Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between a saliva alcohol test (SAT) and hazardous/harmful drinking, as measured by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), among a sample of subcritically injured patients. METHODS: Patients (n = 78) seeking treatment for a subcritical injury were saliva-tested for alcohol and interviewed regarding their drinking behaviors and related difficulties. Associations of SAT values with AUDIT results were determined. RESULTS: SAT results and hazardous/harmful drinking were not independent events (p < 0.001). Estimates of sensitivity and specificity (using a dichotomous SAT result [> or = 4 mmol/L] to identify positive AUDIT patients) were 65.2% and 83.6%, respectively. SAT-positive people had significantly higher AUDIT scores than did SAT-negative individuals (p < 0.0001). Patients experiencing assault-type injuries were much more likely to be SAT-positive than were patients incurring other types of injury. Discriminant function analysis suggests that AUDIT scores can successfully identify SAT-positive and SAT-negative patients; the analysis accounted for 42.5% of the variance and correctly classified 84.6% of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an easy-to-administer, noninvasive, routine SAT, among patients presenting for a subcritical injury in a hospital ED, provides a mechanism for the identification of individuals with a history of hazardous/harmful drinking. However, since discrimination of hazardous/harmful drinking is imperfect, some caution is warranted when conducting such screening activities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Clifford et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: