by Simon Coulton, Dorothy Newbury-Birch, Paul Cassidy, Veronica Dale, Paolo Deluca, Eilish Gilvarry, Christine Godfrey, Nick Heather, Eileen Kaner, Adenekan Oyefeso, Steve Parrott, Tom Phillips, Jonathan Shepherd, Colin Drummond
Abstract:
Aims: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of alcohol screening and delivery of brief interventions within criminal justice settings. Methods: A quantitative survey of those aged 18 or over in English criminal justice settings (three custody suites within police stations, three prisons and three probation offices). Measurements: The Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) and a modified version of the Single Alcohol Screening Question (M-SASQ) were compared with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as the ‘gold standard’. Participants completed a health status questionnaire (EQ5D), questions on service utilization and the Readiness to Change Questionnaire. Questions relating to the acceptability and feasibility of delivering brief interventions and about perception of coercion were included. Findings: Five hundred and ninety-two individuals were approached and 251 were eligible. Of these, 205 (82%) consented to take part in the study. The mean AUDIT score was 19.9 (SD 13.5) and 73% scored 8 or more on AUDIT. A higher percentage of those approached in the probation setting consented to take part (81%: prison 36%, police setting 10%). Those scoring AUDIT positive were more likely to be involved in violent offences (36.5 vs 9.4%; P
Reference:
Screening for Alcohol Use in Criminal Justice Settings: An Exploratory Study (Simon Coulton, Dorothy Newbury-Birch, Paul Cassidy, Veronica Dale, Paolo Deluca, Eilish Gilvarry, Christine Godfrey, Nick Heather, Eileen Kaner, Adenekan Oyefeso, Steve Parrott, Tom Phillips, Jonathan Shepherd, Colin Drummond), In Alcohol and Alcoholism, volume 47, no. 4, 2012.AbstractAims: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of alcohol screening and delivery of brief interventions within criminal justice settings. Methods: A quantitative survey of those aged 18 or over in English criminal justice settings (three custody suites within police stations, three prisons and three probation offices). Measurements: The Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) and a modified version of the Single Alcohol Screening Question (M-SASQ) were compared with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as the ‘gold standard’. Participants completed a health status questionnaire (EQ5D), questions on service utilization and the Readiness to Change Questionnaire. Questions relating to the acceptability and feasibility of delivering brief interventions and about perception of coercion were included. Findings: Five hundred and ninety-two individuals were approached and 251 were eligible. Of these, 205 (82%) consented to take part in the study. The mean AUDIT score was 19.9 (SD 13.5) and 73% scored 8 or more on AUDIT. A higher percentage of those approached in the probation setting consented to take part (81%: prison 36%, police setting 10%). Those scoring AUDIT positive were more likely to be involved in violent offences (36.5 vs 9.4%; P
Bibtex Entry:
@article{doi:10.1093/alcalc/ags048,
author = {Coulton, Simon and Newbury-Birch, Dorothy and Cassidy, Paul and Dale, Veronica and Deluca, Paolo and Gilvarry, Eilish and Godfrey, Christine and Heather, Nick and Kaner, Eileen and Oyefeso, Adenekan and Parrott, Steve and Phillips, Tom and Shepherd, Jonathan and Drummond, Colin},
title = {Screening for Alcohol Use in Criminal Justice Settings: An Exploratory Study},
journal = {Alcohol and Alcoholism},
volume = {47},
number = {4},
pages = {423},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1093/alcalc/ags048},
URL = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/ags048},
eprint = {https://academic.oup.com/oup/backfile/content_public/journal/alcalc/47/4/10.1093/alcalc/ags048/2/ags048.pdf}
,abstract = {<strong>Aims</strong>: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of alcohol screening and delivery of brief interventions within criminal justice settings. <strong>Methods</strong>: A quantitative survey of those aged 18 or over in English criminal justice settings (three custody suites within police stations, three prisons and three probation offices). <strong>Measurements</strong>: The Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) and a modified version of the Single Alcohol Screening Question (M-SASQ) were compared with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as the ‘gold standard’. Participants completed a health status questionnaire (EQ5D), questions on service utilization and the Readiness to Change Questionnaire. Questions relating to the acceptability and feasibility of delivering brief interventions and about perception of coercion were included. <strong>Findings</strong>: Five hundred and ninety-two individuals were approached and 251 were eligible. Of these, 205 (82%) consented to take part in the study. The mean AUDIT score was 19.9 (SD 13.5) and 73% scored 8 or more on AUDIT. A higher percentage of those approached in the probation setting consented to take part (81%: prison 36%, police setting 10%). Those scoring AUDIT positive were more likely to be involved in violent offences (36.5 vs 9.4%; P },issn = 1464-3502}