Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
The College of Family Physicians of Canada
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums
  • My alerts
The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow cfp Template on Twitter
Article CommentaryCommentary

Paradigm shift

Moving the management of alcohol use disorders from specialized care to primary care

Sheryl Spithoff and Meldon Kahan
Canadian Family Physician June 2015, 61 (6) 491-493;
Sheryl Spithoff
Staff physician with the Women’s College Hospital Family Health Team in Toronto, Ont.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: sheryl.spithoff@wchospital.ca
Meldon Kahan
Associate Professor in the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of Toronto and Medical Director of the Substance Use Service at Women’s College Hospital.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Almost 20 years ago research indicated that brief interventions1 in primary care settings helped patients with at-risk drinking and milder alcohol use disorder (AUD) reduce heavy drinking.2 More recent meta-analyses have overwhelmingly confirmed this finding.3,4 However, evidence showed that brief interventions were not effective in helping those with more severe AUD reduce or stop drinking.5 As a result, addictions organizations recommended that primary care physicians use the SBIRT (Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment) model,1 and that those with more severe AUD should be referred for specialized treatment.

Limitations of specialized care

However, referral for specialized treatment poses problems. First of all, many patients with AUD do not access or remain engaged with specialized care.6 This is partly owing to low referral rates: a study done in the US Veterans Affairs medical system found that primary care providers were 10 times less likely to refer patients with alcohol misuse for specialized treatment than they were to refer patients with depression or posttraumatic stress disorder.7 It is also a result of high rates of missed appointments. Studies of addiction medicine services have found no-show rates of 30% to 75% for initial appointments and 15% to 50% for follow-up appointments.8,9

Studies have identified reasons for missed appointments that apply to specialized addiction care. One is the delay between the referral and the appointment; no-show rates dropped from 52% to 18% when wait times were reduced from 13 days to 0 days in a mental health clinic.10 Other reasons include financial concerns and transportation costs, lack of a therapeutic alliance with the provider, ambivalence about treatment, and concurrent mental health problems.11–14 As well, many patients with AUD have negative experiences with the health care system.15,16 This might play a role in missed appointments, as higher patient perception of stigma is associated with lower help seeking.17

There are other limitations to specialized addiction care. Many specialized addiction programs focus solely on psychosocial treatments and do not provide pharmacotherapy.6,18 Some abstinence-based programs actively discourage pharmacotherapy for addiction treatment.19 The few programs that do provide pharmacotherapy and psychosocial treatment have limited capacity and cannot accommodate the estimated 641 000 Canadians20 with more severe AUD.

Benefits of primary care management

As a result, researchers shifted their attention to primary care. It appears to be a logical choice. There are many opportunities to intervene because patients are frequently in contact with the primary health care system. There is no or minimal delay to starting an intervention. If patients are lost to follow-up, they reconnect with primary care for another reason and can re-engage with treatment. Primary care clinics are typically more convenient and less costly for patients to access, as they are often closer to their homes than specialized addiction clinics are. Primary care providers, unlike many specialized programs, are able to prescribe medications in addition to counseling. And finally, primary care providers often have strong therapeutic relationships with their patients,21 an important factor in treatment outcomes in addiction medicine.22,23

Longitudinal care

The nature of family medicine makes it well suited to management of AUD. Patients with AUD require complex longitudinal care: ongoing counseling to encourage behavioural change and adherence to medications; assistance with connecting to other resources; coordination of care; and medical management (MM) of complications from alcohol use. Family physicians are trained experts in all of these areas and employ these skills regularly when they care for patients with chronic conditions such as diabetes, depression, cardiac disease, and obesity. Studies consistently demonstrate that family physicians provide good care to patients with chronic diseases.24,25

Effective MM

Recent research26–28 confirms that primary care management of more severe AUD is effective. Several studies have compared primary care management and specialized care head to head. A small trial randomized patients to “advice and clinical management techniques commonly used by primary care providers”29 along with naltrexone, or to standard specialty addiction treatment. They found similar outcomes in the 2 groups. In the much larger COMBINE (Combined Pharmacotherapies and Behavioral Interventions) trial,30 researchers sought to determine if MM was efficacious without additional specialized addiction care. Medical management was specifically constructed to be implemented by medically trained practitioners in nonspecialty settings. Each visit includes evaluations of medication safety and adherence, monitoring of alcohol use and direct advice to the patient for achieving full recovery.31

Of the 9 different treatment combinations (MM with and without additional specialized addiction counseling, and with medications or with placebo), none was more effective than MM with naltrexone.

Increased retention

Some preliminary evidence indicates that “real-world” primary care treatment of addictions might outperform specialized care.32 Researchers randomized 163 American veterans with alcohol dependence (more severe AUD) to primary care management with additional counseling at the veterans’ own primary care clinics or to specialized care at addiction clinics. Both groups experienced a decrease in heavy drinking days from baseline, but the drop was one-third greater in primary care. The researchers attributed most of the difference in outcomes to increased retention in treatment in the primary care group compared with the specialized care group (42% versus 12%) and to increased rates of naltrexone use in the primary care group.

Scope and capacity

Does primary care have the capacity to care for these patients? This is a legitimate concern for an already heavily burdened primary care system. Undoubtedly, addressing the underlying AUD will initially take more time and resources. (Some provinces provide compensation for this outlay; in Ontario, primary care providers can bill 2 “outside the basket” time-based codes when they treat a patient’s AUD.) However, without the intervention of family physicians, many patients with AUD will never get treatment, particularly in remote communities. Family physicians are already caring for many of these patients. Prescribing medications for AUD and providing them with counseling is well within the scope of practice for family doctors. As well, evidence-based treatment of AUD should lead to reduced health care use33 and costs.34

Conclusion

As primary care treatments are effective, and specialized addiction care has poor access and retention, we recommend that family doctors use a primary care treatment model to manage patients with moderate and severe AUD. Family physicians should offer frequent, brief (10 to 30 minutes) counseling sessions, prescribe AUD medications, and connect patients with other addiction and mental health services. If patients connect with specialized addiction care, family physicians should remain involved and assist in the coordination of care.

Family physicians should recognize that behaviour change is very difficult, particularly when coupled with an addiction. Like smoking cessation, relapse rates for AUD are high and patients often go through many cycles of relapse and remission before achieving their long-term goals. Physicians should remain supportive and seek to re-engage patients who relapse.

We review screening and assessment (page 509)35 and the primary care MM (counsel, prescribe, connect) approach (page 515)36 in more depth in this issue.

Footnotes

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • Cet article se trouve aussi en français à la page 495.

  • Competing interests

    Dr Kahan has received honoraria from Reckitt-Benckiser for continuing medical education events on Suboxone (buprenorphine-naloxone).

  • The opinions expressed in commentaries are those of the authors. Publication does not imply endorsement by the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

  • Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada

References

  1. 1.↵
    Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2014. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [website]. Available from: www.samhsa.gov/sbirt. Accessed 2015 Apr 17.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Wilk AI,
    2. Jensen NM,
    3. Havighurst TC
    . Meta-analysis of randomized control trials addressing brief interventions in heavy alcohol drinkers. J Gen Intern Med 1997;12(5):274-83.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Bertholet N,
    2. Daeppen JB,
    3. Wietlisbach V,
    4. Fleming M,
    5. Burnand B
    . Reduction of alcohol consumption by brief alcohol intervention in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 2005;165(9):986-95.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Kaner EFS,
    2. Beyer F,
    3. Dickinson HO,
    4. Pienaar E,
    5. Campbell F,
    6. Schlesinger C,
    7. et al
    . Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(2):CD004148.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Saitz R
    . Alcohol screening and brief intervention in primary care: absence of evidence for efficacy in people with dependence or very heavy drinking. Drug Alcohol Rev 2010;29(6):631-40.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. CASA Columbia
    . Addiction medicine: closing the gap between science and practice. New York, NY: Columbia University; 2012. Available from: www.casacolumbia.org/addiction-research/reports/addiction-medicine. Accessed 2015 Apr 17.
  7. 7.↵
    1. Maust DT,
    2. Mavandadi S,
    3. Klaus J,
    4. Oslin DW
    . Missed opportunities: fewer service referrals after positive alcohol misuse screens in VA primary care. Psychiatr Serv 2011;62(3):310-2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Molfenter T
    . Reducing appointment no-shows: going from theory to practice. Subst Use Misuse 2013;48(9):743-9. Epub 2013 Apr 22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Capoccia VA,
    2. Cotter F,
    3. Gustafson DH,
    4. Cassidy EF,
    5. Ford JH 2nd.,
    6. Madden L,
    7. et al
    . Making “stone soup”: improvements in clinic access and retention in addiction treatment. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2007;33(2):95-103.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Williams ME,
    2. Latta J,
    3. Conversano P
    . Eliminating the wait for mental health services. J Behav Health Serv Res 2008;35(1):107-14. Epub 2007 Nov 2.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Palmer RS,
    2. Murphy MK,
    3. Piselli A,
    4. Ball SA
    . Substance abuse treatment dropout from client and clinician perspectives: a pilot study. Subst Use Misuse 2009;44(7):1021-38.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.
    1. Ryan RM,
    2. Plant RW,
    3. O’Malley S
    . Initial motivations for alcohol treatment: relations with patient characteristics, treatment involvement, and dropout. Addict Behav 1995;20(3):279-97.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.
    1. Mitchell AJ,
    2. Selmes T
    . Why don’t patients attend their appointments? Maintaining engagement with psychiatric services. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2007;13(6):423-34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Ball SA,
    2. Carroll KM,
    3. Canning-Ball M,
    4. Rounsaville BJ
    . Reasons for dropout from drug abuse treatment: symptoms, personality, and motivation. Addict Behav 2006;31(2):320-30. Epub 2005 Jun 17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Gilchrist G,
    2. Moskalewicz J,
    3. Slezakova S,
    4. Okruhlica L,
    5. Torrens M,
    6. Vajd R,
    7. et al
    . Staff regard towards working with substance users: a European multi-centre study. Addiction 2011;106(6):1114-25. Epub 2011 Apr 28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Danda MC
    . Attitudes of health care professionals towards addictions clients accessing mental health services: what do we know and how can this be used to improve care? J Ethics Ment Health 2012;7(1). Available from: www.jemh.ca/issues/v7/documents/JEMH_Vol7_FrontlinePerspectives-AttitutesofHealthCareProfessionalsTowardsAddictionsClients.pdf. Accessed 2015 Apr 17.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Keyes KM,
    2. Hatzenbuehler ML,
    3. McLaughlin KA,
    4. Link B,
    5. Olfson M,
    6. Grant BF,
    7. et al
    . Stigma and treatment for alcohol disorders in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 2010;172(12):1364-72. Epub 2010 Nov 2.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Fletcher AM
    . Inside rehab: the surprising truth about addiction treatment—and how to get help that works. New York, NY: Viking; 2013.
  19. 19.↵
    1. ConnexOntario Health Services Information
    . Organizations in the DAH database that offer residential treatment services in Toronto. London, ON: ConnexOntario Health Services Information; 2013.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Tjepkema M
    . Alcohol and illicit drug dependence. Toronto, ON: Health Statistics Division, Statistics Canada; 2004. Available from: http://acbr.com/fas/Alcohol%20and%20illicit%20drug%20dependence.pdf. Accessed 2015 Apr 20.
  21. 21.↵
    1. Saultz JW,
    2. Albedaiwi W
    . Interpersonal continuity of care and patient satisfaction: a critical review. Ann Fam Med 2004;2(5):445-51.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Joe GW,
    2. Simpson DD,
    3. Dansereau DF,
    4. Rowan-Szal GA
    . Relationships between counseling rapport and drug abuse treatment outcomes. Psychiatr Serv 2001;52(9):1223-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Ritter A,
    2. Bowden S,
    3. Murray T,
    4. Ross P,
    5. Greeley J,
    6. Pead J
    . The influence of the therapeutic relationship in treatment for alcohol dependency. Drug Alcohol Rev 2002;21(3):261-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. College of the Family Physicians of Canada
    . Family medicine in Canada. Vision for the future. Mississauga, ON: College of the Family Physicians of Canada; 2004. Available from: www.cfpc.ca/uploadedFiles/Resources/Resource_Items/FAMILY_MEDICINE_IN_CANADA_English.pdf. Accessed 2015 Apr 20.
  25. 25.↵
    1. Shi L
    . The impact of primary care: a focused review. Scientifica (Cairo) 2012;2012:432892. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Miller PM,
    2. Book SW,
    3. Stewart SH
    . Medical treatment of alcohol dependence: a systematic review. Int J Psychiatry Med 2011;42(3):227-66.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.
    1. Ernst DB,
    2. Pettinati HM,
    3. Weiss RD,
    4. Donovan DM,
    5. Longabaugh R
    . An intervention for treating alcohol dependence: relating elements of medical management to patient outcomes with implications for primary care. Ann Fam Med 2008;6(5):435-40.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Lee JD,
    2. Grossman E,
    3. Huben L,
    4. Manseau M,
    5. McNeely J,
    6. Rotrosen J,
    7. et al
    . Extended-release naltrexone plus medical management alcohol treatment in primary care: findings at 15 months. J Subst Abuse Treat 2012;43(4):458-62. Epub 2012 Sep 15.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. O’Malley SS,
    2. Rounsaville BJ,
    3. Farren C,
    4. Namkoong K,
    5. Wu R,
    6. Robinson J,
    7. et al
    . Initial and maintenance naltrexone treatment for alcohol dependence using primary care vs specialty care: a nested sequence of 3 randomized trials. Arch Intern Med 2003;163(14):1695-704.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Anton RF,
    2. O’Malley SS,
    3. Ciraulo DA,
    4. Cisler RA,
    5. Couper D,
    6. Donovan DM,
    7. et al
    . Combined pharmacotherapies and behavioral interventions for alcohol dependence: the COMBINE study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006;295(17):2003-17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Pettinati HM,
    2. Weiss RD,
    3. Dundon W,
    4. Miller WR,
    5. Donovan D,
    6. Ernst DB,
    7. et al
    . A structured approach to medical management: a psychosocial intervention to support pharmacotherapy in the treatment of alcohol dependence. J Stud Alcohol Suppl 2005;(Suppl 15):170-8.
  32. 32.↵
    1. Oslin DW,
    2. Lynch KG,
    3. Maisto SA,
    4. Lantinga LJ,
    5. McKay JR,
    6. Possemato K,
    7. et al
    . A randomized clinical trial of alcohol care management delivered in Department of Veterans Affairs primary care clinics versus specialty addiction treatment. J Gen Intern Med 2014;29(1):162-8. Epub 2013 Sep 20.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Baser O,
    2. Chalk M,
    3. Rawson R,
    4. Gastfriend DR
    . Alcohol dependence treatments: comprehensive healthcare costs, utilization outcomes, and pharmacotherapy persistence. Am J Manag Care 2011;17(Suppl 8):S222-34.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. Popova S,
    2. Mohapatra S,
    3. Patra J,
    4. Duhig A,
    5. Rehm J
    . A literature review of cost-benefit analyses for the treatment of alcohol dependence. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2011;8(8):3351-64. Epub 2011 Aug 16.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Spithoff S,
    2. Kahan M
    . Primary care management of alcohol use disorder and at-risk drinking. Part 1: screening and assessment. Can Fam Physician 2015;61:509-14. (Eng), e259–65 (Fr).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Spithoff S,
    2. Kahan M
    . Primary care management of alcohol use disorder and at-risk drinking. Part 2: counsel, prescribe, connect. Can Fam Physician 2015;61:515-21. (Eng), e266–72 (Fr).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Family Physician: 61 (6)
Canadian Family Physician
Vol. 61, Issue 6
1 Jun 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The College of Family Physicians of Canada.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Paradigm shift
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The College of Family Physicians of Canada
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The College of Family Physicians of Canada web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Paradigm shift
Sheryl Spithoff, Meldon Kahan
Canadian Family Physician Jun 2015, 61 (6) 491-493;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Paradigm shift
Sheryl Spithoff, Meldon Kahan
Canadian Family Physician Jun 2015, 61 (6) 491-493;
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Limitations of specialized care
    • Benefits of primary care management
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Primary care management of alcohol use disorder and at-risk drinking
  • Primary care management of alcohol use disorder and at-risk drinking
  • Changement de paradigme
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Challenges with new treatments for Alzheimer disease
  • Merging clinical practice guidelines for chronic pain with insights from noninvasive neuroimaging
  • Collaborative mental health care
Show more Commentary

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Collections - English
  • Collections - Française

For Authors

  • Authors and Reviewers
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Permissions
  • Terms of Use

General Information

  • About CFP
  • About the CFPC
  • Advertisers
  • Careers & Locums
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Subscribers

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feeds

Copyright © 2023 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Powered by HighWire