Does Socio-Economic Status Influence the Acceptability Of, Attendance For, and Outcome Of, Screening and Brief Interventions for Alcohol Misuse: A Review

Abstract

Brief interventions should remain available to all non-dependent hazardous and harmful drinkers in primary care. However, fidelity to research design is suggested to allow for any participation effects to occur. Benefits of such an approach exist for both clinicians and patients. The characteristics of those who participate in BI trials, compared to those who do not, should be studied in detail. Socio-economic variables should be included as potentially important characteristics. The impact of BI on drinking style as well as consumption needs further attention.

Reach and effectiveness of a computer-based alcohol intervention in a Swedish emergency room

“…Our findings are in line with previous brief alcohol intervention studies (e.g. Wallace et al, 1988;Richmond et al, 1995;Littlejohn, 2006;Beich et al, 2007), which have found that patients who do not want to be followed up after an intervention tend to drink more than those who are followed up.…”

A laboratory-based evaluation of exercise plus contingency management for reducing cigarette smoking

“…The present research also replicated Dallery and Raiff's finding that less impulsive participants exhibited longer latencies to smoke during CM. The absence of a relationship between participants' income and responsiveness to CM is also consistent with previous research in which CM was highly effective across various SES categories (Littlejohn, 2006;Rash et al, 2009). The results also expand previous research by deriving a novel, combined manipulation from a valid theoretical framework for approaching the behavior of cigarette smoking.…”

A pilot feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of screening and brief alcohol intervention to prevent hazardous drinking in young people aged 14–15 years in a high school setting (SIPS JR-HIGH)

“…58 Most of the evidence for ASBI demonstrates effectiveness for non-treatment-seeking adults in primary health care. 58,[61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68] Furthermore, meta-analyses have consistently reported that students aged ≥ 18 years who received ASBI subsequently reduced their drinking behaviour compared with control group participants who typically received assessment only. 69,70 The key elements of the ASBI were personalised feedback on alcohol consumption, typically with a normative component 70 and/or MI approaches.…”