Unhealthy alcohol use and brief intervention rates among high and low complexity veterans seeking primary care services in the Veterans Health Administration

Abstract: Brief intervention (BI) is recommended for all primary care (PC) patients who screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use; however, patients with multiple chronic health conditions who are at high-risk of hospitalization (i.e., “high complexity” patients) may face disparities in receiving BIs in PC. The current study investigated whether high complexity and low complexity patients in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) differed regarding screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use, alcohol-use severity, and receipt of BI for those with unhealthy alcohol use. Patients were veterans receiving PC services at the VHA in a mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The study extracted VHA administrative and clinical data for a total of 282,242 patients who had ≥1 PC visits between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2014, during which they were screened for unhealthy alcohol use by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test–Consumption (AUDIT-C). The study defined high complexity patients as those within and above the 90th percentile of risk for hospitalization per the VHA's Care Assessment Need Score. Logistic regression models assessed if being a high complexity patient was associated with screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥ 5), severity of unhealthy alcohol use in those who screened positive (AUDIT-C score range 5–12), and receipt of BI in those who screened positive. Our sample was 94.5% male, 83% White, 13% Black, 4% other race, and 1.7% Hispanic. A total of 10,813 (3.8%) patients screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use from which we identified 569 (5.3%) high complexity and 10,128 (93.6%) low complexity patients (n = 116 removed due to missing complexity data). Relative to low complexity patients, high complexity patients were less likely to screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use (3.3% vs. 4.1%, AOR = 0.59, p < .001); however, in patients who screened positive, high complexity patients had higher AUDIT-C scores (Mean AUDIT-C = 7.75 vs. 6.87, AOR = 1.46, p < .001) and were less likely to receive a BI (78.0% vs. 92.6%, AOR = 0.42, p < .001). Disparities in BI exist for highly complex patients despite having more severe unhealthy alcohol use. Future research should examine the specific patient- and/or clinic-level factors impeding BI delivery for complex patients.

Read the full article
Report a problem with this article

Related articles

  • More for Researchers

    Qualitative analysis of the lived experience of reproductive and pediatric health care in the military health care system

    Abstract: Introduction: Persistent inequities exist in obstetric and neonatal outcomes in military families despite universal health care coverage. Though the exact underlying cause has not been identified, social determinants of health may uniquely impact military families. The purpose of this study was to qualitatively investigate the potential impact of social determinants of health and the lived experiences of military individuals seeking maternity care in the Military Health System. Materials and methods: This was an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol. Nine providers conducted 31 semi-structured interviews with individuals who delivered within the last 5 years in the direct or purchased care market. Participants were recruited through social media blasts and clinic flyers with both maximum variation and homogenous sampling to ensure participation of diverse individuals. Data were coded and themes were identified using inductive qualitative research methods. Results: Three main themes were identified: Requirements of Military Life (with subthemes of pregnancy notification and privacy during care, role of pregnancy instructions and policies, and role of command support), Sociocultural Aspects of the Military Experience (with subthemes of pregnancy as a burden on colleagues and a career detractor, postpartum adjustment, balancing personal and professional requirements, pregnancy timing and parenting challenges, and importance of friendship and camaraderie in pregnancy), and Navigating the Healthcare Experience (including subthemes of transfer between military and civilian care and TRICARE challenges, perception of military care as inferior to civilian, and remote duty stations and international care). Conclusions: The unique stressors of military life act synergistically with the existing health care challenges, presenting opportunities for improvements in care. Such opportunities may include increased consistency of policies across services and commands. Increased access to group prenatal care and support groups, and increased assistance with navigating the health care system to improve care transitions were frequently requested changes by participants.