Publication:
Screening and concurrent brief intervention of conjoint hazardous or harmful alcohol and tobacco use in hospital out-patients in Thailand: A randomized controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorSupa Pengpiden_US
dc.contributor.authorKarl Peltzeren_US
dc.contributor.authorApa Puckpinyoen_US
dc.contributor.authorSomchai Viripiromgoolen_US
dc.contributor.authorKriengsak Thamma-aphipholen_US
dc.contributor.authorKawinarat Suthisukhonen_US
dc.contributor.authorDussanee Dumeeen_US
dc.contributor.authorThiprada Kongtapanen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Limpopoen_US
dc.contributor.otherHuman Sciences Research Council of South Africaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-23T10:44:41Z
dc.date.available2018-11-23T10:44:41Z
dc.date.issued2015-05-27en_US
dc.description.abstract© Pengpid et al.; licensee BioMed Central. Background: The aim of this study was to conduct a cluster randomized control trial to assess the efficacy of screening and brief intervention (SBI) for conjoint alcohol and tobacco use among hospital out-patients. Method: In all 620 hospital out-patients who screened positive for both tobacco and alcohol moderate risk in four hospitals were randomized into 2 control and 1 intervention condition using the hospital as a unit of randomization (2 intervention and 2 control hospitals) to 405 patients in the two control groups (tobacco only intervention, n = 199, and alcohol only intervention, n = 206) and 215 in the intervention group. The intervention or control consisted of three counselling sessions. Results: Results of the interaction (Group × Time) effects using GEE indicated that there were statistically significant differences between the three study groups over the 6-month follow-up on the ASSIST tobacco score (Wald X<sup>2</sup> = 8.43, P = 0.004), and past week tobacco use abstinence (Wald X<sup>2</sup> = 7.34, P = 0.007). Although there were no significant interaction effects on the other outcomes (Alcohol ASSIST score, low alcohol risk score, past week tobacco abstinence or low alcohol risk score, and past week tobacco abstinence and low alcohol risk score), the scores in all of the six outcome measures showed consistent improvements. For past week tobacco abstinence the tobacco only intervention was more effective than the alcohol only intervention and the integrated alcohol and tobacco intervention. For the outcome of low alcohol risk, the alcohol only intervention and the integrated alcohol and tobacco intervention was more effective than the tobacco only or alcohol only intervention. Conclusions: The study found that for past week tobacco abstinence the tobacco only intervention was more effective than the alcohol only intervention and the polydrug use (alcohol and tobacco) integrated intervention.en_US
dc.identifier.citationSubstance Abuse: Treatment, Prevention, and Policy. Vol.10, No.1 (2015)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13011-015-0018-1en_US
dc.identifier.issn1747597Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84930211318en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/36433
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84930211318&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleScreening and concurrent brief intervention of conjoint hazardous or harmful alcohol and tobacco use in hospital out-patients in Thailand: A randomized controlled trialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84930211318&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections