CORK Bibliography: AUDIT - PC (Primary Care) (Screening Test)

4 citations. January 2005 to present

Prepared: December 2010

Aalto M; Tuunanen M; Sillanaukee P; Seppa K. Effectiveness of structured questionnaires for screening heavy drinking in middle-aged women. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research 30(11): 1884-1888, 2006. (19 refs.)

Background: There is a need for an effective and feasible alcohol screening instrument. The aim of the study was to evaluate how the abbreviated versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) questionnaire perform in comparison with the original AUDIT and what the optimal cutoffs are when screening for heavy drinking among women. Methods: All the 40-year-old women in the city of Tampere, Finland, are invited yearly for a health screening. From 1 year, data from 894 women (response rate 68.2%) invited for a health screening were utilized in the study. The original 10-item AUDIT, AUDIT-C, Five Shot, AUDIT-PC, AUDIT-3, AUDIT-QF, and CAGE were evaluated against the Timeline Followback. Consumption of at least 140 g of absolute ethanol per week on average during the past month was considered heavy drinking. Results: In the Timeline Followback, the mean +/- SD weekly reported alcohol consumption was 45 +/- 67 g (range 0-936 g) of absolute ethanol. Of the women, 6.2% (55/894) were heavy drinkers. The optimal combination of sensitivity and specificity was reached for the AUDIT with cutoff >= 6, for the AUDIT-C with cutoff >= 5, for the Five Shot with cutoff >= 2.0, for the AUDIT-PC with cutoff >= 4, and for the AUDIT-QF with cutoff >= 4. When choosing the optimal cutoffs, the AUDIT-C, the Five Shot, the AUDIT-PC, and the AUDIT-QF performed as well as the 10-item AUDIT. With these cutoffs, sensitivities were 0.84 to 0.93 and specificities were 0.83 to 0.90. The AUDIT-3 and the CAGE did not perform as well as the other questionnaires. Conclusions: The 10-item AUDIT, AUDIT-C, Five Shot, AUDIT-PC, and AUDIT-QF seem to be equally effective tools in screening for heavy drinking among middle-aged women. However, their applicability is achieved only if the cutoffs are tailored according to gender.

Gomez A; Conde A; Santana JM; Jorrin A. Diagnostic usefulness of brief versions of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) for detecting hazardous drinkers in primary care settings. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 66(2): 305-308, 2005. (20 refs.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of the brief versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) for detecting hazardous drinkers and to compare it with that of the full-AUDIT in primary care settings. Method: Five hundred patients were randomly selected in a primary care center. An interview on quantity-frequency was administered for assessment of weekly alcohol intake. The standard used for classification of hazardous drinkers was a weekly alcohol consumption of 280 g for men and 168 g for women. Cut-off points were 8 for the full-AUDIT, I for the AUDIT-3 (third item), 3 for the AUDIT-C (items 1, 2 and 3), 5 for the AUDIT-PC (items 1, 2, 4, 5 and 10) and 3 for the modified Fast Alcohol Screening Test (m-FAST; items 3, 5, 8 and 10). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves were measured. Results: Diagnostic usefulness of the questionnaires for detecting hazardous drinkers was for the full-AUDIT: 81.4% sensitivity, 94.6% specificity and 0.97 AUROC curve; for the AUDIT-3: 83.1% sensitivity, 90.9% specificity and 0.89 AUROC curve; for the AUDIT-C: 100% sensitivity, 79.4% specificity and 0.97 AUROC curve; for the AUDIT-PC: 98.3% sensitivity 90.9% specificity and 0.97 AUROC curve; and for the m-FAST: 79.7% sensitivity, 93.7% specificity and 0.93 AUROC curve. Conclusions: The AUDIT-C and AUDIT-PC show a higher sensitivity, lower specificity and a similar AUROC curve than the full-AUDIT, thus allowing their use as screening instruments that are as reliable as the original test for detecting hazardous drinkers. The AUDIT-3 and m-FAST, when compared with the full-AUDIT, performed less well, therefore limiting their use for this purpose.

Meneses-Gaya C; Zuardi AW; Loureiro SR; Hallak JEC; Trzesniak C; Marques JMD et al. Is the full version of the AUDIT really necessary? Study of the validity and internal construct of its abbreviated versions. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research34(8): 1417-1424, 2010. (49 refs.)

Background: This study was aimed at assessing the psychometric qualities of the abbreviated versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-3, AUDIT-4, AUDIT-C, AUDIT-PC, AUDIT-QF, FAST, and Five-Shot) and at comparing them to the 10-item AUDIT and the CAGE in 2 samples of Brazilian adults. Methods: The validity and internal consistency of the scales were assessed in a sample of 530 subjects attended at an emergency department and at a Psychosocial Care Center for Alcohol and Drugs. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV was used as the diagnostic comparative measure for the predictive validity assessment. The concurrent validity between the scales was analyzed by means of Pearson's correlation coefficient. Results: The assessment of the predictive validity of the abbreviated versions showed high sensitivity (of 0.78 to 0.96) and specificity (of 0.74 to 0.94) indices, with areas under the curve as elevated as those of the AUDIT (0.89 and 0.92 to screen for abuse and 0.93 and 0.95 in the screening of dependence). The CAGE presented lower indices: 0.81 for abuse and 0.87 for dependence. The analysis of the internal consistency of the AUDIT and its versions exhibited Cronbach's alpha coefficients between 0.83 and 0.94, while the coefficient for the CAGE was 0.78. Significant correlations were found between the 10-item AUDIT and its versions, ranging from 0.91 to 0.99. Again, the results for the CAGE were satisfactory (0.77), although inferior to the other instruments. Conclusions: The results obtained in this study confirm the validity of the abbreviated versions of the AUDIT for the screening of alcohol use disorders and show that their psychometric properties are as satisfactory as those of the 10-item AUDIT and the CAGE.

Verster JC; van Herwijnen J; Olivier B; Kahler CW Validation of the Dutch version of the brief young adult alcohol consequences questionnaire (B-YAACQ). (18 refs.) Addictive Behaviors 34(5): 411-414, 2009. (18 refs.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to validate the Dutch version of the Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (B-YAACQ). Method: The B-YAACQ was translated Into the Dutch language and 800 students were invited to complete the questionnaire. A number of drinking behaviors were also assessed; including weekly drinking. age of drinking onset, and blood alcohol concentration on a typical night out. Students also completed a short version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-PC). Results: Data from 667 undergraduate and graduate students (184 men and 483 women) who reported alcohol use during the past year was used in the analysis. On average, students in this study report 4.7 alcohol-related consequences. The Dutch B-YAACQ was shown to have a high reliability and validity: Cronbach's Alpha was 0.816. and B-YAACQ scores correlated significantly with AUDIT-PC scores (r = 0.747). B-YAACQ scores correlated significantly (p < 0.01) with various drinking variables, including drinking onset age, drinking days per week, alcoholic drinks per week, number of drinks on a night out and blood alcohol concentration when returning home. Conclusion: The Dutch B-YAACQ is a useful new tool for screening of alcohol-related consequences.