Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
Published in: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Care | Research

Should screening for risk of gambling-related harm be undertaken in health, care and support settings? A systematic review of the international evidence

Authors: Lindsay Blank, Susan Baxter, Helen Buckley Woods, Elizabeth Goyder

Published in: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Gambling-related harm is an increasing recognised problem internationally. Recent years have seen an explosion in opportunities to gamble, both in person and online. Health and other care settings have the potential to act as screening sites to identify and support gamblers who may be at high risk of experiencing gambling-related harm. This study aimed to identify interventions to screen for risk of gambling-related harm in the general population which may be delivered in health, care and support settings.

Methods

Systematic review. Searches of key databases and grey sources since 2012 were undertaken in October 2019. Electronic database searches generated a total of 5826 unique hits. Nine studies published 2013–2019, along with thirteen grey literature documents met our eligibility criteria. The criteria were setting (health, care and support settings), participants (any attendee in help, care and support settings), interventions (screening to identify risk of harm from gambling behaviours) and outcome measures (gambling behaviours, service use).

Results

Three papers evaluating screening interventions delivered in general practice (repeat visits and written advice), mental health service (the use of screening tools to identify risk of harm), and substance abuse treatment (intensive outpatient treatment for substance use disorders or methadone maintenance) indicated evidence of potential effectiveness. Six papers supported the feasibility and acceptability of delivering interventions in various settings. Grey literature reports described the implementation of interventions such as training materials, and transfer of interventions developed for substance abuse populations by practitioners.

Conclusions

Health, care and support services offer potentially important contexts in which to identify and offer support to people who are at risk of gambling related harm. Screening interventions appear feasible and acceptable in a range of community and healthcare settings for those at risk of gambling harm. Evaluation of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening in these populations should therefore be prioritised.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Browne M, Greer N, Armstrong T, Doran C, Kinchin I, Langham E, Rockloff M (2017) The social cost of gambling to Victoria, Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, Melbourne
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Cowlishaw S, Kessler D. Problem gambling in the UK: implications for health, psychosocial adjustment and health care utilization. Eur Addict Res. 2016;22(2):90–8.CrossRef
12.
13.
14.
Dowling NA, Merkouris SS, Manning V, et al. Screening for problem gambling within mental health services: a comparison of the classification accuracy of brief instruments. Addiction. 2018;113(6):1088–104.CrossRef
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Himelhoch SS, Miles-McLean H, Medoff DR, et al. Evaluation of brief screens for gambling disorder in the substance use treatment setting. Am J Addict. 2015;24(5):460–6.CrossRef
24.
Hing N, Russell A, Nuske E, Gainsbury S. (2015). The stigma of problem gambling: Causes, characteristics and consequences. Victoria, Australia: Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation
25.
26.
27.
28.
Langham E, Thorne H, Browne M, et al. Understanding gambling related harm: a proposed definition, conceptual framework, and taxonomy of harms. BMC Public Health. 2015;16(1):80.CrossRef
29.
30.
Mahase E. GPs talked to fewer patients about alcohol after incentive scheme ended, study finds. BMJ. 2019;367:l5920.CrossRef
31.
32.
Neal P, Delfabbro P, O’Neil M. (2005). Problem gambling and harm: Towards a national definition. Commissioned for the Ministerial Council on Gambling. Prepared by the SA Centre for Economic Studies with the Department of Psychology, University of Adelaide. Nov 2005
33.
Nehlin C, Nyberg F, Jess L, et al. Brief intervention within primary care for at-risk gambling: a pilot study. J Gambl Stud. 2016;32(4):1327–35.CrossRef
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Otto JL, Smolenski DJ, Garvey Wilson AL, Evatt DP, Campbell MS, et al. Systematic review evaluating screening instruments for gambling disorder finds lack of adequate evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;120:86–93.CrossRef
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
Roberts A, Bowden-Jones H, Roberts D, et al. Should GPs routinely screen for gambling disorders? Br J Gen Pract. 2019;69(682):226–7.CrossRef
45.
Rodda S, Manning V, Dowling NA, et al. Barriers and facilitators of responding to problem gambling: perspectives from Australian mental health services. J Gambl Stud. 2018;34(1):307–20.CrossRef
46.
Rogers J. Problem gambling: a suitable case for social work? Practice. 2013;25(1):41–60.CrossRef
47.
48.
49.
50.
Temcheff CE, Derevensky JL, St-Pierre RA, et al. Beliefs and attitudes of mental health professionals with respect to gambling and other high risk behaviors in schools. Int J Ment Health Addiction. 2014;12(6):716–29.CrossRef
51.
52.
Volberg RA, Williams RJ. Developing a Brief Problem Gambling Screen Using Clinically Validated Samples of At‐Risk, Problem and Pathological Gamblers. Northampton, MA, Gemini Research. (2011)
53.
54.
55.
56.
Metadata
Title
Should screening for risk of gambling-related harm be undertaken in health, care and support settings? A systematic review of the international evidence
Authors
Lindsay Blank
Susan Baxter
Helen Buckley Woods
Elizabeth Goyder
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Care
Published in
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1940-0640
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-021-00243-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice 1/2021 Go to the issue

Research

External validation of an opioid misuse machine learning classifier in hospitalized adult patients

Study Protocol

A medical peer-delivered intervention comprising brief motivational interviewing via instant-messaging interaction to reduce drug misuse among youth in Hong Kong: A protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Review

Financial sustainability of payment models for office-based opioid treatment in outpatient clinics

Review

Prior National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) opioid use disorder trials as background and rationale for NIDA CTN-0100 “optimizing retention, duration and discontinuation strategies for opioid use disorder pharmacotherapy (RDD)”

Letter to the Editor

Should the CIWA-Ar be the standard monitoring strategy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in the intensive care unit?

Research

A Descriptive analysis of urine drug screen results in patients with opioid use disorder managed in a primary care setting