Elsevier

Injury

Volume 42, Issue 9, September 2011, Pages 922-926
Injury

Alcohol-related injury visits: Do we know the true prevalence in U.S. trauma centres?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.01.098Get rights and content

Abstract

Introduction

Alcohol consumption is a significant risk factor for injuries. Further, level I trauma centres are mandated to screen and provide a brief intervention for identified problem drinkers. However, a valid population-based estimate of the magnitude of the problem is unknown. Therefore, the goal of this study is to evaluate the extent to which the present literature provides a valid estimate of the prevalence of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres.

Methods

A Medline search for all articles from 1966 to 2007 that might provide prevalence estimates of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres yielded 836 articles in English language journals. This review included only papers whose main or secondary goal was to estimate the prevalence of positive blood alcohol concentration (BAC) or acute intoxication. Both a crude aggregate estimate and sample size adjusted estimate were calculated from the included papers and the coverage and comparability of methods were evaluated.

Results

Of the 15 studies that met inclusion criteria, incidence estimates of alcohol-related visits ranged from 26.2% to 62.5% and yielded an aggregate, weighted estimate of 32.5%. Target population, capture rate, and threshold for a positive screening result varied considerably across studies. No study provided a comprehensive estimate, i.e., of all trauma patients hospitalised, treated and released, or who died.

Conclusions

Although the incidence of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres appears very high perhaps higher than any other medical setting, the validity of our aggregate estimate is threatened by crucial methodological considerations. The lack of a methodologically valid prevalence estimate hinders efforts to devise appropriate policies for trauma centres and across medical settings.

Introduction

Injury is the leading cause of death and disability for men and women under the age of 45 in the United States.21 The financial cost to society is enormous with an estimated $80.2 billion dollars in medical costs alone for the 50 million Americans who sustained an injury that required medical attention in the year 2000.11 Globally, there are approximately 5 million deaths attributed to injury every year, with an annual death rate that varies by region from 51.1 to 131.5 deaths per 100,000 population.26 In 2002, there were more worldwide deaths due to injury than the total number of deaths due to AIDS, TB or malaria.17 Even more devastating, across all mechanisms except fire-related injuries, injury disproportionately affects young males, the productive component of a society. The World Health Organisation has referred to injury as a “hidden epidemic among young men” that requires a global response to address its risk factors and causes.38

Clinicians practicing in acute-care settings, such as trauma centres, recognise that alcohol misuse is frequently associated with an injury admission. Many authors identify alcohol consumption as a significant risk factor for injuries.20, 1, 19, 37, 14, 35 One trauma centre study showed that, compared to patients without an alcohol-related admission, patients with an alcohol-related admission had more than twice the risk for a future injury event.10 The importance of alcohol misuse as a precursor to serious injury is widely accepted enough that in 2006 the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma introduced screening for problem drinking as a requirement for designation as a level I or II trauma centre.7 Moreover, level I trauma centres must provide an intervention for identified problem drinkers. Recent studies have shown that brief interventions significantly reduced post-injury problem drinking as well as the incidence of associated recurrent injury.30, 12 Therefore, as interventions are employed at trauma centres, a valid estimate of the magnitude of the problem is appropriate.

The prevalence of alcohol-related visits to U.S. emergency departments (EDs) has been estimated at about 9%.18 In the 2005 National Alcohol Survey, among those surveyed who reported an ER visit in the past year, 24% were positive for risky drinking (14+ drinks weekly for men and 7+ for females and/or 5+/4+ in a day in the last 12 months) and 8% for problem drinking.6 Injuries are the most common reason for an alcohol-related ER visit.3 Therefore, the prevalence for ED patients who present for injuries can be much higher.5 Because surgeons at trauma centres assess and treat only injured patients, they also probably serve a patient population in which the prevalence of alcohol-related visits is considerably higher than 9%. A variety of studies have estimated the prevalence of alcohol-related visits to trauma centres, but no study estimates the prevalence for all alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres, or even for level I trauma centres. Trauma centres are currently experiencing financial constraints that limit their capacity to respond to the myriad of problems they encounter. Thus, an accurate estimate of alcohol-related visits is crucial for the appropriate allocation of limited resources and prevention services. A valid national estimate would supply that evidence and would also provide a benchmark for trends on intervention impact and facilitate appropriate planning and resource allocation.

The goal of this review is to evaluate the extent to which the English-language literature provides or can be used to calculate a valid estimate of the prevalence of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

We reviewed the literature for studies of all patients who presented at U.S. trauma centres and were tested for pre-injury alcohol intake. A Medline search from 1966 to 2007 was performed using a complex set of title/abstract words and subject headings for each of the two main study concepts. The first set included alcohol, alcohol drinking, alcoholism, and ethanol; and the second included wounds and injuries, trauma, injury, emergency, and accidents. We excluded articles having terms such as

Results

Fifteen studies met our inclusion criteria but focused on significantly different target populations.33, 29, 28, 27, 15, 4, 16, 36, 25, 32, 8, 34, 9, 2, 31 Two studies included only patients dead on the scene or dead at arrival. The remaining fourteen included only admitted trauma patients. Of these, four studies required patients to be hospitalised for 2 or more days, two of which included patients only if they had intact cognition. No studies included “all-comers”, that is an estimate that

Discussion

Our aggregate estimate of alcohol-related visits to trauma centres is 32.4%. Although this may be a reasonable initial estimate of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres, it is subject to a number of limitations, an understanding of which will inform an accurate interpretation. This estimate is subject to variability in three different domains: the population covered by the studies, the thresholds used to identify the “alcohol relatedness” of the visit, and the quality of study methods

Conclusion

The current literature does not yield a valid estimate for the prevalence of alcohol-related injury admissions to trauma centres in the U.S. For a variety of reasons, the aggregate prevalence estimate of 32.5% calculated from the reviewed studies could be a significantly large under- or over-estimate. None of the studies provided an estimate for the complete population of trauma centre patients. The lack of a methodologically valid prevalence estimate hinders efforts to devise appropriate

Conflict of interest

The authors would like to confirm that they have no conflict of interest, personal, financial or otherwise, that would inappropriately influence their work.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thanks Karl Woodworth MLn, Head Librarian of the Woodruff Health Sciences Library, Grady Campus, Emory University School of Medicine for his assistance in performing the literature search.

References (38)

  • E.E. Cromwell et al.

    The prevalence and effect of alcohol and drug abuse on cohort-matched critically injured patients

    Am Surg

    (1998)
  • P.C. Dischinger et al.

    A longitudinal study of former trauma center patients: the association between toxicology status and subsequent injury mortality

    J Trauma

    (2001)
  • E.A. Finkelstein et al.

    Incidence and economic burden of injuries in the United States

    (2006)
  • L.M. Gentilello et al.

    Alcohol interventions in a trauma center as a means of reducing the risk of injury recurrence

    Ann Surg

    (1999)
  • L.M. Gentilello et al.

    Detection of acute alcohol intoxication and chronic alcohol dependence by trauma center staff

    J Trauma

    (1999)
  • G. Gmel et al.

    Injury and repeated injury—what is the link with acute consumption, binge drinking and chronic heavy alcohol use?

    Swiss Medical Weekly

    (2007)
  • G.J. Jurkovich et al.

    The effect of acute alcohol intoxication and chronic alcohol abuse on outcome from trauma

    JAMA

    (1993)
  • R.C. Mackersie et al.

    High-risk behavior and the public burden for funding the costs of acute injury

    Arch Surg

    (1995)
  • C.D. Mathers et al.

    The global burden of disease in 2002: data sources, methods and results

    (2003)
  • Cited by (58)

    • The impact of alcohol use and withdrawal on trauma outcomes: A case control study

      2021, American Journal of Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      Other studies have noted higher rates of positive alcohol screens based on varying blood alcohol concentration thresholds (e.g BAL>0, 10, 20, 80, 100 mg/dL). In a meta-analysis of 15 studies quantifying alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centers, a 26.2%–62.5% incidence was noted with a weighted average of 32.5% (31,455/96,845) by aggregating the samples.2,16,17 Our study identified a slightly higher rate of Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome, 1.23% (48/3896), compared to rates of 0.82%, 0.88%, and 0.9% in three previous trauma studies.18–20

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text