Introduction: Visits to settings such as emergency departments (EDs) may present a “teachable moment” in that a patient may be more open to feedback and suggestions regarding their risky alcohol and illicit drug-use behaviors. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is an ’opportunistic’ public health approach that targets low-risk users, in addition to those already dependent on alcohol and/or drugs. SBIRT programs provide patients with comprehensive screening and assessments, and deliver interventions of appropriate intensity to reduce risks related to alcohol and drug use. Methods: This study used a single group pre-post test design to assess the effect of the California SBIRT service program (i.e., CASBIRT) on 6 substance-use outcomes (past-month prevalence and number of days of binge drinking, illegal drug use, and marijuana use). Trained bilingual/bicultural Health Educators attempted to screen all adult patients in 12 EDs/trauma centers (regardless of the reason for the patient’s visit) using a short instrument, and then delivered a brief motivational intervention matched to the patient’s risk level. A total of 2,436 randomly selected patients who screened positive for alcohol and/or drug use consented to be in a 6-month telephone follow-up interview. Because of the high loss to follow-up rate, we used an intention-to-treat approach for the data analysis. Results: Results of generalized linear mixed models showed modest reductions in all 6 drug- and alcohol-use outcomes. Men (versus women), those at relatively higher risk status (versus lower risk), and those with only one substance of misuse (versus both alcohol and illicit drug misuse) tended to show more positive change. Conclusion: These results suggest that SBIRT services provided in acute care settings are associated with modest changes in self-reported recent alcohol and illicit drug use. [West J Emerg Med. 2013;14(3):263–270.]

Emergency department (ED) settings have gained interest as venues for illegal drug misuse prevention and intervention, with researchers and practitioners attempting to capitalize on the intersection of need and opportunity within these settings. This study of 686 adult patients visiting two EDs for various reasons who admitted drug use compared daily cannabis-only users, nondaily cannabis-only users, and other drug users on sociodemographic and drug-related severity outcomes. The three drug use groups did not differ on most sociodemographic factors or medical problem severity scores. Forty-five percent of the sample was identified as having a drug use problem. ED patients who used drugs other than cannabis were at particular risk for high drug use severity indicators and concomitant problems such as psychiatric problems and alcohol use severity. However, 19-29% of cannabis-only users were identified as having problematic drug use. Furthermore, daily cannabis-only users fared less well than nondaily cannabis users with regard to drug use severity indicators and self-efficacy for avoiding drug use. Results may assist emergency medicine providers and medical social workers in matching patients to appropriate intervention. For example, users of drugs other than cannabis (and perhaps heavy, daily cannabis-only users) may need referral to specialty services for further assessment. Enhancement of motivation and self-efficacy beliefs could be an important target of prevention and treatment for cannabis-only users screened in the ED.