Cited by 33Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsHealth Policy Implementation Science

Nurse-provided screening and brief intervention for risky alcohol consumption by sexual health clinic patients

Open access
Lane, J, Proude, E M, Conigrave, K M, de Boer, J P, Haber, P S·2008·Sexually Transmitted Infections

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Brief intervention for excessive alcohol consumption is effective yet not implemented widely. Alcohol misuse is implicated in unsafe sex and sexually transmitted infections and is common in clients of sexual health services. Our aims were to assess feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of screening and brief intervention for risky alcohol consumption by a nurse in a sexual health clinic. METHODS: Patients completed the AUDIT questionnaire on handheld computers. Those scoring >or=8 on AUDIT were asked to participate in the study and the 3 months' follow-up and were randomised to intervention or control groups. The Drink-less package (based on WHO validated methods) was used to implement the brief intervention by a trained registered nurse. RESULTS: Of 519 (87%) who completed screening, 204 (39%) scored >or=8 on AUDIT (eligible), 184 agreed to follow-up and 133 completed it. At follow-up, both groups showed significant reductions in AUDIT scores. Mean scores decreased from 13.7 to 11.5 (control group) and 14.0 to 10.7 (intervention group); most (94%) recalled the intervention and 62% reported reducing drinking compared with 47% of controls (p<0.001). The nurse screening and intervention process was reported acceptable by 74% of patients at follow-up and a majority (71%) of staff. CONCLUSIONS: Screening and brief intervention in a sexual health clinic for risky alcohol consumption is feasible, acceptable and effective in producing significant reductions in drinking as measured by AUDIT. Both intervention and control groups decreased consumption, suggesting that screening alone is sufficient to influence behaviour. Further study of brief intervention in this setting is appropriate.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/sti.2008.032482

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lane 2008 had high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data because loss to follow-up was greater than 30%.

    “Loss to follow-up > 30%.”

    From Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations (2018) · cites this paper as Lane 2008

    The Results report 184 study participants, and the Follow-up section reports 133 followed up and 51 lost—an overall loss of 27.7%, not greater than 30%. Loss in the control group alone was 30 of 97 (30.9%), but the unqualified statement does not specify that group. The paper does not itself assign a risk-of-bias rating. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • One included study took place in a public sexual health clinic.

    “one in a public sexual health clinic (Lane 2008)”
  • The Lane 2008 and McDevitt-Murphy 2014 studies were included because their interventions were available without referral to large groups of people.

    “The studies by Lane 2008 and McDevitt-Murphy 2014 were included because although they did not take place in general practice clinics, the interventions were available without referral to large groups of people.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [9]9. Schofield C, Wilson E, Patel A, et al. Blood alcohol concentrations in patients attending special clinics in Glasgow. British Venereal Disease 1975;51:34-344.
  2. [14]14. Proude E, Saunders J, Conigrave K, et al. The Drink-less Program 2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lane, J., Proude, E. M., Conigrave, K. M., de Boer, J. P., & Haber, P. S.
Affiliations
  • Sydney South West Area Health Service (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Proude, E M
Venue
Sexually Transmitted Infections
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2008-12-01
Volume
84
Issue
7
Pages
524-527
ISSN
  • 0007-134X (ISSN-L)
  • 1368-4973
OpenAlex
W2149305520
Cited by
33
References
16
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sexually Transmitted Infections (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
NSW Ministry of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
screening and brief intervention, risky alcohol use, nurse-led intervention, AUDIT questionnaire, alcohol abuse, unprotected sex, feasibility and acceptability, alcohol consumption reduction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Ambulatory Care, Attitude of Health Personnel, Female, Hospitals, Special, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Case-Control Studies, Alcohol-Related Disorders, Unsafe Sex, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review