Does a local Alcohol Health Champion programme have a measurable impact on health and crime outcomes? A natural experiment evaluation of Communities in Charge of Alcohol (CICA) based on triangulation of methods

• DOI: 10.1111/add.16363
• Publication Date: 2023-10-12T23:48:40Z
• Authors: Lauren J. Scott; Mira Hidajat; Elizabeth J. Burns; Cathy Ure; Suzy C. Hargreaves; Suzanne Audrey; Margaret Coffey; Susan Hare; Noemia Siqueira; Steve Parrott; Penny A. Cook; Frank de Vocht
• Keywords: 330; 16. Peace & justice; 3. Good health

Abstract Background and Aim Drinking alcohol may cause harm to an individual's health social relationships, while a drinking culture societies as it increase crime rates make area feel less safe. Local councils in Greater Manchester, UK, developed the Communities Charge of Alcohol (CICA) intervention, which volunteers were trained give alcohol‐related advice public taught how influence policies restrict when, where is sold. As part larger study, aim current project measure impact CICA on outcomes at lower super output (LSOA) geographical aggregation. Design Quantitative evaluation using four time series analytic methods (stepped‐wedge design, comparisons local controls, national controls synthetic controls) with findings triangulated across these methods. A cost–benefit analysis was carried out alongside effectiveness analysis. Setting Participants The general between 2010 2020. Measurements primary outcome interest hospital admissions. Secondary accident emergency (A&E) attendances, ambulance callouts, recorded crimes anti‐social behaviour incidents. Findings Triangulation results did not indicate any consistent effect area‐level admissions, A&E reported or associated implementation CICA. stepped‐wedge indicated admissions following 13.4% (95% confidence interval −3.3%, +30.1%), analyses based other point estimates ranging from +3.4% 16.4%. Conclusion There no evidence measurable programme within 3 years start. likely result temporal trends rather than programme. Possible explanations include insufficient follow‐up time, too few trained, being unwilling get involved licensing decisions that intervention has direct selected outcomes.