• Jana Vitesnikova, Michael Dinh, Elizabeth Leonard, Soufiane Boufous, and Katherine Conigrave.
• Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: jvit3927@uni.sydney.edu.au.
• Injury. 2014 Sep 1;45(9):1440-4.

IntroductionAlcohol use is an important contributor to injuries. Simple bedside tools to identify trauma patients with potentially harmful drinking may assist in brief intervention efforts in clinical practice. The objective of the study was to determine and compare the accuracy of alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) and an abbreviated version of this test, in the detection of hazardous drinking.MethodsA cross-sectional study of a convenience sample of admitted trauma patients at a single Australian major trauma centre. Eligible patients completed the AUDIT. AUDIT survey responses were scored in two ways, using the full form scale and secondly an abbreviated (AUDIT C) scale which uses only the first 3 questions. AUDIT and AUDIT-C scores were then evaluated with respect to the primary study measure; the detection of hazardous alcohol consumption based on a full alcohol consumption history. Sensitivities for each relevant score were calculated and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine test accuracy.ResultsDuring the study period, 523 trauma admissions were identified and of these 146 (28%) were screened. The optimum cut off scores for AUDIT and AUDIT-C were 8 and 5 respectively corresponding to sensitivities of 88% and 91% and both tests had excellent overall accuracy for the detection of hazardous alcohol consumption. There was no significant difference between AUDIT-C and AUDIT performance (p=0.395) (AUDIT-C AUROC 0.96 95%CI 0.93, 0.99).ConclusionAUDIT-C appears to be a potentially useful screening tool for use trauma centres, but that further research with larger samples is required.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

29 keywords...

hide…