No abstract

No abstract

Introduction and aims Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs) around Australia have been asked to standardise screening for unhealthy drinking. Accordingly, screening with the 3-item AUDIT-C (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test—Consumption) tool has become a national key performance indicator. Here we provide an overview of suitability of AUDIT-C and other brief alcohol screening tools for use in ACCHSs.MethodsAll peer-reviewed literature providing original data on validity, acceptability or feasibility of alcohol screening tools among Indigenous Australians was reviewed. Narrative synthesis was used to identify themes and integrate results.ResultsThree screening tools—full AUDIT, AUDIT-3 (third question of AUDIT) and CAGE (Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty and Eye-opener) have been validated against other consumption measures, and found to correspond well. Short forms of AUDIT have also been found to compare well with full AUDIT, and were preferred by primary care staff. Help was often required with converting consumption into standard drinks. Researchers commented that AUDIT and its short forms prompted reflection on drinking. Another tool, the Indigenous Risk Impact Screen (IRIS), jointly screens for alcohol, drug and mental health risk, but is relatively long (13 items). IRIS has been validated against dependence scales. AUDIT, IRIS and CAGE have a greater focus on dependence than on hazardous or harmful consumption.Discussion and conclusionsDetection of unhealthy drinking before harms occur is a goal of screening, so AUDIT-C offers advantages over tools like IRIS or CAGE which focus on dependence. AUDIT-C’s brevity suits integration with general health screening. Further research is needed on facilitating implementation of systematic alcohol screening into Indigenous primary healthcare.

Introduction Sexual harassment has been identified as a major public health problem that is hidden in most institutions/organizations. Objective This study assessed sexual harassment and victimization of students in a higher institution in South Africa. Methods A quantitative, cross-sectional descriptive design was used in this study. The target population was registered students of the higher education institution and the sample size was 342. Questionnaire was used for data collection and data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 23.0 program. The basic principles of ethics were duly observed and the ethical clearance certificate was obtained prior to data collection. Results The findings revealed that 27 (17.3%) of the male and 47 (25.5%) of the female respondents (P = 0.047) had personally experienced unwanted touching. Two (1.3%) male and 5 (2.7%) female students admitted that they have been raped. Seventeen (10.8%) of the males and 19 (10.2%) of the females had been coerced to comply with a sexual relationship on campus. Conclusion This study shows that both male and female students on campus are experiencing different forms of sexual harassment.

No abstract