Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37756359›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Attitudes and current practice in alcohol screening, brief intervention, and referral for treatment among staff working in urgent and emergency settings: An open, cross-sectional international survey.

Holly Blake, Mehmet Yildirim, Vinishaa Premakumar, Lucy Morris, Philip Miller, Frank Coffey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Holly BlakeSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3080-2306
Mehmet YildirimSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Vinishaa PremakumarSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Lucy MorrisEmergency Department, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Philip MillerEast Midlands Academic Health Sciences Network, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Frank CoffeyEmergency Department, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2096-6895
University of Nottingham · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBEast Midlands Academic Health Science Network · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of the study was to ascertain the views and experiences of those working in urgent and emergency care (UEC) settings towards screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for alcohol, to inform future practice.

objectivesTo explore i) views towards health promotion, ii) views towards and practice of SBIRT, iii) facilitators and barriers to delivering SBIRT, iv) training needs to support future SBIRT practice, and v) comparisons in views and attitudes between demographic characteristics, geographical regions, setting and occupational groups.

methodsThis was an open cross-sectional international survey, using an online self-administered questionnaire with closed and open-ended responses. Participants were ≥18 years of age, from any occupational group, working in urgent and emergency care (UEC) settings in any country or region.

resultsThere were 362 respondents (aged 21-65 years, 87.8% shift workers) from 7 occupational groups including physicians (48.6%), nurses (22.4%) and advanced clinical practitioners (18.5%). Most believed that health promotion is part of their role, and that SBIRT for alcohol prevention is needed and appropriate in UEC settings. SBIRT was seen to be acceptable to patients. 66% currently provide brief alcohol advice, but fewer screen for alcohol problems or make alcohol-related referrals. The most common barriers were high workload and lack of funding for prevention, lack of knowledge and training on SBIRT, lack of access to high-quality resources, lack of timely referral pathways, and concerns about patient resistance to advice. Some views and attitudes varied according to demographic characteristics, occupation, setting or region.

conclusionsUEC workers are willing to engage in SBIRT for alcohol prevention but there are challenges to implementation in UEC environments and concerns about workload impacts on already-burdened staff, particularly in the context of global workforce shortages. UEC workers advocate for clear guidelines and policies, increased staff capacity and/or dedicated health promotion teams onsite, SBIRT education/training/resources, appropriate physical spaces for SBIRT conversations and improved alcohol referral pathways to better funded services. Implementation of SBIRT could contribute to improving population health and reducing service demand, but it requires significant and sustained commitment of time and resources for prevention across healthcare organisations.

Indexed as

AlcoholismEmergency Medical ServicesCrisis InterventionCross-Sectional StudiesEthanolHumansEthanol

Identifiers

PMID37756359
PMCPMC10529549
OpenAlexW4387092797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.