{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.043502202643171804, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013766519823788546, 'mean_word_length': 5.243986254295533, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Community-based alcohol counselling: a randomized clinical trial.

AIMS
To examine the effectiveness of a brief intervention (BI) and cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for alcohol abuse.


DESIGN
A randomized trial with clients randomized within counsellors.


SETTING
Community-based drug and alcohol counselling in Australia.


PARTICIPANTS
Of all new clients attending counselling. 869 (82%) completed a computerized assessment at their first consultation. Four hundred and twenty-one (48%) were defined as eligible, of whom 295 (70%) consented and were allocated randomly to an intervention. Of these, 13 3 (45%) were followed-up at 6 months post-test.


INTERVENTIONS
BI comprised the elements identified by the acronym FRAMES:feedback, responsibility, advice, menu, empathy, self-efficacy. Face-to-face counselling time was not to exceed 90 minutes. CBT comprised six consecutive weekly sessions: introduction: cravings and urges; managing crises; saying 'no' and solving problems: emergencies and lapses: and maintenance. Total face-to-face counselling time was 270 minutes (six 45-minute sessions).


MEASUREMENTS
Treatment outcomes are measured in terms of counsellor compliance, client satisfaction, weekly and binge consumption, alcohol-related problems, the AUDIT questionnaire and cost-effectiveness.


FINDINGS
When analysed on an intention-to-treat basis and for those followed-up. treatment outcomes between BI and CBT were not statistically significantly different at pre- or post-test, whether considered as continuous or categorical variables. BI was statistically significantly more cost-effective than CBT and there was no difference between them in clients' reported levels of satisfaction.


CONCLUSION
For low-dependence alcohol abuse in community settings, BI may be the treatment of choice.