Randomized Controlled Trial of a Brief Versus Extended Internet Intervention for Problem Drinkers

John A Cunningham, Gillian W Shorter, Michelle Murphy, Vladyslav Kushnir, Jürgen Rehm, Christian S Hendershot, John A Cunningham, Gillian W Shorter, Michelle Murphy, Vladyslav Kushnir, Jürgen Rehm, Christian S Hendershot

Abstract

Purpose: Brief Internet interventions have been shown to reduce alcohol consumption. This trial intended to compare the effects of one such brief intervention to an extended Internet intervention for problem drinkers.

Method: Using online advertising, 490 participants, 18 years or older, were recruited and randomized to receive a brief ( CheckYourDrinking.net ) versus an extended ( AlcoholHelpCentre.net ) Internet intervention and were followed up at 6, 12, and 24 months. The per protocol primary analysis assessed difference between condition at the 12-month follow-up.

Results: The follow-up rate at 12 months was 83.3 %. ANCOVAs of the primary (Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT)-C) and secondary outcome variables (drinks in a typical week, highest number of drinks on one occasion-baseline drinking as covariate) revealed no significant (p > 0.05) differences between the interventions. Similarly, combined analyses of the 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up revealed no significant differences between interventions at all time points.

Conclusion: The present study does not provide support for the added benefit of an extended Internet intervention for problem drinkers over a brief Internet intervention.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01874509.

Keywords: Alcohol; Internet intervention; Problem drinking; RCT; Randomized controlled trial.

Conflict of interest statement

Funding

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, grant no. 285651.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Trial CONSORT flowchart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Graphs of means for the three alcohol use variables (imputed data). a Mean AUDIT-C score across all time points. b Geometric mean of the standard number of drinks consumed in a week across all time points. c Geometric mean of the largest number of drinks consumed on occasion across all time points

References

    1. Dedert EA, McDuffie JR, Stein R, et al. Electronic interventions for alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorders a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(3):205. doi: 10.7326/M15-0285.
    1. Donoghue K, Patton R, Phillips T, Deluca P, Drummond C. The effectiveness of electronic screening and brief intervention for reducing levels of alcohol consumption: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of medical Internet research. 2014;16(6):e142. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3193.
    1. Riper H, Blankers M, Hadiwijaya H, et al. Effectiveness of guided and unguided low-intensity internet interventions for adult alcohol misuse: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e99912. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099912.
    1. Cunningham JA. Comparison of two internet-based interventions for problem drinkers: randomized controlled trial. Journal of medical Internet research. 2012;14(4):e107. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2090.
    1. Cunningham JA, Hendershot CS, Rehm J. Randomized controlled trial of a minimal versus extended internet-based intervention for problem drinkers: study protocol. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1347-8.
    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;88:791–804. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x.
    1. Cunningham JA, Wild TC, Cordingley J, van Mierlo T, Humphreys K. A randomized controlled trial of an internet-based intervention for alcohol abusers. Addiction. 2009;104(12):2023–2032. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02726.x.
    1. Doumas DM, Hannah E. Preventing high-risk drinking in youth in the workplace: a web-based normative feedback program. J Subst Abus Treat. 2008;34(3):263–271. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2007.04.006.
    1. Doumas DM, Haustveit T. Reducing heavy drinking in intercollegiate athletes: evaluation of a web-based personalized feedback program. The Sport Psychologist. 2008;22:213–229. doi: 10.1123/tsp.22.2.212.
    1. Doumas DM, McKinley LL, Book P. Evaluation of two web-based alcohol interventions for mandated college students. J Subst Abus Treat. 2009;36(1):65–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2008.05.009.
    1. Cunningham JA, Murphy M, Hendershot CS. Treatment dismantling pilot study to identify the active ingredients in personalized feedback interventions for hazardous alcohol use: randomized controlled trial. Addiction Science and Clinical Practice. 2014;e9:22.
    1. Bush K, Kivlahan DR, McDonell MB, 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. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(16):1789–1795. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.16.1789.
    1. Dawson DA, Grant BF, Stinson FS, Zhou Y. Effectiveness of the derived alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT-C) in screening for alcohol use disorders and risk drinking in the US general population. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005;29(5):844–854. doi: 10.1097/01.ALC.0000164374.32229.A2.
    1. Romelsjö A, Leifman H, Nyström S. A comparative study of two methods for the measurement of alcohol consumption in the general population. Int J Epidemiol. 1995;24:929–936. doi: 10.1093/ije/24.5.929.
    1. Graham JW. Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:549–576. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530.
    1. Dziura JD, Post LA, Zhao Q, Fu Z, Peduzzi P. Strategies for dealing with missing data in clinical trials: from design to analysis. The Yale journal of biology and medicine. 2013;86(3):343–358.
    1. Pituch KA, Stevens JP. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences: analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS. New York: Routledge; 2016.
    1. Sinadinovic K, Wennberg P, Johansson M, Berman AH. Targeting individuals with problematic alcohol use via web-based cognitive-behavioral self-help modules, personalized screening feedback or assessment only: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Addict Res. 2014;20(6):305–318. doi: 10.1159/000362406.
    1. Blankers M, Koeter MW, Schippers GM. Missing data approaches in eHealth research: simulation study and a tutorial for nonmathematically inclined researchers. Journal of medical Internet research. 2010;12(5):e54. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1448.
    1. Reinwand DA, Schulz DN, Crutzen R, Kremers SPJ, de Vries H. Who follows eHealth interventions as recommended? A study of Participants’ personal characteristics from the experimental arm of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of medical Internet research. 2015;17(5):e115. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3932.
    1. Wallace P, Murray E, McCambridge J, et al. On-line randomized controlled trial of an internet based psychologically enhanced intervention for people with hazardous alcohol consumption. PLoS One. 2011;6(3):e14740. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014740.
    1. Cunningham JA, Sdao-Jarvie K, Koski-Jannes A, Breslin FC. Using self-help materials to motivate change at assessment for alcohol treatment. J Subst Abus Treat. 2001;20(4):301–304. doi: 10.1016/S0740-5472(01)00175-1.
    1. Pulford J, Adams P, Sheridan J. Unilateral treatment exit: a failure of retention or a failure of treatment fit? Subst Use Misuse. 2006;41(14):1901–1920. doi: 10.1080/10826080601025847.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi