Aims: The aim of the study was to assess the cumulative evidence on the effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary healthcare in order to highlight key knowledge gaps for further research. Methods: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the effectiveness of brief alcohol intervention in primary healthcare published between 2002 and 2012. Findings: Twenty-four systematic reviews met the eligibility criteria (covering a total of 56 randomized controlled trials reported across 80 papers). Across the included studies, it was consistently reported that brief intervention was effective for addressing hazardous and harmful drinking in primary healthcare, particularly in middle-aged, male drinkers. Evidence gaps included: brief intervention effectiveness in key groups (women, older and younger drinkers, minority ethnic groups, dependent/co-morbid drinkers and those living in transitional and developing countries); and the optimum brief intervention length and frequency to maintain longer-term effectiveness. Conclusion: This overview highlights the large volume of primarily positive evidence supporting brief alcohol intervention effects as well as some unanswered questions with regards to the effectiveness of brief alcohol intervention across different cultural settings and in specific population groups, and in respect of the optimum content of brief interventions that might benefit from further research.

Most mental disorders appear by age 14, but in most cases, they remain undiagnosed and untreated well into adulthood. A scoping review showed an absence of systematic reviews that address prevalence rates of mental disorders among children and adolescents in Europe that are based on community studies conducted between 2015 and 2020. To estimate the updated pooled prevalence of Anxiety Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Conduct Disorder (CD), Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), Autism Spectrum Disorder, Eating Disorders, Substance Use Disorders (SUD), among children and adolescents living in Europe, a search strategy was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and Psych Info and studies were also identified from reference lists and gray literature. Eligible studies were evaluated for reliability, validity, and bias. Trends of prevalence rates for each mental disorder were calculated. Almost one in five young people in Europe were found to suffer from a mental disorder, with a pooled prevalence rate of 15.5%. Anxiety disorders had the highest pooled prevalence rate (7.9% (95% CI 5.1–11.8%, I²: 98.0%)), followed by ADHD (2.9% (95% CI 1.2–6.9%, I² = 94.3%)), ODD (1.9% (95% CI 1.0–3.7%, I² = 98.4%)), depressive disorder (1.7% (95% CI 1.0–2.9%, I² = 97.7%)), CD (1.5% (95% CI 0.6–3.8%, I² = 98.8%)) and ASD (1.4% (95% CI 0.4–5.4%, I² = 99.7%). No studies on SUD were identified. The mental health of children and adolescents may be improved by introducing routine screening, refining diagnostic sensitivity, raising awareness of mental disorders, minimizing stigma and socioeconomic inequality, as well as developing early intervention services. These facilitators of good mental health need to be prioritized, especially at a time of unprecedented risk factors for poor mental health.

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of different brief intervention strategies at reducing hazardous or harmful drinking in primary care. The hypothesis was that more intensive intervention would result in a greater reduction in hazardous or harmful drinking. Design Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting Primary care practices in the north east and south east of England and in London. Participants 3562 patients aged 18 or more routinely presenting in primary care, of whom 2991 (84.0%) were eligible to enter the trial: 900 (30.1%) screened positive for hazardous or harmful drinking and 756 (84.0%) received a brief intervention. The sample was predominantly male (62%) and white (92%), and 34% were current smokers. Interventions Practices were randomised to three interventions, each of which built on the previous one: a patient information leaflet control group, five minutes of structured brief advice, and 20 minutes of brief lifestyle counselling. Delivery of the patient leaflet and brief advice occurred directly after screening and brief lifestyle counselling in a subsequent consultation. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was patients’ self reported hazardous or harmful drinking status as measured by the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) at six months. A negative AUDIT result (score <8) indicated non-hazardous or non-harmful drinking. Secondary outcomes were a negative AUDIT result at 12 months, experience of alcohol related problems (alcohol problems questionnaire), health utility (EQ-5D), service utilisation, and patients’ motivation to change drinking behaviour (readiness to change) as measured by a modified readiness ruler. Results Patient follow-up rates were 83% at six months (n=644) and 79% at 12 months (n=617). At both time points an intention to treat analysis found no significant differences in AUDIT negative status between the three interventions. Compared with the patient information leaflet group, the odds ratio of having a negative AUDIT result for brief advice was 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.39) and for brief lifestyle counselling was 0.78 (0.48 to 1.25). A per protocol analysis confirmed these findings. Conclusions All patients received simple feedback on their screening outcome. Beyond this input, however, evidence that brief advice or brief lifestyle counselling provided important additional benefit in reducing hazardous or harmful drinking compared with the patient information leaflet was lacking. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06145674.

Importance Nausea and vomiting affects approximately 85% of pregnant women. The most severe form, hyperemesis gravidarum, affects up to 3% of women and can have significant adverse physical and psychological sequelae. Objective To summarize current evidence on effective treatments for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum. Evidence Review Databases were searched to June 8, 2016. Relevant websites and bibliographies were also searched. Titles and abstracts were assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Results were narratively synthesized; planned meta-analysis was not possible because of heterogeneity and incomplete reporting of findings. Findings Seventy-eight studies (n = 8930 participants) were included: 67 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 11 nonrandomized studies. Evidence from 35 RCTs at low risk of bias indicated that ginger, vitamin B₆, antihistamines, metoclopramide (for mild symptoms), pyridoxine-doxylamine, and ondansetron (for moderate symptoms) were associated with improved symptoms compared with placebo. One RCT (n = 86) reported greater improvements in moderate symptoms following psychotherapy (change in Rhodes score [range, 0 {no symptoms} to 40 {worst possible symptoms}], 18.76 [SD, 5.48] to 7.06 [SD, 5.79] for intervention vs 19.18 [SD, 5.63] to 12.81 [SD, 6.88] for comparator [P < .001]). For moderate-severe symptoms, 1 RCT (n = 60) suggested that pyridoxine-doxylamine combination taken preemptively reduced risk of recurrence of moderate-severe symptoms compared with treatment once symptoms begin (15.4% vs 39.1% [P < .04]). One RCT (n = 83) found that ondansetron was associated with lower nausea scores on day 4 than metoclopramide (mean visual analog scale [VAS] score, 4.1 [SD, 2.9] for ondansetron vs 5.7 [SD, 2.3] for metoclopramide [P = .023]) but not episodes of emesis (5.0 [SD, 3.1] vs 3.3 [SD, 3], respectively [P = .013]). Although there was no difference in trend in nausea scores over the 14-day study period, trend in vomiting scores was better in the ondansetron group (P = .042). One RCT (n = 159) found no difference between metoclopramide and promethazine after 24 hours (episodes of vomiting, 1 [IQR, 0-5] for metoclopramide vs 2 [IQR, 0-3] for promethazine [P = .81], VAS [0-10 scale] for nausea, 2 [IQR, 1-5] vs 2 [IQR, 1-4], respectively [P = .99]). Three RCTs compared corticosteroids with placebo or promethazine or metoclopramide in women with severe symptoms. Improvements were seen in all corticosteroid groups, but only a significant difference between corticosteroids vs metoclopramide was reported (emesis reduction, 40.9% vs 16.5% at day 2; 71.6% vs 51.2% at day 3; 95.8% vs 76.6% at day 7 [n = 40,P < .001]). For other interventions, evidence was limited. Conclusions and Relevance For mild symptoms of nausea and emesis of pregnancy, ginger, pyridoxine, antihistamines, and metoclopramide were associated with greater benefit than placebo. For moderate symptoms, pyridoxine-doxylamine, promethazine, and metoclopramide were associated with greater benefit than placebo. Ondansetron was associated with improvement for a range of symptom severity. Corticosteroids may be associated with benefit in severe cases. Overall the quality of evidence was low.