Results of a cluster randomised controlled trial to reduce risky use of alcohol, alcohol-related HIV risks and improve help-seeking behaviour among safety and security employees in the Western Cape, South Africa
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a programme aimed at reducing the risky use of alcohol and alcohol-related HIV risk and increase help-seeking behaviour among a sample of municipal employees in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. METHODS: A clustered randomised controlled trial was conducted in 2011-2012 among 325 employees. The eight hour intervention, Team Awareness (TA), addressing behavioural risk among employees was administered to 168 employees in the intervention arm and the 157 employees in the control arm who received a one-hour wellness talk. RESULTS: The results show that TA had the greatest impact on risky drinking practices and hangover effects. There was a significant group × time interaction (F (1, 117) = 25.16, p<0.0001) with participants in the intervention condition reducing number of days on which they engaged in binge drinking. There was also a significant time effect with participants in the intervention condition reducing the likelihood of going to work with a hangover (F (1,117) = 4.10, p=0.045). No reduction in HIV-related risk behaviours were found. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention study was able to demonstrate a modest but significant reduction in risky drinking practices and hangover effects. This provides encouraging evidence for the effectiveness of interventions that address risky use of alcohol among employed persons, further providing a launch pad for strengthening and replicating future RCT studies on workplace prevention, especially in developing country settings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Pan-African Control Trial Registry (201301000458308) .
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Of the health promotion and education RCTs, 2 were based in the workplace, 5 in the community, 6 in schools, and 7 in clinics, of which 1 focused on women sex workers.
“Of these, 2 were based in the workplace [26,38], 5 in the community [23,37,43,84], 6 in schools [33,40,65,85,86], and 7 in clinics [39,55–57], of which 1 was focused on women sex workers [95].”
From Patient-level interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-summary (2022) · cites this paper as [38]
About half (8 of 17) of the health promotion and education interventions were found to have positive results.
“About half (8 of 17) of the health promotion and education interventions were found to have positive results [25,26,38,39,54,56,57,65,66,84].”
From Patient-level interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-summary (2022) · cites this paper as [38]
The majority of health promotion and education programs addressed alcohol use in the context of HIV/AIDS prevention and risk reduction.
“The majority of programs addressed alcohol use in the context of HIV/AIDS prevention and risk reduction [38–40,43,56,57,95].”
From Patient-level interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-summary (2022) · cites this paper as [38]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 20
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [22]Steenkamp W Teoriegebaseerde programevaluering in die ontwikkeling en evaluering van ʼn alkoholmisbruikvoorkomingsprogram vir die werksplek. PhD thesis 2008 Cape Town University Of Stellenbosch, Social Work Department
- Authors
- Burnhams, N. H., London, L., Laubscher, R., Nel, E., & Parry, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Cape Town (ZA)
- South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
- Venue
- Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy
- Published
- 2015-05-08
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 18-18
- ISSN
- 1747-597X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4430876
- OpenAlex
- W2145694684
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 1.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Open University of Cape Town (University of Cape Town) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1021893)
- Styrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete (54100029)
- International Development Research Centre
- South African Medical Research Council
- African Population and Health Research Center (54100029)
- Medical Research Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Keywords
- risky alcohol use, binge drinking, hangover effects, help-seeking, HIV risk behavior, municipal employees, workplace wellness programmes, Western Cape
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Health Services, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Psychotherapy, Brief, Risk-Taking, South Africa, Health Behavior, HIV Infections, 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
