Journal of gambling studies · 2021
A Within-Subject Pilot Feasibility Study of a Gambling Specific SBIRT Intervention Delivered in an Urban HIV/Primary Clinic.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Heinlein Emily, Rugle Lori, Potts Wendy, Welsh Chris, Himelhoch Seth
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although there are few interventions available to provide screening and brief intervention targeted toward problematic gambling, Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based intervention that has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing gambling behaviors.
METHODS: The goal of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary outcomes of a gambling specific SBIRT intervention in a medical setting. Fifteen participants were recruited from an urban HIV/Primary Care clinic to receive the gambling specific SBIRT intervention delivered by 3 clinicians. Process and gambling specific outcome measures were evaluated at baseline, immediately after the intervention and at 1-month follow-up.
RESULTS: On average, patient participants were 49 years and self-described themselves as male (60%) and Black or African American (86.7%). Three (20%) participants met 4 or more criteria of the DSM-5 gambling disorder. Compared to baseline, those who participated in the intervention decreased both the median number of days gambled (1 days vs. 0 days), as well as the median money gambled at 1-month follow-up ($7 vs. $1). Participants with 4 or more criteria of DSM-5 gambling had the greatest reduction (days gambled: (26 days vs. 21 days); money spent: (($400 vs. $65)). Participants reported that the intervention was acceptable. Clinician participants found the intervention to be easy to deliver.
CONCLUSIONS: A gambling specific SBIRT intervention was feasible to deliver and acceptable to participants. Gambling specific outcome measures were reduced at 1-month follow-up. A randomized control trial to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention is a recommended next step.
METHODS: The goal of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary outcomes of a gambling specific SBIRT intervention in a medical setting. Fifteen participants were recruited from an urban HIV/Primary Care clinic to receive the gambling specific SBIRT intervention delivered by 3 clinicians. Process and gambling specific outcome measures were evaluated at baseline, immediately after the intervention and at 1-month follow-up.
RESULTS: On average, patient participants were 49 years and self-described themselves as male (60%) and Black or African American (86.7%). Three (20%) participants met 4 or more criteria of the DSM-5 gambling disorder. Compared to baseline, those who participated in the intervention decreased both the median number of days gambled (1 days vs. 0 days), as well as the median money gambled at 1-month follow-up ($7 vs. $1). Participants with 4 or more criteria of DSM-5 gambling had the greatest reduction (days gambled: (26 days vs. 21 days); money spent: (($400 vs. $65)). Participants reported that the intervention was acceptable. Clinician participants found the intervention to be easy to deliver.
CONCLUSIONS: A gambling specific SBIRT intervention was feasible to deliver and acceptable to participants. Gambling specific outcome measures were reduced at 1-month follow-up. A randomized control trial to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention is a recommended next step.