Testing the validity of the AUDIT-C and AUDIT-3 to detect unhealthy alcohol use among high-risk populations in Zambia: A secondary analysis from two randomized trials.
Testing the validity of the AUDIT-C and AUDIT-3 to detect unhealthy alcohol use among high-risk populations in Zambia: A secondary analysis from two randomized trials.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.109156
复制
发表时间：
2021-12-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Kane JC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Inoue S;Chitambi C;Vinikoor MJ;Kanguya T;Murray LK;Sharma A;Chander G;Paul R;Mwenge MM;Munthali S;Kane JC
本研究评估了简要版本的酒精使用障碍识别测试（AUDIT）、AUDIT- c和AUDIT-3的测试特征，与生活在赞比亚的重度饮酒人群的完整审计进行了比较，并比较了在临床试验中使用简要版本时效应大小估计的差异。数据来自两项旨在减少赞比亚成年夫妇和艾滋病毒感染者不健康饮酒的共同要素治疗方法（CETA）的随机试验。在基线和6个月或12个月的随访中对参与者进行完整的审计。与完整审计相比，计算了简要版本的敏感性和特异性。估计混合效应回归模型来计算使用简短版本的试验的效应量，并将其与最初使用完整版本计算的效应量进行比较。在cut-off≥3时，AUDIT-C在男性（敏感度：>80%；特异性：>76%）和女性（敏感度：>84%；特异性：>88%）均表现良好。cut-off≥1时，AUDIT-3表现最佳，但对男性（灵敏度：>77%；特异性：≥60%）和女性（灵敏度：≥72%；特异性：>62%）的效度相对较低。与AUDIT相比，使用AUDIT- c和AUDIT-3的效应量差异高达52%和60%。建议将审计- c作为一种简短的筛查工具，在赞比亚不健康饮酒高流行人群中进行基于社区和诊所的筛查。对于研究，建议进行全面审计来计算治疗效果。
This study evaluated the test characteristics of brief versions of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), the AUDIT-C and AUDIT-3, compared to the full AUDIT in populations with heavy drinking living in Zambia and compared differences in effect size estimates when using brief versions in clinical trials. Data were obtained from two randomized trials of the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA) for reducing unhealthy alcohol use among adult couples and people living with HIV (PLWH) in Zambia. The full AUDIT was administered to participants at baseline and at 6- or 12-month follow-up. Sensitivity and specificity of the brief versions were calculated in comparison to the full AUDIT. Mixed effects regression models were estimated to calculate the effect sizes from the trials using the brief versions and these were compared to the originally calculated effect sizes using the full version. The AUDIT-C performed well at cut-off ≥ 3 for both men (sensitivity: >80%; specificity: >76%) and women (sensitivity: >84%; specificity: >88%). The AUDIT-3 performed best at cut-off ≥ 1, but with comparatively reduced validity for men (sensitivity: >77%; specificity: ≥60%) and women (sensitivity: ≥72%; specificity: >62%). Effect sizes were different by up to 52% using the AUDIT-C and up to 60% for the AUDIT-3 compared to the AUDIT. The AUDIT-C is recommended as a brief screening tool for community-based and clinic-based screening in Zambia among populations with high prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use. For research studies, the full AUDIT is recommended to calculate treatment effect.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Nadkarni, Abhijit;Garber, Alison;Rane, Anil
通讯作者：
Rane, Anil
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Kane, J. C.;Van Wyk, S. Skavenski;Murray, L. K.
通讯作者：
Murray, L. K.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Bush, K;Kivlahan, DR;Bradley, KA
通讯作者：
Bradley, KA
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Kane JC;Sharma A;Murray LK;Chander G;Kanguya T;Skavenski S;Chitambi C;Lasater ME;Paul R;Cropsey K;Inoue S;Bosomprah S;Danielson CK;Chipungu J;Simenda F;Vinikoor MJ
通讯作者：
Vinikoor MJ
DOI：
10.1111/j.1530-0277.2010.01225.x
发表时间：
2010-08-01
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Meneses-Gaya, Carolina;Zuardi, Antonio W.;Crippa, Jose A. S.
通讯作者：
Crippa, Jose A. S.