Alcohol is one of the most important risk factors for disease and disability, with a strong association found between alcohol and injury. Two recent international studies have analysed the involvement of alcohol in injuries, taking into account contextual variables. Blood alcohol level (BAL) positive patients and those reporting drinking before the injury were more likely to be admitted to the emergency department (ED) with an injury compared to a non-injury problem, and detrimental patterns of drinking predicted the individual's alcohol-related risk and the likelihood of attributing the injury to alcohol. Emergency departments are in a privileged position to identify and intervene with patients who are at risk or have developed problems because of their drinking, for these patient find themselves in a teachable moment after the critical event. Different screening instruments have been investigated for identifying alcohol use disorders in emergency department patients. The RAPS4-QF (Rapid Alcohol Problems Screen, 4 items + 2 quantity frequency items) is proposed for its optimal performance at the ED setting. A number of studies have shown good results of brief intervention among these patients. Most studies show a significant reduction in the consumption of alcohol, although not always significant compared with control patients, and a significant reduction in alcohol-related problems (e.g. new injuries and hospital admissions) compared with controls. Nevertheless, early identification and brief intervention are still a pending subject in emergency departments throughout the world.
Objectives. To analyze changes in racial/ethnic disparities for unintentional injury mortality from 1999-2016. Methods. Mortality data are from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) for all unintentional injuries, analyzed separately by injury cause (motor vehicle accidents [MVA], poisonings, other unintentional) for white, black, and Hispanic populations within four age groups: 15-19, 20-34, 35-54, 55-74 for males and for females. Results. Rates across race/ethnic groups varied by gender, age and cause of injury. Unintentional injury mortality showed a recent increase for both males and females, which was more marked among males and for poisoning in all race/ethnic groups of both genders. Whites showed highest rates of poisoning mortality and the steepest increase for both genders, except for black males aged 55-74. MVA mortality also showed an increase for all race/ethnic groups, with a sharper rise among blacks, while Hispanics had lower rates than either whites or blacks. Rates for other unintentional injury mortality were similar across groups except for white women over 55, for whom rates were elevated. Conclusions. Data suggest while mortality from unintentional injury related to MVA and poisoning is on the rise for both genders and in most age groups, blacks compared to whites and Hispanics may be suffering a disproportionate burden of mortality related to MVAs and to poisonings among those over 55, which may be related to substance use.
The purpose of this article is to examine in an emergency room (ER) population the concordance of self-reports of no alcohol consumption prior to injury with breath-analyzer readings in two groups: (1) those patients from whom reports were obtained after they were breath analyzed compared to (2) patients from whom reports were obtained prior to obtaining the breath-analyzer reading. Data were collected on a probability sample of patients attending three health maintenance organization ERs. Among those sampled were 159 patients admitted for initial treatment of an injury, who were breath analyzed within 6 hours of the event and reported no drinking following the event that lead to injury. Of these, 119 were breath analyzed prior to the interview, and none who reported not drinking were positive on the breath analyzer, while of the 37 breath analyzed after the interview, only one was positive who had reported not drinking. Obtaining the breath-analyzer reading following the interview was not found to affect the rate of refusal to provide a breath-analyzer reading; however, it was found to adversely affect obtaining the breath-analyzer reading for other reasons. The data suggest that the concordance of negative self-reports of consumption with breath-analyzer readings remains high in ER populations regardless of when the breath-analyzer reading is obtained; however, it appears best to obtain the reading prior to interviewing the patient for reasons explained below.
The purpose of this study is to describe variables associated with injury in an emergency room (ER) sample that is representative of an entire U.S. county. A probability sample (n = 3717) of ER patients from the county hospital, 3 of the 6 community hospitals, and the three health maintenance organization hospitals in a single Northern California county were breath-analyzed and interviewed at the time of the ER visit. Injured were most likely to consume only 1 or 2 drinks within < 1 hr of injury occurrence. Twenty-three percent reported feeling drunk at the time of the event, and of these, 45% felt the event would not have happened if they had not been drinking. Breathalyzer reading, feeling drunk at the time of the event, and quantity-frequency (Q-F) of usual drinking were found to be predictive of admission to the ER with an injury, whereas breathalyzer reading, Q-F, and being injured in someone's home were predictive of reporting drinking prior to injury. Although feeling drunk at the time of the event and usual drinking patterns are predictive of injury occurrence, drinking prior to the event may not entail large quantities of alcohol consumed, but relatively small amounts consumed in close proximity to the injury event. These alcohol consumption variables may vary, however, depending on the type, cause, and severity of injury.
Probability samples of 66 Mexican-American injured male emergency room (ER) patients in Santa Clara County, CA, and 457 injured male ER patients in Pachuca, Mexico are compared on a number of drinking-in-the-event variables. While those in Pachuca were more likely to be positive on the breathalyzer than those in Santa Clara, they were less likely to attribute a causal association of their drinking with the event. Site (Santa Clara) was found to be a significant (positive) predictor of drinking prior to injury.
A randomized controlled trial of brief intervention (BI), for drinking and related problems, using peer health promotion advocates (promotores), was conducted among at-risk and alcohol-dependent Mexican-origin young adult emergency department (ED) patients, aged 18–30. Six hundred and ninety-eight patients were randomized to: screened only (n = 78), assessed (n = 310) and intervention (n = 310). Primary outcomes were at-risk drinking and Rapid Alcohol Problems Screen (RAPS4) scores. Secondary outcomes were drinking days per week, drinks per drinking day, maximum drinks in a day and negative consequences of drinking. At 3- and 12-month follow-up the intervention condition showed significantly lower values or trends on all outcome variables compared to the assessed condition, with the exception of the RAPS4 score; e.g. at-risk drinking days dropped from 2.9 to 1.7 at 3 months for the assessed condition and from 3.2 to 1.2 for the intervention condition. Using random effects modeling controlling for demographics and baseline values, the intervention condition showed significantly greater improvement in all consumption measures at 12 months, but not in the RAPS4 or negative consequences of drinking. Improvements in outcomes were significantly more evident for non-injured patients, those reporting drinking prior to the event, and those lower on risk taking disposition. At 12-month follow-up this study demonstrated significantly improved drinking outcomes for Mexican-origin young adults in the ED who received a BI delivered by promotores compared to those who did not. ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02056535.
Objective: Although researchers and policy makers have often considered the U.S.–Mexico border region to be at high risk for substance use problems, epidemiological studies of this region have been hard to interpret because of their modest geographic coverage, reliance on self-report, and mixed results. The current study addresses limitations of existing studies and extends the knowledge base by comparing alcohol- and drug-related mortality in counties on versus off the border across all four U.S. border states. Method: Data were from the 2008–2017 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention WONDER Multiple Causes of Death data set, American Community Survey, and Rural Urban Continuum Codes, including all four border states. Spatial lag models tested differences across on- and off-border counties in total alcohol- and drug-related mortality (“total mortality”), alcohol-related mortality, and drug-related mortality. Results: In multivariate models, mortality rates were significantly higher in off- versus on-border counties for all three outcomes (ps < .05). Rates for total mortality, alcohol-related mortality, and drug-related mortality were 28%, 82%, and 30% higher, respectively, off versus on the border. Border effects were similar, excluding California; robust over time; and stronger for Latinx versus White decedents. Conclusions: Results suggest a revised understanding of the border, revealing that residents of interior counties of border states are at highest risk of severe substance use consequences. Results are consistent with other research finding that border counties were protected against drug overdose deaths, particularly for Latinx residents.