• Craig Field, Scott Walters, C Nathan Marti, Jina Jun, Michael Foreman, and Carlos Brown.
• *University of Texas at Austin, Health Behavior Research and Training Institute, Austin, TX †University of North Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health-Behavioral and Community Health, Fort Worth, TX ‡Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX §Trauma Department, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX ¶Trauma Department, University Medical Center Brackenridge, Austin, TX.
• Ann. Surg. 2014 May 1; 259 (5): 873-80.

ObjectiveDetermine the efficacy of 3 brief intervention strategies that address heavy drinking among injured patients.BackgroundThe content or structure of brief interventions most effective at reducing alcohol misuse after traumatic injury is not known.MethodsInjured patients from 3 trauma centers were screened for heavy drinking and randomly assigned to brief advice (n = 200), brief motivational intervention (BMI) (n = 203), or BMI plus a telephone booster using personalized feedback or BMI + B (n = 193). Among those randomly assigned, 57% met criteria for moderate to severe alcohol problems. The primary drinking outcomes were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months.ResultsCompared with brief advice and BMI, BMI + B showed significant reductions in the number of standard drinks consumed per week at 3 (Δ adjusted means: -1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.99, approximately -1.49, P = 0.01) and 6 months (Δ adjusted means: -1.42, 95% CI: -1.14, approximately -1.76, P = 0.02), percent days of heavy drinking at 6 months (Δ adjusted means: -5.90, 95% CI: -11.40, approximately -0.40, P = 0.04), maximum number of standard drinks consumed in 1 day at 3 (Δ adjusted means: -1.38, 95% CI: -1.18, approximately -1.62, P = 0.003) and 12 months (Δ adjusted means: -1.71, 95% CI: -1.47, approximately -1.99, P = 0.02), and number of standard drinks consumed per drinking day at 3 (Δ adjusted means: -1.49, 95% CI: -1.35, approximately -1.65, P = 0.002) and 6 months (Δ adjusted means: -1.28, 95% CI: -1.17, approximately -1.40, P = 0.01).ConclusionsBrief interventions based on motivational interviewing with a telephone booster using personalized feedback were most effective at achieving reductions in alcohol intake across the 3 trauma centers.

24 keywords...

hide…