This review aimed to synthesize qualitative evidence for barriers and facilitators to effective implementation of screening and brief intervention for alcohol misuse in adults and children over 10 years. A search of medical and social science databases was carried out and augmented by hand-searching of reference lists and contents of key journals. Qualitative evidence was synthesized thematically. A total of 47 papers varying in design and quality were included in the review. Most evaluated implementation in primary care settings. Implementation was reported to be limited by lack of resources, training and support from management, as well as workload. The appropriateness of context in which discussions take place was reported as an acceptability factor for patients and practitioners. Health professionals require sufficient knowledge about alcohol guidelines and risk in order to implement screening and intervention to those most in need. Whilst brief screening and brief intervention have been shown to be effective in some settings, this review has identified a number of barriers and facilitators to implementation. Adequate resources, training and the identification of those at risk without stereotyping are the main facilitators in primary care. More research is needed to assess implementation in other settings.

Several countries are considering a minimum price policy for alcohol, but concerns exist about the potential effects on drinkers with low incomes. We aimed to assess the effect of a £0·45 minimum unit price (1 unit is 8 g/10 mL ethanol) in England across the income and socioeconomic distributions. We used the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model (SAPM) version 2.6, a causal, deterministic, epidemiological model, to assess effects of a minimum unit price policy. SAPM accounts for alcohol purchasing and consumption preferences for population subgroups including income and socioeconomic groups. Purchasing preferences are regarded as the types and volumes of alcohol beverages, prices paid, and the balance between on-trade (eg, bars) and off-trade (eg, shops). We estimated price elasticities from 9 years of survey data and did sensitivity analyses with alternative elasticities. We assessed effects of the policy on moderate, hazardous, and harmful drinkers, split into three socioeconomic groups (living in routine or manual households, intermediate households, and managerial or professional households). We examined policy effects on alcohol consumption, spending, rates of alcohol-related health harm, and opportunity costs associated with that harm. Rates of harm and costs were estimated for a 10 year period after policy implementation. We adjusted baseline rates of mortality and morbidity to account for differential risk between socioeconomic groups. Overall, a minimum unit price of £0.45 led to an immediate reduction in consumption of 1.6% (-11.7 units per drinker per year) in our model. Moderate drinkers were least affected in terms of consumption (-3.8 units per drinker per year for the lowest income quintile vs 0.8 units increase for the highest income quintile) and spending (increase in spending of £0.04 vs £1.86 per year). The greatest behavioural changes occurred in harmful drinkers (change in consumption of -3.7% or -138.2 units per drinker per year, with a decrease in spending of £4.01), especially in the lowest income quintile (-7.6% or -299.8 units per drinker per year, with a decrease in spending of £34.63) compared with the highest income quintile (-1.0% or -34.3 units, with an increase in spending of £16.35). Estimated health benefits from the policy were also unequally distributed. Individuals in the lowest socioeconomic group (living in routine or manual worker households and comprising 41.7% of the sample population) would accrue 81.8% of reductions in premature deaths and 87.1% of gains in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Irrespective of income, moderate drinkers were little affected by a minimum unit price of £0.45 in our model, with the greatest effects noted for harmful drinkers. Because harmful drinkers on low incomes purchase more alcohol at less than the minimum unit price threshold compared with other groups, they would be affected most by this policy. Large reductions in consumption in this group would however coincide with substantial health gains in terms of morbidity and mortality related to reduced alcohol consumption. UK Medical Research Council and Economic and Social Research Council (grant G1000043).

Applying a complex systems perspective to public health evaluation may increase the relevance and strength of evidence to improve health and reduce health inequalities. In this review of methods, we aimed to: (i) classify and describe different complex systems methods in evaluation applied to public health; and (ii) examine the kinds of evaluative evidence generated by these different methods. We adapted critical review methods to identify evaluations of public health interventions that used systems methods. We conducted expert consultation, searched electronic databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, Web of Science), and followed citations of relevant systematic reviews. Evaluations were included if they self-identified as using systems- or complexity-informed methods and if they evaluated existing or hypothetical public health interventions. Case studies were selected to illustrate different types of complex systems evaluation. Seventy-four unique studies met our inclusion criteria. A framework was developed to map the included studies onto different stages of the evaluation process, which parallels the planning, delivery, assessment, and further delivery phases of the interventions they seek to inform; these stages include: 1) theorising; 2) prediction (simulation); 3) process evaluation; 4) impact evaluation; and 5) further prediction (simulation). Within this framework, we broadly categorised methodological approaches as mapping, modelling, network analysis and 'system framing' (the application of a complex systems perspective to a range of study designs). Studies frequently applied more than one type of systems method. A range of complex systems methods can be utilised, adapted, or combined to produce different types of evaluative evidence. Further methodological innovation in systems evaluation may generate stronger evidence to improve health and reduce health inequalities in our complex world.

This report contains new and follow-up metric data relating to the eight main recommendations of the Lancet Standing Commission on Liver Disease in the UK, which aim to reduce the unacceptable harmful consequences of excess alcohol consumption, obesity, and viral hepatitis. For alcohol, we provide data on alcohol dependence, damage to families, and the documented increase in alcohol consumption since removal of the above-inflation alcohol duty escalator. Alcoholic liver disease will shortly overtake ischaemic heart disease with regard to years of working life lost. The rising prevalence of overweight and obesity, affecting more than 60% of adults in the UK, is leading to an increasing liver disease burden. Favourable responses by industry to the UK Government's soft drinks industry levy have been seen, but the government cannot continue to ignore the number of adults being affected by diabetes, hypertension, and liver disease. New direct-acting antiviral drugs for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection have reduced mortality and the number of patients requiring liver transplantation, but more screening campaigns are needed for identification of infected people in high-risk migrant communities, prisons, and addiction centres. Provision of care continues to be worst in regions with the greatest socioeconomic deprivation, and deficiencies exist in training programmes in hepatology for specialist registrars. Firm guidance is needed for primary care on the use of liver blood tests in detection of early disease and the need for specialist referral. This report also brings together all the evidence on costs to the National Health Service and wider society, in addition to the loss of tax revenue, with alcohol misuse in England and Wales costing £21 billion a year (possibly up to £52 billion) and obesity costing £27 billion a year (treasury estimates are as high as £46 billion). Voluntary restraints by the food and drinks industry have had little effect on disease burden, and concerted regulatory and fiscal action by the UK Government is essential if the scale of the medical problem, with an estimated 63 000 preventable deaths over the next 5 years, is to be addressed.