Assessing sexual risk behaviour with the Timeline Followback (TLFB) approach: continued development and psychometric evaluation with psychiatric outpatients

This paper describes a series of 4 studies, designed to provide evidence of the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Timeline Followback (TLFB) method when used to assess sexual risk behaviour with psychiatric outpatients. This population was selected because patients often have difficulty completing assessments of sexual risk behaviours due to deficits in attention, memory, and communication skills. All 4 studies demonstrated the feasibility of the HIV-risk TLFB. Study 1 also demonstrated that it can be completed in 20 min, and scored in less than 10 min. Qualitative data revealed that both patients and assessors found the features of the TLFB helpful. Study 2 provided evidence that the HIV-risk TLFB can be reliably scored by interviewers whereas Study 3 demonstrated that this measure can be completed reliably by patients and that TLFB of sexual behaviour were consistent over time. Study 4 provided initial evidence for the validity of the HIV-risk TLFB but also suggested that the TLFB may yield frequency estimates that are slightly less than those obtained with single-item measures. We conclude that the TLFB is feasible, reliable, and valid, even in a population known to have difficulty with self-report measures.     

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

BACKGROUND: The three consumption questions from the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) are increasingly used as a screener for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and risk drinking. METHODS: In a representative sample of US adults 18 years of age and older, AUDIT-C scores (derived from consumption questions embedded in a large national survey) were used to estimate sensitivity, specificity, and areas under receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROCs) for alcohol dependence, any AUD, and risk drinking. AUDs were defined according to DSM-IV criteria. For men, risk drinking was defined as consuming >14 drinks per week or >4 drinks in a single day at least once a month; for women, the weekly and daily limits were >7 drinks and >3 drinks, respectively. The derived AUDIT-C was evaluated among past-year drinkers (n = 26,946), within the total population (n = 43,093), in groups defined by age, sex, and race/ethnicity, and among pregnant women, persons attending an emergency room, and college students. RESULTS: For past-year drinkers, the AUROCs for the derived AUDIT-C were 0.887 for alcohol dependence, 0.860 for any AUD, and 0.966 for risk drinking. Scores were higher in the total population, 0.931, 0.917, and 0.981, respectively. The derived AUDIT-C performed slightly better in screening for dependence among women than men. Screening for risk drinking was better among men, probably because the third AUDIT-C question directly mirrors one of the definitions of risk drinking for men but not for women. Performance in pregnant women, past-year emergency room patients, and college students was on a par with performance in the general population. CONCLUSIONS: The derived AUDIT-C performs well in screening for AUDs and risk drinking. The use of variable cut points for men and women improves its sensitivity and specificity. Validation in a realistic screening situation, in which the AUDIT-C questions are asked as stand-alone and not embedded items, is a critical future step.     

Aftercare telephone contacts with problem drinkers can serve a clinical and research function

Research staff typically gather treatment outcome data, whereas clinicians perform aftercare contacts. To date no alcohol treatment outcome study has examined the utility of therapists collecting outcome data through aftercare contacts. Using the Alcohol Timeline Followback (TLFB) method modified for clinical aftercare contacts, 154 problem drinkers who were part of a cognitive-behavioral intervention completed the modified TLFB with their primary therapist during aftercare telephone contacts conducted 1 and 3 months after their last treatment session. Clients reported their daily alcohol use over the past 30 days using four consumption categories (i.e. 0 drinks, 1-4 drinks, 5-9 drinks and 10+ drinks). At a 6-month follow-up research interview, a trained research assistant gathered standard TLFB data from the clients that included the time period for aftercare contacts. Correlations between the two TLFB formats showed good alternate form reliability, especially for frequency of alcohol use. Discrepancies between reports were positively associated with heavier pre-treatment and post-treatment drinking, suggesting possible memory biases among heavier drinkers. Subject reports also closely paralleled collateral reports of the subjects' drinking. These results support the utility of a brief TLFB instrument for use by therapists in assessing clients' outcomes by telephone during aftercare contacts.     

Self-reported alcohol use versus phosphatidylethanol in behavioral trials: A study of people living with HIV in Tshwane,South Africa

Background

Accurately quantifying alcohol use among persons with HIV (PWH) is important for validly assessing the efficacy of alcohol reduction interventions.

Methods

We used data from a randomized controlled trial of an intervention to reduce alcohol use among PWH who were receiving antiretroviral therapy in Tshwane, South Africa. We calculated agreement between self-reported hazardous alcohol use measured by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT; score ≥8) and AUDIT-Consumption (AUDIT-C; score ≥3 for females and ≥4 for males), heavy episodic drinking (HED) in the past 30 days, and heavy drinking in the past 7 days with a gold standard biomarker--phosphatidylethanol (PEth) level (≥50 ng/mL)--among 309 participants. We used multiple logistic regression to assess whether underreporting of hazardous drinking (AUDIT-C vs. PEth) differed by sex, study arm, and assessment time point.

Results

Participants' mean age was 40.6 years, 43% were males, and 48% were in the intervention arm. At 6 months, 51% had PEth ≥50 ng/mL, 38% and 76% had scores indicative of hazardous drinking on the AUDIT and AUDIT-C, respectively, 11% reported past 30-day HED, and 13% reported past 7-day heavy drinking. At 6 months, there was low agreement between AUDIT-C scores and past 7-day heavy drinking relative to PEth ≥50 (sensitivities of 83% and 20% and negative predictive values of 62% and 51%, respectively). Underreporting of hazardous drinking at 6 months was associated with sex (OR = 3.504. 95% CI: 1.080 to 11.364), with odds of underreporting being greater for females.

Conclusions

Steps should be taken to decrease underreporting of alcohol use in clinical trials.     

AUDIT-C as a brief screen for alcohol misuse in primary care

BACKGROUND: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption (AUDIT-C) questions have been previously validated as a 3-item screen for alcohol misuse and implemented nationwide in Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatient clinics. However, the AUDIT-C's validity and optimal screening threshold(s) in other clinical populations are unknown. METHODS: This cross-sectional validation study compared screening questionnaires with standardized interviews in 392 male and 927 female adult outpatients at an academic family practice clinic from 1993 to 1994. The AUDIT-C, full AUDIT, self-reported risky drinking, AUDIT question #3, and an augmented CAGE questionnaire were compared with an interview primary reference standard of alcohol misuse, defined as a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4th ed. alcohol use disorder and/or drinking above recommended limits in the past year. RESULTS: Based on interviews with 92% of eligible patients, 128 (33%) men and 177 (19%) women met the criteria for alcohol misuse. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for the AUDIT-C were 0.94 (0.91, 0.96) and 0.90 (0.87, 0.93) in men and women, respectively (p=0.04). Based on AUROC curves, the AUDIT-C performed as well as the full AUDIT and significantly better than self-reported risky drinking, AUDIT question #3, or the augmented CAGE questionnaire (p-values <0.001). The AUDIT-C screening thresholds that simultaneously maximized sensitivity and specificity were > or =4 in men (sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.89) and > or =3 in women (sensitivity 0.73, specificity 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: The AUDIT-C was an effective screening test for alcohol misuse in this primary care sample. Optimal screening thresholds for alcohol misuse among men (> or =4) and women (> or =3) were the same as in previously published VA studies.     

Inebriation, Drinking Motivations and Sexual Risk Taking Among Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic Patients in St. Petersburg, Russia

We investigated whether inebriation was associated with having non-main partners and unprotected sex with non-main partners and whether drinking motivations were associated with sexual risk behaviors among patients attending an STD clinic in St Petersburg, Russia. A cross-sectional behavior survey was applied to 362 participants between 2008 and 2009. Multivariate logistic regression was used for analysis. At-risk drinking per Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) criteria (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.4–4.4) was independently associated with having non-main sexual partners. Inebriation (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.3–8.1) but not at-risk drinking or drinking prior to sex was associated with unprotected sex with non-main partners. Among drinkers, the consumption of alcohol to facilitate sexual encounters (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.6–4.5) was associated with having non-main sexual partners. HIV prevention programs in Russia must address inebriation in addition to conventional patterns of problem drinking such as those measured by AUDIT-C and consider individuals’ motivations to drink that lead to sexual risk taking.     

Retrospective Self-Report of Alcohol Consumption: Test-Retest Reliability by Telephone

The Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) is an interview technique for obtaining detailed retrospective self-reports of alcohol consumption with excellent reliability for various composite variables when both administrations are in person. Because the telephone offers practical advantages over face-to-face interviewing for follow-up assessments in longitudinal studies of problem drinkers, this study was undertaken to compare the test-retest reliability of a 12-week TLFB interview when the second administration was by telephone to that when the second interview was in person. In addition, because the reliability of the TLFB has been previously assessed using composite variables, we examined the reliability of the TLFB at the item level. Research participants were 30 adult medical patients who drank frequently, and 75 college students who were problem drinkers. Test-retest reliability as measured by intraclass correlation was generally high, 0.79 or greater for the number of days of drinking > 6 standard drinks, 0.90 or greater for the number of abstinent days, and 0.80 or greater for the greatest number of drinks consumed on any 1 day, in both the most recent 4-week interval and in the entire 12-week interval. Test-retest correlation coefficients for composite variables derived from the interview data were not systematically affected by whether the second interview was in person or by telephone. Furthermore, item-level correlations were also substantial. Findings support the use of the telephone for follow-up interviews, potentially reducing costs of longitudinal studies and facilitating multisite studies with centralized data collection, and lend further general support to the reliability of the TLFB.     

Alcohol screening scores and risk of hospitalizations for GI conditions in men

BACKGROUND: Alcohol misuse is a common cause of liver disease, upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, and pancreatitis, but it is not known whether alcohol screening questionnaires can identify patients at increased risk for hospitalizations due to these conditions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of alcohol screening scores with the risk of subsequent hospitalization for alcohol-related GI conditions. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Male general medicine outpatients from 7 Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers who returned mailed questionnaires. MEASUREMENTS: The CAGE questionnaire (0-4 points) and the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption questions (AUDIT-C; 0-12 points) were included on mailed surveys. The main outcome, "GI hospitalization," was a primary VA or Medicare discharge diagnosis indicating liver disease, upper GI bleeding, or pancreatitis. RESULTS: Among 31,311 patients followed, a median of 3.75 years, patients with CAGE scores >or=2 points or AUDIT-C scores >or=6 points were at a significantly increased risk for GI hospitalizations. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR(adj)) ranged from 1.6 (95% CI 1.2-2.0) for CAGE score 2, to 1.7 (1.4-2.2) for CAGE 4, and from 1.4 (1.01-2.0) for AUDIT-C scores from 6 to 7, to 2.7 (1.9-3.8) for AUDIT-C scores from 10 to 12. Secondary analyses demonstrated that the association was the strongest among patients less than 50 years of age who reported drinking in the past year. CONCLUSIONS: Brief alcohol screening questionnaires predict subsequent hospitalizations for alcohol-related GI conditions.     

Alcohol Screening and Risk of Postoperative Complications in Male VA Patients Undergoing Major Non-cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

Patients who misuse alcohol are at increased risk for surgical complications. Four weeks of preoperative abstinence decreases the risk of complications, but practical approaches for early preoperative identification of alcohol misuse are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether results of alcohol screening with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaire??up to a year before surgery??were associated with the risk of postoperative complications.

DESIGN

This is a cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Male Veterans Affairs (VA) patients were eligible if they had major noncardiac surgery assessed by the VA??s Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) in fiscal years 2004-2006, and completed the AUDIT-C alcohol screening questionnaire (0-12 points) on a mailed survey within 1 year before surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

One or more postoperative complication(s) within 30 days of surgery based on VASQIP nurse medical record reviews.

RESULTS

Among 9,176 eligible men, 16.3% screened positive for alcohol misuse with AUDIT-C scores ?? 5, and 7.8% had postoperative complications. Patients with AUDIT-C scores ?? 5 were at significantly increased risk for postoperative complications, compared to patients who drank less. In analyses adjusted for age, smoking, and days from screening to surgery, the estimated prevalence of postoperative complications increased from 5.6% (95% CI 4.8?C6.6%) in patients with AUDIT-C scores 1?C4, to 7.9% (6.3?C9.7%) in patients with AUDIT-Cs 5?C8, 9.7% (6.6?C14.1%) in patients with AUDIT-Cs 9?C10 and 14.0% (8.9?C21.3%) in patients with AUDIT-Cs 11?C12. In fully-adjusted analyses that included preoperative covariates potentially in the causal pathway between alcohol misuse and complications, the estimated prevalence of postoperative complications increased significantly from 4.8% (4.1?C5.7%) in patients with AUDIT-C scores 1?C4, to 6.9% (5.5?C8.7%) in patients with AUDIT-Cs 5-8 and 7.5% (5.0?C11.3%) among those with AUDIT-Cs 9?C10.

CONCLUSIONS

AUDIT-C scores of 5 or more up to a year before surgery were associated with increased postoperative complications.     

Effectiveness of the AUDIT-C as a Screening Test for Alcohol Misuse in Three Race/Ethnic Groups

Summary Background  The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test—Consumption (AUDIT-C) is a brief validated screen for risky drinking and alcohol abuse and dependence (alcohol misuse). However, the AUDIT-C was validated in predominantly White populations, and its performance in different racial/ethnic groups is unclear. Objective  To evaluate the validity of the AUDIT-C among primary care patients from the predominant racial/ethnic subgroups within the United States: White, African American, and Hispanic. Design  Cross-sectional interview validation study. Participants  1,292 outpatients from an academic family practice clinic in Texas (90% of randomly sampled eligible). Measurements and Main Results  Race/ethnicity was self-reported. Areas under the receiver operating curve (AuROCs) evaluated overall AUDIT-C performance in the 3 racial/ethnic groups compared to diagnostic interviews for alcohol misuse. AUDIT-C sensitivities and specificities at recommended screening thresholds were compared across racial/ethnic groups. AuROCs were greater than 0.85 in all 3 groups, with no significant differences across racial/ethnic groups in men (P = .43) or women (P = .12). At previously recommended cut points, there were statistically significant differences by race in AUDIT-C sensitivities but not specificities. In women, the sensitivity was higher in Hispanic (85%) than in African-American (67%; P = .03) or White (70%; P = .04) women. In men, the sensitivity was higher in White (95%) than in African-American men (76%; P = .01), with no significant difference from Hispanic men (85%; P = .11). Conclusions  The overall performance of the AUDIT-C was excellent in all 3 racial/ethnic groups as reflected by high AuROCs. At recommended cut points, there were significant differences in the AUDIT-C’s sensitivity but not in specificity across the 3 racial/ethnic groups. Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi: ) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Interactive Voice Response Technology Applied to Sexual Behavior Self-reports: A Comparison of Three Methods

We tested the feasibility and performance of the Interactive Voice Response Technology (IVR) in the assessment of sexual behavior self-reports, relative to self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) and Timeline Followback (TLFB) methods. The sample consisted of 44 sexually active Hispanic students recruited at the University of Texas at El Paso who reported daily about sexual behaviors and substance use. Thirty-three participants (75%, 18 women, 15 men) were retained for at least 80 days of the 91-day IVR. At follow-up, sexual behaviors and substance use were assessed by questionnaire (summary) reports and by TLFB, referring to the same 3-month interval. ANOVAs with normalized variables indicated less reporting in the TLFB and over-reporting of substance use in the questionnaire relative to the daily IVR self-reports. Gender moderated the effects of assessment mode, which were observed among women only. HLM analyses indicated a significant decrease in self-reports over time, suggesting reactivity of self-monitoring via IVR on behavior.     

Test-retest reliability of adolescents' self-report of substance use

BACKGROUND: Adolescent substance abuse is a serious problem for which effective interventions are needed. To conduct trials of new therapies, investigators need reliable means of identifying potential participants and of measuring outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine the 1-week test-retest reliability of the CRAFFT screening test and of the timeline follow-back (TLFB) calendar method for measuring alcohol, cannabis, and other drug use. METHODS: Ninety-three 12- to 18-year-old patients presenting for routine medical care to three urban adolescent clinics were administered the CRAFFT screen in both lifetime and past-year versions and a 90-day TLFB. Both measures were completed on the day of the clinic visit and again 1 week later. We computed kappa coefficients and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the CRAFFT and computed the ICC separately for TLFB self-reports of alcohol and cannabis. RESULTS: For the CRAFFT, kappa for individual items ranged from 0.31 to 0.86, and the ICC was 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.95). However, the total score of the lifetime CRAFFT at time 2 was significantly lower than at time 1; there was no difference in time 1 and time 2 total scores for the past-year version. The ICCs for past-90-days TLFB variables were as follows: drinking days, 0.92; drinks per occasion, 0.87; cannabis days, 0.83; and joints per occasion, 0.76. Past-30-day and past-60-day intervals compared favorably to past-90-day intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The CRAFFT screen is a reliable means of screening adolescents for substance abuse, although we recommend using the past-year version. The TLFB is a reliable method of quantifying adolescents' alcohol and cannabis use at intervals of 30, 60, or 90 days.     

A review of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), AUDIT-C,and USAUDIT for screening in the United States: Past issues and future directions

Background. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that clinicians screen all adults for alcohol misuse and provide brief counseling to those engaged in risky or hazardous drinking. The World Health Organization's (WHO's) Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is the most widely tested instrument for screening in primary health care. Objectives. This paper describes the structural and functional features of the AUDIT and methodological problems with the validation of the alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C). The content, scoring, and rationale for a new version of the AUDIT (called the USAUDIT), adapted to US standard drink size and hazardous drinking guidelines, is presented. Method. Narrative review focusing on the consumption elements of the AUDIT. Four studies of the AUDIT-C are reviewed and evaluated. Results. The AUDIT has been used extensively in many countries without making the changes in the first three consumption questions recommended in the AUDIT User’s Manual. As a consequence, the original WHO version is not compatible with US guidelines and AUDIT scores are not comparable with those obtained in countries that have different drink sizes, consumption units, and safe drinking limits. Clinical and Scientific Significance. The USAUDIT has adapted the WHO AUDIT to a 14 g standard drink, and US low-risk drinking guidelines. These changes provide greater accuracy in measuring alcohol consumption than the AUDIT-C.     

Correlations and agreement between delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in blood plasma and timeline follow-back (TLFB)-assisted self-reported use of cannabis of patients with cannabis use disorder and psychotic illness attending the CapOpus randomized clinical trial

Aims To assess correlations and agreement between timeline follow‐back (TLFB)‐assisted self‐report and blood samples for cannabis use. Design Secondary analysis of a randomized trial. Setting Copenhagen, Denmark. Participants One hundred and three patients from the CapOpus trial with cannabis use disorder and psychosis, providing 239 self‐reports of cannabis use and 88 valid blood samples. Measurements Delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 11‐hydroxy‐delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (11‐OH‐THC) and 11‐nor‐delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol‐9‐carboxylic acid (THC‐COOH) detected in plasma using high‐performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry detection. Self‐report of cannabis‐use last month by TLFB. Pearson's r, sensitivity and specificity calculated as measures of correlation or agreement. Findings Correlations were strong; r = 0.75 for number of days and r = 0.83 for number of standard joints in the preceding month when excluding outliers. Including outliers, coefficients were moderate to strong (r = 0.49). There were differences in subgroups, mainly inconsistent, depending on inclusion or exclusion of outliers. Sensitivity and specificity for TLFB detecting the presence or absence of cannabis use were 95.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 88.0–99.1%) and 72.2% (95% CI 46.5–90.3%), respectively. Using 19 days as cut‐off on TLFB, they were 94.3% (95% CI 86.0–98.4%) and 94.4% (95% CI 72.2–99.9%), respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.96. Conclusions Timeline follow‐back (TLFB)‐assisted self‐report of cannabis use correlates highly with plasma‐delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with comorbid cannabis use disorder and psychosis. Sensitivity and specificity of timeline follow‐back appear to be optimized with 19 days as the cut‐off point. As such, timeline follow‐back may be superior to analysis of blood when going beyond 19 days of recall.     

Reliability and Validity of the Aggregate Method of Determining Number of Cigarettes Smoked Per Day

The authors evaluated the reliability of two pretreatment assessments (screening and intake) of cigarettes smoked per day (CPD) by the commonly used aggregate method. The validity of the aggregate method was also determined by comparison with results of the timeline followback (TLFB) method for the identical periods. The study participants were 49 outpatients undergoing nicotine patch treatment. The reliability of the two aggregate method evaluations of CPD was quite high by Pearson product-moment correlation (r) and good when based on the intraclass correlation. Correspondence between the CPD assessments based on the aggregate and TLFB methods for the two time-points ranged from fair (screening) to good (intake). Overall, the study findings indicate that the aggregate method provides reasonably consistent data.     

Effectiveness of structured questionnaires for screening heavy drinking in middle-aged women

BACKGROUND: There is a need for an effective and feasible alcohol screening instrument. The aim of the study was to evaluate how the abbreviated versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) questionnaire perform in comparison with the original AUDIT and what the optimal cutoffs are when screening for heavy drinking among women. METHODS: All the 40-year-old women in the city of Tampere, Finland, are invited yearly for a health screening. From 1 year, data from 894 women (response rate 68.2%) invited for a health screening were utilized in the study. The original 10-item AUDIT, AUDIT-C, Five Shot, AUDIT-PC, AUDIT-3, AUDIT-QF, and CAGE were evaluated against the Timeline Followback. Consumption of at least 140 g of absolute ethanol per week on average during the past month was considered heavy drinking. RESULTS: In the Timeline Followback, the mean+/-SD weekly reported alcohol consumption was 45+/-67 g (range 0-936 g) of absolute ethanol. Of the women, 6.2% (55/894) were heavy drinkers. The optimal combination of sensitivity and specificity was reached for the AUDIT with cutoff > or =6, for the AUDIT-C with cutoff > or =5, for the Five Shot with cutoff > or =2.0, for the AUDIT-PC with cutoff > or =4, and for the AUDIT-QF with cutoff > or =4. When choosing the optimal cutoffs, the AUDIT-C, the Five Shot, the AUDIT-PC, and the AUDIT-QF performed as well as the 10-item AUDIT. With these cutoffs, sensitivities were 0.84 to 0.93 and specificities were 0.83 to 0.90. The AUDIT-3 and the CAGE did not perform as well as the other questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: The 10-item AUDIT, AUDIT-C, Five Shot, AUDIT-PC, and AUDIT-QF seem to be equally effective tools in screening for heavy drinking among middle-aged women. However, their applicability is achieved only if the cutoffs are tailored according to gender.     

A comparison between two retrospective alcohol consumption measures and the daily drinking diary method with university students

Background: There are two main categories of retrospective self-report alcohol consumption measures: summary and daily drinking. Time-efficient summary measures have been criticized for being less able to capture sporadic and unpatterned drinking. A novel retrospective summary measure, the Typical and Atypical Drinking Diary (TADD), may produce more precise estimates of alcohol consumption than the gold-standard daily measure, the Timeline Followback (TLFB). Objective: To establish how accurately the TADD and TLFB retrospectively capture alcohol consumption compared to the Daily Drinking Diary (DDD) method. Method: Forty-three university undergraduates (77% female) concurrently recorded their daily alcohol consumption for 28 consecutive days using daily drinking diaries. Participants then retrospectively estimated their alcohol consumption using both the TADD and TLFB 28 days following completion of the 28-day daily consumption period. Results: When compared against the drinking data obtained from the DDD method, the TADD consistently produced accurate retrospective estimates of total alcohol consumption, number of drinking days, and number of heavy drinking episodes. Contrariwise, the TLFB significantly underestimated all aspects of drinking. Underreporting on the TLFB was hypothesized to be associated with social desirability bias. Conclusion: The TADD is a valid and reliable instrument for retrospectively measuring alcohol consumption and drinking variability in the university student population.     

The TWEAK is weak for alcohol screening among female Veterans Affairs outpatients

BACKGROUND: The optimal brief questionnaire for alcohol screening among female patients has not yet been identified. This study compared the performance of the TWEAK (tolerance, worried, eye-opener, amnesia, cutdown), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and the AUDIT Consumption (AUDIT-C) as self-administered screening tests for hazardous drinking and/or active alcohol abuse or dependence among female Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatients. METHODS: Women were included in the study if they received care at VA Puget Sound and completed both a self-administered survey containing the AUDIT and TWEAK screening questionnaires and subsequent in-person interviews with the Alcohol Use Disorders and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule. Sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and areas under Receiver Operating Characteristic curves were computed for each screening questionnaire compared with two interview-based comparison standards: (1) active DSM-IV alcohol abuse or dependence and (2) hazardous drinking and/or active DSM-IV alcohol abuse or dependence, the more appropriate target for primary care screening. RESULTS: Of 393 women who completed screening questionnaires and interviews, 39 (9.9%) met diagnostic criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence, and 89 (22.7%) met criteria for hazardous drinking or alcohol abuse or dependence. The TWEAK had relatively low sensitivities (0.62 and 0.44) but adequate specificities (0.86 and 0.89) for both interview-based comparison standards, even at its lowest cut-point (>/=1). The AUDIT and AUDIT-C were superior, with the following areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for active alcohol abuse or dependence and hazardous drinking and/or active alcohol abuse or dependence, respectively: AUDIT, 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.85-0.95] and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.91); AUDIT-C, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88-0.95) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88-0.94); and TWEAK, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.86) and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.60-0.74). CONCLUSIONS: The TWEAK has low sensitivity as an alcohol-screening questionnaire among female VA outpatients and should be evaluated further before being used in other female primary care populations. The three-item AUDIT-C was the optimal brief alcohol-screening questionnaire in this study.     

Excessive alcohol consumption and hypertension: clinical implications of current research

Substantial evidence demonstrates that: 1) heavy alcohol consumption (three or more standard drinks per day) is associated with and predictive of hypertension; 2) reduction in alcohol consumption is associated with a significant dose-dependent lowering of mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure; and 3) physician advice can reduce heavy drinking in hypertensive patients. These findings suggest that the routine evaluation of alcohol consumption in hypertensive patients is warranted. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-C (AUDIT-C), a brief, three-question screening test, is useful in this regard. Alcohol biomarkers can also play a role in detecting and monitoring heavy drinking in hypertensive patients whose self-reports on the AUDIT-C are suspect. Carbohydrate-deficient transferrin, a new alcohol biomarker with high specificity, can provide objective data for feedback and counseling. A routine search for excessive use of alcohol, along with brief interventions and monitoring, can have a major impact on reducing the prevalence of hypertension in the general population.     

Alcohol Consumption and 5-Year Change in Left Atrial Volume Among Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: Results From the Heart and Soul Study

BackgroundHeavy alcohol consumption is a risk factor for developing atrial fibrillation, but whether chronic alcohol use affects left atrial volume is unknown. We evaluated the association of self-reported alcohol consumption with 5-year change in left atrial volume among patients with coronary heart disease (CHD).MethodsWe studied 601 participants with stable CHD who underwent 2-dimensional echocardiography at baseline (2000–2002) and after 5 years of follow-up (2005–2007). Alcohol consumption was determined at baseline with the use of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test consumption questions (AUDIT-C), with a standard cutoff point of ≥3 used to define at-risk drinking. We used logistic regression to evaluate the association of baseline alcohol use with 5-year increase in left atrial end-systolic volume index (defined as being in the highest tertile of percent change).ResultsAfter adjustment for covariates, each standard deviation (2.4-point) increase in AUDIT-C score was associated with a 24% greater odds of experiencing a 5-year increase in left atrial volume index (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04–1.48; P = .02). Compared with the 369 participants who had AUDIT-C scores of <3, the 171 participants with scores of 3–5 had a 51% greater odds (OR 1.51, 95% CI, 1.11–2.25) and the 61 participants with scores of >5 a 98% greater odds (OR 1.98, 95% CI, 1.10–3.56) of experiencing a 5-year increase in left atrial volume index.ConclusionsIn patients with CHD, heavier alcohol consumption is associated with a 5-year increase in left atrial volume. Whether greater left atrial volume contributes to the increased risk of atrial fibrillation associated with alcohol use deserves further study.