A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of primary care-based facilitated access to an alcohol reduction website (EFAR Spain)
Standard
A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of primary care-based facilitated access to an alcohol reduction website (EFAR Spain). / Caballeria, Elsa; López-Pelayo, Hugo ; Segura, Lidia; Wallace, Paul; Oliveras, Clara; Díaz, Estela; Manthey, Jakob; Baena, Begoña; Colom, Joan; Gual, Antoni; EFAR group.
in: INTERNET INTERV, Jahrgang 26, 100446, 12.2021, S. 100446.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of primary care-based facilitated access to an alcohol reduction website (EFAR Spain)
AU - Caballeria, Elsa
AU - López-Pelayo, Hugo
AU - Segura, Lidia
AU - Wallace, Paul
AU - Oliveras, Clara
AU - Díaz, Estela
AU - Manthey, Jakob
AU - Baena, Begoña
AU - Colom, Joan
AU - Gual, Antoni
AU - EFAR group
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Background: Brief interventions (BI) for risky drinkers in primary healthcare have been demonstrated to be cost-effective but they are still poorly implemented. Digital BI seems to be a complementary strategy to overcome some barriers to implementation but there is a scarcity of studies in clinical environments. We present the results of a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial which tests the non-inferiority of facilitated access to a digital intervention (experimental condition) for risky drinkers against a face-to-face BI (control condition) provided by primary healthcare professionals.Method: In a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, unselected primary healthcare patients (≥ 18 years old) were given a brief introduction and asked to log on to the study website to fill in the 3-item version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Positively screened patients (4+ for women and 5+ for men) received further online assessment (AUDIT, socio-demographic characteristics and EQ-5D-5L) and were automatically randomized to either face-to-face or digital BI (1:1). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients classified as risky drinkers by the digitally administered AUDIT at month 3. A multiple imputation approach for the missing data was performed.Results: Of the 4499 patients approached by 115 healthcare professionals, 1521 completed the AUDIT-C. Of the 368 positively screened patients, 320 agreed to participate and were randomized to either intervention. At month 3, there were more risky drinkers in the experimental group (59.8%) than in the control group (52%), which was similar to the distribution at baseline and less than the pre-specified margin of 10%. The difference was not significant when accounting for possible confounders.Conclusion: Digital BI was not inferior to face-to-face BI, in line with previous findings and the a priori hypothesis. However, the low power of the final sample, due to the low recruitment and loss to follow-up, limits the interpretation of the findings. New approaches in this field are required to ensure the effective implementation of digital interventions in actual practice.
AB - Background: Brief interventions (BI) for risky drinkers in primary healthcare have been demonstrated to be cost-effective but they are still poorly implemented. Digital BI seems to be a complementary strategy to overcome some barriers to implementation but there is a scarcity of studies in clinical environments. We present the results of a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial which tests the non-inferiority of facilitated access to a digital intervention (experimental condition) for risky drinkers against a face-to-face BI (control condition) provided by primary healthcare professionals.Method: In a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, unselected primary healthcare patients (≥ 18 years old) were given a brief introduction and asked to log on to the study website to fill in the 3-item version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Positively screened patients (4+ for women and 5+ for men) received further online assessment (AUDIT, socio-demographic characteristics and EQ-5D-5L) and were automatically randomized to either face-to-face or digital BI (1:1). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients classified as risky drinkers by the digitally administered AUDIT at month 3. A multiple imputation approach for the missing data was performed.Results: Of the 4499 patients approached by 115 healthcare professionals, 1521 completed the AUDIT-C. Of the 368 positively screened patients, 320 agreed to participate and were randomized to either intervention. At month 3, there were more risky drinkers in the experimental group (59.8%) than in the control group (52%), which was similar to the distribution at baseline and less than the pre-specified margin of 10%. The difference was not significant when accounting for possible confounders.Conclusion: Digital BI was not inferior to face-to-face BI, in line with previous findings and the a priori hypothesis. However, the low power of the final sample, due to the low recruitment and loss to follow-up, limits the interpretation of the findings. New approaches in this field are required to ensure the effective implementation of digital interventions in actual practice.
U2 - 10.1016/j.invent.2021.100446
DO - 10.1016/j.invent.2021.100446
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
VL - 26
SP - 100446
JO - INTERNET INTERV
JF - INTERNET INTERV
SN - 2214-7829
M1 - 100446
ER -