Brief interventions for alcohol use disorders have been the focus of considerable research. In this meta-analytic review, we considered studies comparing brief interventions with either control or extended treatment conditions. We calculated the effect sizes for multiple drinking-related outcomes at multiple follow-up points, and took into account the critical distinction between treatment-seeking and non-treatment-seeking samples. Most investigations fell into one of two types: those comparing brief interventions with control conditions in non-treatment-seeking samples (n = 34) and those comparing brief interventions with extended treatment in treatment-seeking samples (n = 20). For studies of the first type, small to medium aggregate effect sizes in favor of brief interventions emerged across different follow-up points. At follow-up after > 3-6 months, the effect for brief interventions compared to control conditions was significantly larger when individuals with more severe alcohol problems were excluded. For studies of the second type, the effect sizes were largely not significantly different from zero. This review summarizes additional positive evidence for brief interventions compared to control conditions typically delivered by health-care professionals to non-treatment-seeking samples. The results concur with previous reviews that found little difference between brief and extended treatment conditions. Because the evidence regarding brief interventions comes from different types of investigation with different samples, generalizations should be restricted to the populations, treatment characteristics and contexts represented in those studies.

Brief interventions for alcohol problems: a meta‐analytic review of controlled investigations in treatment‐seeking and non‐treatment‐seeking populations

The dopaminergic system, and in particular the dopamine D2 receptor, has been implicated in reward mechanisms. The net effect of neurotransmitter interaction at the mesolimbic brain region induces “reward” when dopamine (DA) is released from the neuron at the nucleus accumbens and interacts with a dopamine D2 receptor. “The reward cascade” involves the release of serotonin, which in turn at the hypothalmus stimulates enkephalin, which in turn inhibits GABA at the substania nigra, which in turn fine tunes the amount of DA released at the nucleus accumbens or “reward site.” It is well known that under normal conditions in the reward site DA works to maintain our normal drives. In fact, DA has become to be known as the “pleasure molecule” and/or the “antistress molecule.” When DA is released into the synapse, it stimulates a number a DA receptors (D1-D5) which results in increased feelings of well-being and stress reduction. A consensus of the literature suggests that when there is a dysfunction in ...

Reward deficiency syndrome: a biogenetic model for the diagnosis and treatment of impulsive, addictive, and compulsive behaviors.

To investigate the impact of counselor style, a 2-session motivational checkup was offered to 42 problem drinkers (18 women and 24 men) who were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (a) immediate checkup with directive-confrontational counseling, (b) immediate checkup with client-centered counseling, or (c) delayed checkup (waiting-list control). Overall, the intervention resulted in a 57% reduction in drinking within 6 weeks, which was maintained at 1 year. Clients receiving immediate checkup showed significant reduction in drinking relative to controls. The 2 counseling styles were discriminable on therapist behaviors coded from audiotapes. The directive-confrontational style yielded significantly more resistance from clients, which in turn predicted poorer outcomes at 1 year. Therapist styles did not differ in overall impact on drinking, but a single therapist behavior was predictive (r = .65) of 1-year outcome such that the more the therapist confronted, the more the client drank.

Enhancing motivation for change in problem drinking: A controlled comparison of two therapist styles.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in heavy drinkers by analyzing the outcome data and methodologic quality. DESIGN: (1) Qualitative analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) using criteria from Chalmers' scoring system; (2) calculating and combining odds ratios (ORs) of RCTs using the One-Step (Peto) and the Mantel-Haenszel methods. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA ANALYSIS: A MEDLINE and PsycLIT search identified RCTs testing brief interventions in heavy alcohol drinkers. Brief interventions were less than 1 hour and incorporated simple motivational counseling techniques much like outpatient smoking cessation programs. By a single-reviewer, nonblinded format, eligible studies were selected for adult subjects, sample sizes greater than 30, a randomized control design, and incorporation of brief alcohol interventions. Methodologic quality was assessed using an established scoring system developed by Chalmers and colleagues. Outcome data were combined by the One-Step (Peto) method; confidence limits and test for heterogeneity were calculated. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs met all inclusion criteria, with an average quality score of 0.49 +/- 0.17. This was comparable to published average scores in other areas of research (0.42 +/- 0.16). Outcome data from RCTs were pooled, and a combined OR was close to 2 (1.91; 95% confidence interval 1.61-2.27) in favor of brief alcohol interventions over no intervention. This was consistent across gender, intensity of intervention, type of clinical setting, and higher-quality clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Heavy drinkers who received a brief intervention were twice as likely to moderate their drinking 6 to 12 months after an intervention when compared with heavy drinkers who received no intervention. Brief intervention is a low-cost, effective preventive measure for heavy drinkers in outpatient settings.

/pdf/meta-analysis-of-randomized-control-trials-addressing-brief-2v7o2g2spc.pdf

Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials Addressing Brief Interventions in Heavy Alcohol Drinkers

http://www.doctordeluca.com/Library/AbstinenceHR/HRforAlcProbs02.pdf

Harm reduction approaches to alcohol use: health promotion, prevention, and treatment.

Four samples of problem drinkers treated by behavioral self-control training were evaluated at 3.5, 5, 7 and 8 years following treatment, respectively. Of 140 cases, 99 (71%) were accounted for: 23 abstinent, 14 with controlled and asymptomatic drinking, 22 improved but still impaired, 35 unremitted and 5 deceased. Abstinent versus controlled-drinking outcomes were most strongly differentiated by pretreatment severity of alcohol problems and dependence and by the patients' pretreatment self-assessment and goals. Percentages of abstainers and of relapsed cases increased at long-term follow-ups. A reasonably constant percentage of known outcomes (14%) were clearly controlled and asymptomatic drinkers in each of the follow-up samples. Most of the long-term controlled drinkers had established this pattern within the first year following treatment. However, periods of controlled drinking during the first year did not reliably predict maintenance of this pattern. Successful asymptomatic drinkers were discriminable from other outcomes based on pretreatment characteristics.

M. Tinkcom

Papers

Long-term follow-up of behavioral self-control training