Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

Carolien Verheij; Juanita A. Haagsma; Birgit C.P. Koch; Anne E.M. Segers; Stephanie C.E. Schuit; Pleunie P.M. Rood

doi:10.1111/acer.14958

Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

Carolien Verheij^*, Juanita A. Haagsma, Birgit C.P. Koch, Anne E.M. Segers, Stephanie C.E. Schuit, Pleunie P.M. Rood

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

48 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2225-2235
Number of pages	11
Journal	Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research
Volume	46
Issue number	12
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.14958
Publication status	Published - Dec 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This study received funding from Stichting Coolsingel (Rotterdam, The Netherlands) for the costs of the laboratory analyses of the PEth value in the blood samples.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Research Society on Alcoholism.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/acer.14958Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Alcohol Clin Exp Res - 2022 - Verheij - Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department Comparison ofFinal published version, 606 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

Verheij, C., Haagsma, J. A., Koch, B. C. P., Segers, A. E. M., Schuit, S. C. E., & Rood, P. P. M. (2022). Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 46(12), 2225-2235. https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.14958

@article{27671364c93b4282aa3f1bebef565ffa,

title = "Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back",

abstract = "Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored {\textquoteleft}low risk drinking/abstinence{\textquoteright} according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population.",

author = "Carolien Verheij and Haagsma, {Juanita A.} and Koch, {Birgit C.P.} and Segers, {Anne E.M.} and Schuit, {Stephanie C.E.} and Rood, {Pleunie P.M.}",

note = "Funding Information: This study received funding from Stichting Coolsingel (Rotterdam, The Netherlands) for the costs of the laboratory analyses of the PEth value in the blood samples. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 The Authors. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Research Society on Alcoholism.",

year = "2022",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1111/acer.14958",

language = "English",

volume = "46",

pages = "2225--2235",

journal = "Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research",

issn = "0145-6008",

publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Inc.",

number = "12",

}

Verheij, C , Haagsma, JA , Koch, BCP, Segers, AEM, Schuit, SCE & Rood, PPM 2022, 'Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back', Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, vol. 46, no. 12, pp. 2225-2235. https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.14958

Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back. / Verheij, Carolien ; Haagsma, Juanita A.; Koch, Birgit C.P. et al.
In: Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, Vol. 46, No. 12, 12.2022, p. 2225-2235.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department

T2 - Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

AU - Verheij, Carolien

AU - Haagsma, Juanita A.

AU - Koch, Birgit C.P.

AU - Segers, Anne E.M.

AU - Schuit, Stephanie C.E.

AU - Rood, Pleunie P.M.

N1 - Funding Information: This study received funding from Stichting Coolsingel (Rotterdam, The Netherlands) for the costs of the laboratory analyses of the PEth value in the blood samples. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Research Society on Alcoholism.

PY - 2022/12

Y1 - 2022/12

N2 - Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population.

AB - Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144155902&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/acer.14958

DO - 10.1111/acer.14958

M3 - Article

C2 - 36520053

AN - SCOPUS:85144155902

SN - 0145-6008

VL - 46

SP - 2225

EP - 2235

JO - Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

JF - Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

IS - 12

ER -