Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18581618›Full record

ArticleCroatian medical journal2008

Evaluation of alcohol screening and brief intervention in routine practice of primary care nurses in Vhembe district, South Africa.

Karl Peltzer, Gladys Matseke, Matevha Azwihangwisi

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Croatian medical journal, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04998045 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Peer-delivered Substance Use Screening and Brief Intervention for Youth Attending Rafiki Clinic in Eldoret, Kenya

TypeinterventionalSponsorMoi UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled106ConditionsSubstance Use, Substance Use DisordersArmsScreening and brief intervention for substance use
NCT05545904 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Feasibility & Acceptability of a Peer-mentor Delivered Substance Use Screening and Brief Intervention for Adolescents in Kenya

TypeinterventionalSponsorMoi UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled60ConditionsSubstance UseArmsSubstance use brief intervention (BI), substance use education intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Karl PeltzerHuman Sciences Research Council, Private Bag X41, Pretoria 0001, South Africa. KPeltzer@hsrc.ac.za
Gladys Matseke
Matevha Azwihangwisi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the implementation of the Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) strategy as part of a routine practice of nurses in 18 primary health care services in Vhembe district, South Africa.

methodWe performed a cross-sectional study to assess the success of implementation of the SBI in 18 primary health care services. We examined all anonymously completed questionnaires (n=2670) collected from all practices after a 6-month implementation period. Clinic managers were interviewed on SBI implementation after 4 months of implementation. The success of implementation was assessed on the basis of perceived benefits, beliefs, values, past history, current needs, competing priorities, complexity of innovation, trialability and observability, and feedback on SBI performance.

resultsIn the 6-month period, nurses screened 2670 patients and found that 648 (23.4%) patients (39.1% men and 13.8% women) were hazardous or harmful drinkers. Nine clinics had good and 9 poor SBI implementation. Factors discriminating the clinics with good or poor SBI implementation included the percentage of nurses trained in SBI, support visits, clinical workload, competing priorities, team work, innovation adoption curve, perceived complexity of innovation, compatibility beliefs, trialability, and observability of SBI.

conclusionTo improve SBI implementation as a routine practice, more attention should be paid to training modalities, clinic organization, and changes in the attitudes of nurses.

Indexed as

NursesPrimary Health CareAdolescentAdultAlcoholismAttitude of Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID18581618
PMCPMC2443624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.