Computerized Relational Agent to Deliver Alcohol Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment in Primary Care: a Randomized Clinical Trial

Amy Rubin, Nicholas A Livingston, Julianne Brady, Elise Hocking, Timothy Bickmore, Molly Sawdy, Nancy Kressin, Richard Saitz, Steven Simon, Amy Rubin, Nicholas A Livingston, Julianne Brady, Elise Hocking, Timothy Bickmore, Molly Sawdy, Nancy Kressin, Richard Saitz, Steven Simon

Abstract

Background: Alcohol screening and brief intervention have demonstrated efficacy but limited effectiveness and implementation in real-world primary care settings.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a computerized Relational Agent programmed to provide alcohol screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment. We hypothesized that participants in the experimental condition would report greater reductions in their drinking and higher rates of brief intervention and referrals to specialty care compared to those in treatment as usual (TAU).

Design: This was a Hybrid I implementation design and stratified RCT. Participants were randomized to TAU or Relational Agent + TAU and assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up.

Participants: A total of 178 veteran participants were recruited by referral from primary care staff after a positive alcohol screen, or via letter sent do patients screening positive during recent visit.

Intervention(s): TAU involved yearly reminders to screen alcohol use and provide brief intervention and treatment referrals, as needed. The Relational Agent added an automated brief intervention, a 1-month follow-up Relational Agent visit, and referral to treatment if needed.

Main measures: We measured average drinks per day, drinking days per week, number of brief interventions, and number of referrals over 3 months.

Key results: Participants decreased their drinking in both study conditions, with no significant between-group differences on primary alcohol measures. However, Relational Agent + TAU participants evidenced greater improvements regarding negative alcohol-related consequences over 3 months, and were significantly more likely to receive a brief intervention and referral to specialty care.

Conclusions: The Relational Agent successfully provided brief intervention and referred many more patients to specialty care and was able to intervene with patients with less severe drinking without increasing primary care burden.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov , NCT02030288, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home.

Keywords: alcohol; intervention; primary care; technology; veterans.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Screenshot of Laura.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Model-implied trajectories of change from baseline to 3-month follow-up for primary, secondary, and exploratory outcome models.

References

    1. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Key substance use and mental health indicators in the United States: results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (HHS Publication No. PEP19-5068, NSDUH Series H-54). Rockville, MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Retrieved from https://www samhsa gov/data. 2020.
    1. Grant BF, Goldstein RB, Saha TD, et al. Epidemiology of DSM-5 alcohol use disorder: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions III. JAMA psychiatry. 2015;72(8):757–766. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0584.
    1. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Alcohol Facts and Statistics. Updated February 2020. Accessed August 15, 2020.
    1. Thompson A, Ashcroft DM, Owens L, van Staa TP, Pirmohamed M. Drug therapy for alcohol dependence in primary care in the UK: a Clinical Practice Research Datalink study. PloS one. 2017;12(3)
    1. Lan CW, Fiellin DA, Barry DT, et al. The epidemiology of substance use disorders in US veterans: a systematic review and analysis of assessment methods. The American Journal on Addictions. 2016;25(1):7–24. doi: 10.1111/ajad.12319.
    1. Golub A, Vazan P, Bennett AS, Liberty HJ. Unmet need for treatment of substance use disorders and serious psychological distress among veterans: a nationwide analysis using the NSDUH. Military medicine. 2013;178(1):107–114. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-12-00131.
    1. Hoge C, Messer S, Castro C. Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan mental health problems. New England Journal of Medicine. 2004;351(17):1798–1800. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200410213511722.
    1. Babor TF, McRee BG, Kassebaum PA, Grimaldi PL, Ahmed K, Bray J. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT): Toward a Public Health Approach to the Management of Substance Abuse. Substance Abuse. 2007;28(3):7–30. doi: 10.1300/J465v28n03_03.
    1. Agerwala SM, McCance-Katz EF. Integrating Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) into Clinical Practice Settings: a Brief Review. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs. 2012;44(4):307–317. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2012.720169.
    1. Kaner EF, Beyer F, Dickinson HO, et al. Effectiveness of Brief Alcohol Interventions in Primary Care Populations. Cochrane Database Systematic Review. 2007;2:CD004148. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004148.pub3.
    1. Teeters JB, Lancaster CL, Brown DG, Back SE. Substance Use Disorders in Military Veterans: Prevalence and Treatment Challenges. Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation. 2017;8:69–77. doi: 10.2147/SAR.S116720.
    1. Lapham GT, Achtmeyer CE, Williams EC, Hawkins EJ, Kivlahan DR, Bradley KA. Increased Documented Brief Alcohol Interventions with a Performance Measure and Electronic Decision Support. Medical Care. 2012;50(2):179–87. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e35743.
    1. Williams EC, Lapham G, Achtmeyer CE, Volpp B, Kivlahan DR, Bradley KA. Use of an electronic clinical reminder for brief alcohol counseling is associated with resolution of unhealthy alcohol use at follow-up screening. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2010;25(1):11–17. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1100-z.
    1. Bradley KA, Lapham GT, Hawkins EJ, et al. Quality Concerns with Routine Alcohol Screening in VA Clinical Settings. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2011;26(3):299–306. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1509-4.
    1. Bradley KA, Williams EC, Achtmeyer CE, et al. Measuring Performance of Brief Alcohol Counseling in Medical Settings: a Review of the Options and Lessons from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System. Substance Abuse. 2007;28(4):133–49. doi: 10.1300/J465v28n04_05.
    1. Williams EC, Rubinsky AD, Chavez LJ, et al. An early evaluation of implementation of brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use in the US Veterans Health Administration. Addiction. 2014;109(9):1472–1481. doi: 10.1111/add.12600.
    1. Osborn R, Moulds D, Schneider EC, Doty MM, Squires D, Sarnak DO. Primary care physicians in ten countries report challenges caring for patients with complex health needs. Health Affairs. 2015;34(12):2104–2112. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1018.
    1. Mertens JR, Chi FW, Weisner CM, et al. Physician versus non-physician delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment in adult primary care: the ADVISe cluster randomized controlled implementation trial. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice. 2015;10(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s13722-015-0047-0.
    1. Williams EC, Achtmeyer CE, Young JP, et al. Local Implementation of Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention at Five Veterans Health Administration Primary Care Clinics: Perspectives of Clinical and Administrative Staff. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2016;60:27–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2015.07.011.
    1. McNeely J, Kumar PC, Rieckmann T, et al. Barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of substance use screening in primary care clinics: a qualitative study of patients, providers, and staff. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice. 2018;13(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13722-018-0110-8.
    1. Probst C, Manthey J, Martinez A, Rehm J. Alcohol use disorder severity and reported reasons not to seek treatment: a cross-sectional study in European primary care practices. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy. 2015;10(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s13011-015-0028-z.
    1. Livingston NA, Mahoney CT, Ameral V, et al. Changes in alcohol use, PTSD hyperarousal symptoms, and intervention dropout following veterans’ use of VetChange. Addictive behaviors. 2020:106401.
    1. Livingston NA, Shingleton R, Heilman ME, Brief D. Self-help smartphone applications for alcohol use, PTSD, anxiety, and depression: addressing the new research-practice gap. Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science. 2019;4(2):139–151. doi: 10.1007/s41347-019-00099-6.
    1. Ashford RD, Bergman BG, Kelly JF, Curtis B. Systematic review: digital recovery support services used to support substance use disorder recovery. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 2020;2(1):18–32. doi: 10.1002/hbe2.148.
    1. Bickmore TW, Caruso L, Clough-Gorr K, Heeren T. ‘It’s Just Like You Talk to a Friend’ Relational Agents for Older Adults. Interact Comput. 12// 2005;17(6):711-735. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2005.09.002
    1. Bickmore TW, Silliman RA, Nelson K, et al. A randomized controlled trial of an automated exercise coach for older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2013;61(10):1676–1683. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12449.
    1. Auriacombe M, Moriceau S, Serre F, et al. Development and Validation of a Virtual Agent to Screen Tobacco and Alcohol Use Disorders. Drug and alcohol dependence. 2018;193:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.08.025.
    1. Bickmore T, Rubin A, Simon SR. Substance use screening using virtual agents: towards automated Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT). ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVA). 2020;
    1. Curran GM, Bauer M, Mittman B, Pyne JM, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Medical care. 2012;50(3):217. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812.
    1. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Drinking Levels Defined. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2020.
    1. Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, et al. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 1998.
    1. Sobell LC, Agrawal S, Sobell MB, et al. Comparison of a quick drinking screen with the timeline followback for individuals with alcohol problems. J Stud Alcohol. 2003;64(6):858–61. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2003.64.858.
    1. Roy M, Dum M, Sobell LC, et al. Comparison of the quick drinking screen and the alcohol timeline followback with outpatient alcohol abusers. Substance Use & Misuse. Dec 2008;43(14):2116-23. doi:90318344110.1080/10826080802347586
    1. Miller WR, Tonigan JS, Longabaugh R. The Drinker Inventory of Consequences (DrInC): an instrument for assessing adverse consequences of alcohol abuse. Vol. 4. 1995. Project MATCH Monograph Series.
    1. Saunders JB, Aasland OG, Babor TF, de la Fuente JR, Grant M. Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO collaborative project on early detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumption--II. Addiction. 1993;88(6):791–804. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x.
    1. Bush K, Kivlahan DR, MB MD, Fihn SD, Bradley KA. The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): an effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Archives of Internal Medicine. 1998;158(16):1789–95. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.16.1789.
    1. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change. 2nd ed. Guilford Publications; 2002:428.
    1. Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: Austria; 2013.
    1. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv preprint arXiv:14065823. 2014;
    1. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D. R Core Team (2019). nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-148. 2020.
    1. Witkiewitz K, Heather N, Falk DE, et al. World Health Organization risk drinking level reductions are associated with improved functioning and are sustained among patients with mild, moderate and severe alcohol dependence in clinical trials in the United States and United Kingdom. Addiction. 2020.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi