Four-Year Effects of a Computer-Based Brief Alcohol Intervention Targeting Alcohol Users in the General Population: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND

Brief alcohol interventions aim at motivating individuals to reduce their drinking and encompass a multitude of activities with limited duration or frequency such as counseling or individualized feedback. Brief interventions are effective in alcohol users who exceed the low-risk drinking limits. Considering the health risks associated with alcohol consumption below these limits, brief interventions should be targeted at all alcohol users to maximize their public health impact.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed (1) to test the long-term effects of a brief alcohol intervention consisting of computer-generated individualized feedback letters among individuals who consume alcohol, irrespective of how much; and (2) to explore how intervention effects may be moderated by alcohol use severity and school education.

METHODS

In the waiting area of the municipal registry office in Greifswald, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany, a general population sample of 1646 adults (n=920, 55.89% women; mean age 31.0, SD 10.8 y) who reported alcohol use at least once in the past year were randomized to an intervention (n=815, 49.51%) or a control group (n=831, 50.49%). The intervention comprised up to 3 computer-generated individualized feedback letters based on the transtheoretical model of behavior change at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. The control group received assessment only at the same time points and no feedback. The outcome was a change in self-reported number of drinks per week from baseline to follow-up after 36 and 48 months. Moderators of intervention efficacy were self-reported alcohol use severity (low risk vs at-risk drinking) and school education (<12 y vs ≥12 y) at baseline. Data were analyzed using latent growth modeling with full-information maximum likelihood estimation, ensuring an intention-to-treat analysis. Bayes factors (BFs) were calculated to estimate the sensitivity of evidence.

RESULTS

Unadjusted and adjusted models revealed no group difference after 36 months (incidence rate ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.87-1.27; BF=0.37). After 48 months, a decrease in weekly alcohol consumption was observed in the control group and no change in the intervention group (incidence rate ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.05-1.57; BF=0.16), indicating strong evidence against the hypothesized intervention effect. Intervention efficacy was not moderated by alcohol use severity or school education at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized controlled trial, no evidence for the efficacy of individualized feedback letters was found after 3 and 4 years. Unexpectedly, drinking reductions in the control group and no change in the intervention group were observed 4 years after the study start. Intervention strategies effective in at-risk drinkers may necessitate adaptation for applicability to alcohol users as a whole.