Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here
What Can I Do?


Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP
Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE
Resources
Resources
Find useful publications, online documents & more.


DrugScreening.org


 

SBI in Emergency Rooms: Report from San Diego County
August 12, 2008

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Summary

A screening and brief intervention (SBI) effort targeting patients in hospital emergency rooms in San Diego County, Calif., produced discussions with 29,000 people in its first year, with about 1,740 agreeing to a referral to a treatment program, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported Aug. 6.

County officials appearing at a news conference said that about 7,250 people  -- or 25 percent -- identified themselves as at-risk for substance use disorders. (At-risk was defined for men as two of more drinks per day or four or more in one sitting; for women as one or more drinks per day or at least three on one occassion.) Of those identified as at-risk, 1,740 individuals agreed to be referred to treatment.

The county last year received $7.7 million under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA's) Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) grants program, and reported on early results that it believes indicate that discussions with patients may be helping them avoid harmful substance use.

San Diego County's program encompasses 12 sites and 15 health educators who approach patients waiting for emergency services to ask them about alcohol and drug use. The effort is seen as attempting to reduce the staggering $44 billion in annual costs in California related to the health, legal and other impacts of harmful levels of substance use.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction, August 15, 2008: As originally published, this news summary stated the number of individuals referred to treatment as 70, based on erroneous information in the source article. The actual number of people referred through the program, per the County of San Diego's Health and Human Services Agency, was 1,740. (The "70" at-risk individuals mentioned in the article were a random sample of the total number of patients that agreed to be contacted six months later for a follow-up survey.)

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by kitty on 25 Aug 08 06:41 PM EDT
That figure of at risk drinking- men two or more etc. I use it a lot but don't remember from whence it came. Can anyone enlighten me?

Posted by Karen Drexler, M.D. on 18 Aug 08 09:16 AM EDT
Thank you for the correction. I agree with Stephen's point that treatment needs to be more widely and immediately available, but this article is mostly about prevention of alcoholism. Just to clarify with the correction- 29,000 individuals screened. 25% found to be at high risk for an alcohol use disorder. 24% of those at risk agreed to referral for treatment. The 2001-2 NESARC study found that

Posted by Stephen Buchness on 14 Aug 08 06:30 AM EDT
29,000 individuals were screened for at-risk drinking. 24.6% were identified as at-risk drinkers and 0.24% were referred for treatment. Yet there is NO INFORMATION on whether any at-risk individuals entered treatment. For $7,700,000 we know absolutely NOTHING about a reduction in use. If treatment availability in San Diego is similar to Maryland, the presence of a "waiting list" for treatment admission will reduce potential admission by more than 50%. Delays in entering treatment destroy motivation and indicate to the individual, their family, and the community that the situation is HOPELESS. This reinforces a false legitimacy that nothing can be done to change. The "window of opportunity" between the desire for change and the willingness to begin treatment is short. Substance abuse reinforces short-term, reactive strategies not pro-active planning. If a healthy solution is quickly available it will be used. If not, the current pattern of using will continue. Our ability to interrupt substance abuse is tied to IMMEDIACY. Identification, intervention and immediate treatment reinforces a consistent message. Delay reinforces the opposite message - the situation is hopeless.

Posted by June Claypool on 13 Aug 08 12:54 PM EDT
The primary goal of SBI services is not to get more high risk users into treatment (the 70 referenced in the article). The true value of the program is getting people who are non-dependent but engaging in risky alcohol and substance use behavior to modify that behavior before it negatively impacts their own and others' health. Providing brief interventions in the "teachable moment" of the ER visit invests resources in preventing costly public health problems before they start. Early data from the San Diego County program indicates positive effects on behavior of at-risk non-dependent users six months post screen.

Posted by John French on 13 Aug 08 10:16 AM EDT
Come on, folks. Look at the math. $110,000 for each agreement to go to treatment (not even actual entry). And with a 0.2% hit rate, they are woefully inadequate at identifying at-risk drinkers in an ER population that some studies show to be 25% or more at risk.

Posted by Lauren Tyson on 13 Aug 08 09:22 AM EDT
Good to put that into perspective. Also, for anyone interested in reading and watching the latest information on addiction, check out HBO's great Addiction website at http://www.hbo.com/addiction/ For example, it tells us, "Evolving research is demonstrating that addicts are not bad people who need to get good, crazy people who need to get sane, or stupid people who need education. Addicts have a brain disease that goes beyond their use of drugs." I can't begin to tell you what a good site this is.

Posted by Robert J. Chapman, PhD - Philadelphia on 13 Aug 08 08:49 AM EDT
This is actually very good news...and encouraging. Many may read this article and think, "29,000 SBIs and only 70 referrals...why bother?" But when you consider that no one ever enters treatment until having reached a point where the connection between drug use and personal problems is made and that this connection may need to be made many times by "others" before it is realized by the user, then all 29,000 "interventions" were successful in that each of those individuals were "one step closer" to recognizing that what causes a problem is a problem when it causes problems. Add to this the fact that many (most?) of the 29K were probably NOT in need of professional treatment, just feedback that alerted them to the fact that they needed to make a change in personal choices and it is likely that far more than 70 individuals responded to the SBI than the 70 who accepted a referral. In short, SBIs always work...even if not as an immediate response to the intervention.

Your Turn! Post a public comment (read guidelines):

Name:

Comment:
(limit 200
words)

Enter this word
(help):
Change

GUIDELINES: 
To keep this feature useful for all, please:

  1. Keep it clean, courteous, and on-topic. Comments are meant for thoughtful discussion of the article published above.

  2. Do not post promotional links to organizations, products or services, or personal requests for assistance (get help).

  3. Proof your comments carefully, use good spelling and punctuation, and don't use ALL CAPS. Comments are published immediately and cannot be edited.

Deceptive, slanderous and commercially-motivated posts are prohibited. We reserve the right to remove comments not conforming to these guidelines. (Report a comment).

Have questions or feedback? Contact us.