| 1. |
- Bendtsen, Preben, et al.
(författare)
-
Professional's Attitudes Do Not Influence Screening and Brief Interventions Rates for Hazardous and Harmful Drinkers: Results from ODHIN Study
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Alcohol and Alcoholism. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0735-0414 .- 1464-3502. ; 50:4, s. 430-437
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To determine the relation between existing levels of alcohol screening and brief intervention rates in five European jurisdictions and role security and therapeutic commitment by the participating primary healthcare professionals. Health care professionals consisting of, 409 GPs, 282 nurses and 55 other staff including psychologists, social workers and nurse aids from 120 primary health care centres participated in a cross-sectional 4-week survey. The participants registered all screening and brief intervention activities as part of their normal routine. The participants also completed the Shortened Alcohol and Alcohol Problems Perception Questionnaire (SAAPPQ), which measure role security and therapeutic commitment. The only significant but small relationship was found between role security and screening rate in a multilevel logistic regression analysis adjusted for occupation of the provider, number of eligible patients and the random effects of jurisdictions and primary health care units (PHCU). No significant relationship was found between role security and brief intervention rate nor between therapeutic commitment and screening rate/brief intervention rate. The proportion of patients screened varied across jurisdictions between 2 and 10%. The findings show that the studied factors (role security and therapeutic commitment) are not of great importance for alcohol screening and BI rates. Given the fact that screening and brief intervention implementation rate has not changed much in the last decade in spite of increased policy emphasis, training initiatives and more research being published, this raises a question about what else is needed to enhance implementation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Rehm, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Defining Substance Use Disorders : Do We Really Need More Than Heavy Use?
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Alcohol and Alcoholism. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0735-0414 .- 1464-3502. ; 48:6, s. 633-640
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: The aim of the study was to explore whether the concept of heavy substance use over time can be used as definition of substance use disorder. Methods: Narrative review. Results: Heavy use over time clearly underlies the neurobiological changes associated with current thinking of substance use disorders. In addition, there is evidence that heavy use over time can explain the majority of social problems and of burden of disease (morbidity and mortality). A definition of substance use disorders via heavy use over time would avoid some of the problems of current conceptualizations, for instance the cultural specificity of concepts such as loss of control. Finally, stressing the continuum of use may avoid the high level of stigmatization currently associated with substance use disorders. Conclusion: ‘Heavy substance use over time’ seems to be a definition of substance use disorders in line with results of basic research and epidemiology. Additionally, it reduces stigmatization. This approach should thus be further explored.
|
|
| 3. |
- Rehm, J., et al.
(författare)
-
The tangible common denominator of substance use disorders : a reply to Commentaries to Rehm et al. (2013a)
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Alcohol and Alcoholism. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0735-0414 .- 1464-3502. ; 49:1, s. 118-122
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In response to our suggestion to define substance use disorders via ‘heavy use over time’, theoretical and conceptual issues, measurement problems and implications for stigma and clinical practice were raised. With respect to theoretical and conceptual issues, no other criterion has been shown, which would improve the definition. Moreover, heavy use over time is shown to be highly correlated with number of criteria in current DSM-5. Measurement of heavy use over time is simple and while there will be some underestimation or misrepresentation of actual levels in clinical practice, this is not different from the status quo and measurement of current criteria. As regards to stigma, research has shown that a truly dimensional concept can help reduce stigma. In conclusion, ‘heavy use over time’ as a tangible common denominator should be seriously considered as definition for substance use disorder.
|
|
