We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Comparison of Alcohol Use Disorder Screens During College Athlete Pre-Participation Evaluations.
Family Medicine 2016 May
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends screening adults for alcohol misuse, a challenge among young adults who may not have regular primary care. The pre-participation evaluation (PPE) provides an opportunity for screening, but traditional screening tools require extra time in an already busy visit. The objective of this study was to compare the 10-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) with a single-question alcohol misuse screen in a population of college-aged athletes.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study was performed during an athletic PPE clinic at a college in the Southeastern United States among athletes ages 18 years and older. Written AUDIT and single-question screen "How many times in the past year have you had X or more drinks in a day?" (five for men, four for women) asked orally were administered to each participant. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the single-question screen were compared to AUDIT.
RESULTS: A total of 225 athletes were screened; 60% were female; 29% screened positive by AUDIT; 59% positive by single-question instrument. Males were more likely to screen positive by both methods. Compared to the AUDIT, the brief single-question screen had 92% sensitivity for alcohol misuse and 55% specificity. The negative predictive value of the single-question screen was 95% compared to AUDIT.
CONCLUSIONS: A single-question screen for alcohol misuse in college-aged athletes had a high sensitivity and negative predictive value compared to the more extensive AUDIT screen. Ease of administration of this screening tool is ideal for use within the pre-participation physical among college-aged athletes who may not seek regular medical care.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study was performed during an athletic PPE clinic at a college in the Southeastern United States among athletes ages 18 years and older. Written AUDIT and single-question screen "How many times in the past year have you had X or more drinks in a day?" (five for men, four for women) asked orally were administered to each participant. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the single-question screen were compared to AUDIT.
RESULTS: A total of 225 athletes were screened; 60% were female; 29% screened positive by AUDIT; 59% positive by single-question instrument. Males were more likely to screen positive by both methods. Compared to the AUDIT, the brief single-question screen had 92% sensitivity for alcohol misuse and 55% specificity. The negative predictive value of the single-question screen was 95% compared to AUDIT.
CONCLUSIONS: A single-question screen for alcohol misuse in college-aged athletes had a high sensitivity and negative predictive value compared to the more extensive AUDIT screen. Ease of administration of this screening tool is ideal for use within the pre-participation physical among college-aged athletes who may not seek regular medical care.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app