Skip to main content
placeholder image

Standardised alcohol screening in primary health care services targeting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia

Journal Article


Download full-text (Open Access)

Abstract


  • Introduction and aims: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs)

    around Australia have been asked to standardise screening for unhealthy drinking. Accordingly, screening with the

    3-item AUDIT-C (Alcohol Use Disorders Identifcation Test—Consumption) tool has become a national key performance

    indicator. Here we provide an overview of suitability of AUDIT-C and other brief alcohol screening tools for use

    in ACCHSs.

    Methods: All peer-reviewed literature providing original data on validity, acceptability or feasibility of alcohol screening

    tools among Indigenous Australians was reviewed. Narrative synthesis was used to identify themes and integrate

    results.

    Results: Three screening tools—full AUDIT, AUDIT-3 (third question of AUDIT) and CAGE (Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty

    and Eye-opener) have been validated against other consumption measures, and found to correspond well. Short

    forms of AUDIT have also been found to compare well with full AUDIT, and were preferred by primary care staf. Help

    was often required with converting consumption into standard drinks. Researchers commented that AUDIT and its

    short forms prompted refection on drinking. Another tool, the Indigenous Risk Impact Screen (IRIS), jointly screens

    for alcohol, drug and mental health risk, but is relatively long (13 items). IRIS has been validated against dependence

    scales. AUDIT, IRIS and CAGE have a greater focus on dependence than on hazardous or harmful consumption.

    Discussion and conclusions: Detection of unhealthy drinking before harms occur is a goal of screening, so AUDIT-C

    ofers advantages over tools like IRIS or CAGE which focus on dependence. AUDIT-C’s brevity suits integration with

    general health screening. Further research is needed on facilitating implementation of systematic alcohol screening

    into Indigenous primary healthcare

UOW Authors


  •   Islam, M (external author)
  •   Oni, Helen (external author)
  •   Lee, K (external author)
  •   Hayman, N (external author)
  •   Wilson, Scott (external author)
  •   Harrison, Kristie (external author)
  •   Hummerston, Beth (external author)
  •   Ivers, Rowena
  •   Conigrave, Kate M. (external author)

Publication Date


  • 2018

Citation


  • Islam, M. Mofizul., Oni, H. T., Lee, K. Kylie., Hayman, N., Wilson, S., Harrison, K., Hummerston, B., Ivers, R. & Conigrave, K. M. (2018). Standardised alcohol screening in primary health care services targeting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 13 (5), 1-11.

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-85063230114

Ro Full-text Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6553&context=smhpapers

Ro Metadata Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/smhpapers/5488

Number Of Pages


  • 10

Start Page


  • 1

End Page


  • 11

Volume


  • 13

Issue


  • 5

Place Of Publication


  • United Kingdom

Abstract


  • Introduction and aims: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs)

    around Australia have been asked to standardise screening for unhealthy drinking. Accordingly, screening with the

    3-item AUDIT-C (Alcohol Use Disorders Identifcation Test—Consumption) tool has become a national key performance

    indicator. Here we provide an overview of suitability of AUDIT-C and other brief alcohol screening tools for use

    in ACCHSs.

    Methods: All peer-reviewed literature providing original data on validity, acceptability or feasibility of alcohol screening

    tools among Indigenous Australians was reviewed. Narrative synthesis was used to identify themes and integrate

    results.

    Results: Three screening tools—full AUDIT, AUDIT-3 (third question of AUDIT) and CAGE (Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty

    and Eye-opener) have been validated against other consumption measures, and found to correspond well. Short

    forms of AUDIT have also been found to compare well with full AUDIT, and were preferred by primary care staf. Help

    was often required with converting consumption into standard drinks. Researchers commented that AUDIT and its

    short forms prompted refection on drinking. Another tool, the Indigenous Risk Impact Screen (IRIS), jointly screens

    for alcohol, drug and mental health risk, but is relatively long (13 items). IRIS has been validated against dependence

    scales. AUDIT, IRIS and CAGE have a greater focus on dependence than on hazardous or harmful consumption.

    Discussion and conclusions: Detection of unhealthy drinking before harms occur is a goal of screening, so AUDIT-C

    ofers advantages over tools like IRIS or CAGE which focus on dependence. AUDIT-C’s brevity suits integration with

    general health screening. Further research is needed on facilitating implementation of systematic alcohol screening

    into Indigenous primary healthcare

UOW Authors


  •   Islam, M (external author)
  •   Oni, Helen (external author)
  •   Lee, K (external author)
  •   Hayman, N (external author)
  •   Wilson, Scott (external author)
  •   Harrison, Kristie (external author)
  •   Hummerston, Beth (external author)
  •   Ivers, Rowena
  •   Conigrave, Kate M. (external author)

Publication Date


  • 2018

Citation


  • Islam, M. Mofizul., Oni, H. T., Lee, K. Kylie., Hayman, N., Wilson, S., Harrison, K., Hummerston, B., Ivers, R. & Conigrave, K. M. (2018). Standardised alcohol screening in primary health care services targeting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 13 (5), 1-11.

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-85063230114

Ro Full-text Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6553&context=smhpapers

Ro Metadata Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/smhpapers/5488

Number Of Pages


  • 10

Start Page


  • 1

End Page


  • 11

Volume


  • 13

Issue


  • 5

Place Of Publication


  • United Kingdom