≥12个月记录的AUDIT-C(“基线”和“随访”)。
独立测量指标为基线AUDIT-C分数以及从基线到随访时标准AUDIT-C风险组(无使用、低风险使用以及轻度、中度、重度滥用)的变化。结局测量指标为(1)高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL)、(2)酒精相关的胃肠道住院(“胃肠道住院”)和(3)身体创伤,均在基线和随访后的年份进行测量。
基线AUDIT-C分数与次年的结局呈正相关。在AUDIT-C分数0 - 12范围内,平均HDL从41.4[95%置信区间(CI)= 41.3 - 41.5]至53.5(95% CI = 51.4 - 55.6)mg/l,胃肠道住院概率从0.49%(95% CI = 0.48 - 0.51%)至1.8%(95% CI = 1.3 - 2.3%),创伤概率从3.0%(95% CI = 2.95 - 3.06%)至6.0%(95% CI = 5.2 - 6.8%)。在随访时,与未增加的患者相比,增加到中度或重度酒精滥用的患者平均HDL以及随后胃肠道住院或创伤的概率一直更高(P值均<0.05)。例如,在基线低风险使用的患者中,随访时持续低风险使用与重度滥用的患者相比,随后创伤的概率分别为2.65%(95% CI = 2.54 - 2.75%)和5.15%(95% CI = 3.86 - 6.45%)。然而,对于随访时降至较低AUDIT-C风险组的患者而言,不同结局的研究结果不一致,在大多数减少使用的组中只有平均HDL降低(P值均<0.05)。
在临床环境中进行AUDIT-C筛查时,基线AUDIT-C分数以及随访筛查时分数增加到中度 - 重度酒精滥用似乎对HDL胆固醇、酒精相关的胃肠道住院和身体创伤具有预测效度。在临床环境中收集的降低的AUDIT-C分数似乎仅对HDL具有预测效度。