Effectiveness of brief intervention on non-dependent alcohol drinkers (EBIAL): A Spanish multi-centre study

Abstract

Objective. The project was designed to compare the effectiveness of brief intervention (BI) versus simple advice (SA) in the secondary prevention of hazardous alcohol comsumption. Methods. A randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up was conducted. A total of 74 community-based primary care practices (328 physicians) located in 13 Spanish autonomous regions were recruited initially. Out of 546 men screened, only 229 were randomized into BI (n = 104) and SA (n = 125); 44.6% of practices finalized the study. The interventions on the BI group consisted of a 15-minute counselling visit carried out by physicians which included: (i) alcohol quantification, (ii) information on safe limits, (iii) advice, (iv) drinking limits agreement, (v) self-informative booklet with drinking diary record and (vi) unscheduled reinforcement visits. The SA group spent 5 minutes which included (i), (ii) and (iii). Results. There were no significant differences between both groups at baseline on alcohol use, age, socioeconomic status and CAGE score. After the 12-month follow-up there was a significant decrease in frequency of excesive drinkers (67% of BI group reached targeted consumption, versus 44% of SA; P < 0.001) as well as weekly alcohol intake reduction (BI reached 52 versus 32% in SA; P < 0.001). A trend to improve outcome with the number of reinforcement visits was found with BI. The only predictor of success was the initial alcohol consumption level. Conclusions. Brief intervention is more effective than simple advice to reduce alcohol intake on adult men who attend primary care services in Spain.