Georgia Basics: Evaluation Results from Five Years of Intervention for Risky Drinking and Substance Use in Urban Emergency Departments
Presented by:
Gabriel P. Kuperminc, Ph.D
Professor of Psychology
Georgia State University
Characteristics and Outcomes of Adult Opiate Users in Abstinence-Based Resid...Siobhan Morse
Similar to Georgia BASICS : Evaluation Results from Five Years of Intervention for Risky Drinking and Substance Use in Urban Emergency Departments (20)
Mixin Classes in Odoo 17 How to Extend Models Using Mixin Classes
Georgia BASICS : Evaluation Results from Five Years of Intervention for Risky Drinking and Substance Use in Urban Emergency Departments
1. Georgia BASICS :
Evaluation Results from Five Years of
Intervention for Risky Drinking and
Substance Use in Urban Emergency
Departments
Gabriel P. Kuperminc, Ph.D
Professor of Psychology
Georgia State University
2. Outline
• Adult patients in urban emergency depts
• SBIRT – A public health approach to
addressing alcohol and substance misuse
• How does it work?
• Does it make a difference?
• Can it be sustained?
3. Urban Emergency Department
Patients
• Conditions of Risk
– High rates of poverty, housing instability
– Lack of consistent health care, unmet needs
– Behavioral risks (e.g., alcohol, drug use) often
associated with health concerns
• ED as “Teachable Moment”
– Failure to help patients make the connection as
lost opportunity
– When alcohol/drug use does come up, usually
focus on blaming pt for poor choices, need for
abstinence
4. What is SBIRT?
• Screening
• Brief Intervention
• Referral to Treatment
• Initiative of Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
– Cooperative agreements with states (4 cohorts,
20+ projects to date)
– Demonstration projects intended to show
effectiveness and sustain beyond grant period
5. Georgia BASICS
• Overview
– Routine screening for risky drinking,
substance use
– Motivational Interviewing (15-30 minutes) to
discuss motivation for change, set goals
– Availability of alternatives incl. additional
therapy, referral to treatment
• Settings
– Grady Health System (Atlanta)
– Medical Center of Central Georgia (Macon)
7. Patient
Enters ED
Nurse
Health Educators
54% LowModerate Risk
BI
BI = Brief Intervention
BT = Brief Therapy
RT = Referral to Treatment
3 Question
Prescreen:
25% Positive
60% of positive
prescreens
receive ASSIST
Full Screen
7% High
Risk
BI + BT
32%
Screening
Feedback
7% Very High
Risk
BI+ RT
10% Sample enrolled For 6 month Follow Up
8. (Nearly) Final Numbers …
Services
Provided
Enrolled in
Study
(Tx sample)
Screening/Feedback
Brief Intervention (BI)
150,452
23,270
--728
BI + Brief Therapy (BT)
BI + Referral to Tx (RT)
Total
2,933
3,344
179,999
172
176
1,076
* Note: Pts. enrolled in study via random selection from those
receiving services.
9. Analysis Sample
Control
(N = 1737)
Intervention
( N =724)
11.94
11.88
42
42
% Female
34%
29%
% African-American
75%
73%
% Employed full/part time
34%
32%
% Unstably housed/Homeless
39%
45%
Monthly wage (average)
$885
$643
Education (years)
Age (average)
Notes:
(1) Comparison patients received screening/assessment but no services during 3month period prior to initiating service delivery.
(2) Six month follow-ups completed with appr. 50% of Comparison and 65% of
Intervention patients.
10. Reductions in Risky Drinking
• Intervention patients 46%
less likely than Controls to
report moderate/high
frequency drinking by
follow-up.
• One in four Intervention pts,
and one in five Control
patients reduced drinking
from moderate/high to low
frequency.
• Almost twice as many
Control patients as
Intervention patients
increased their drinking
frequency.
Percentage of Moderate to
Heavy Drinkers by Intervention
Status
80%
75%
70%
65%
Intervention
Control
60%
55%
50%
45%
40%
Time 1
Time 2
11. Increased Engagement in
Treatment
• Highest Risk Pts
referred to treatment
facilities in the local
community
• 15-30% of these pts.
engaged treatment by
3 months after
receiving SBIRT
services (MCCG)
• Higher than national
estimate of 5%
12. Improvements in Mental Health
• Intake scores placed
pts in lowest quartile
of U.S. population for
mental health
• By follow up
– Intervention pts
improved to 40th
percentile
– Controls declined to
7th percentile
Change in Mental Health
Composite Score by
Intervention Status
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
Interventio
n
Control
25
Intake
Follow-up
13. Improved Social Support
Networks
• Intervention and
Control Pts. similar
levels of social
support at intake
• Intervention pts.
improved slightly
• Controls declined
substantially
Perceived Social Support at 6-Month Follow-Up
2
1.5
Control
1
Intervention
0.5
0
Partner
Parents
Siblings
Other
Family
14. Potential Cost Savings
Average number of ED visits 6
months before and after target
visit
3.5
Intervention
3
Control
2.5
2
1.5
1
6 months before 6 months after
• 1-month sample (248
SBIRT; 170 controls).
• Intervention pts had 0.66
fewer ED Visits following
SBIRT services vs.
Controls
• Significant even
controlling demographic
and health related
confounds
• Cost savings may
outweigh cost of
services, esp given high
15. Conclusions
• SBIRT services make a meaningful difference
in people’s lives
– Reductions in risky drinking
– Improvements in other health outcomes
• SBIRT services link patients to the care they
need and natural support systems
– High rates of treatment engagement
– Improvements in social support resources
• SBIRT is good policy
– Reductions in ED visits and hospital admissions
point to substantial cost savings
16. Sustaining SBIRT in Georgia?
• SBIRT staff not retained at either medical center
• BUT
– Trained workforce, including increased expertise in
motivational interviewing (MINT)
– Broad acceptance of SBIRT practice
– Universal screening for alcohol/drugs
– Interest in instituting SBIRT/SBI in other settings
• Pilot project on electronic SBI in county health dept (collab
with CDC)
• Integrating MI with linkage to care for HIV+ pts with
substance abuse (NIDA proposal)
• Mercer College of Medicine integrates SBIRT into residency
training (SAMHSA)
17. Thanks to
• Funding from Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA), #TI019545
• GSU Colleagues and Students
– Jim Emshoff, Dom Parrott, Jennifer Zorland, Joanna
Akin, Lindsey Cochran, Adam Carton, Devin Gilmore, Robyn
Borgman, Nick Tarantino, NerissaGermain, Doyanne
Darnell, Natalie Wilkins, and others
• Georgia Division of Behavioral Health and
Developmental Disabilities: Steve O’Neill
• Partners at Grady Health System and Medical
Center of Central Georgia
– Too many to name!