Johnsson 2003.
Methods | Randomised controlled trial, unit of allocation = bar. | |
Participants | Lund University, Sweden Experimental = six student bars Control = six student bars | |
Interventions | Server training
Training programme based on the Alcohol Skills Training Program (ASTP) and the Swedish version of the Responsible Beverage Service. Bartenders in 'key positions' attended educational programme (n=40), these participants were responsible for the total amount of alcohol served in the bar during an evening, responsible for spreading the educational programme to their colleagues, responsible for creating guidelines for serving beverages responsibly. The focus of the programme was on the servers' own reaction to alcohol. Control received no server training. |
|
Outcomes | Patron behaviour (alcohol consumption, determined by breath tests). | |
Notes | Not professional servers (did not receive monetary payment for service). | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Adequate sequence generation? | Low risk | Randomisation was stratified for number of members of each bar. Six of 12 student bars at Lund University were allocated by drawing lots to the intervention group, remaining six were used as the control group. |
Allocation concealment? | High risk | Inadequate. |
Blinding? All outcomes | Low risk | Those conducting the breath tests were not aware of allocation status. |
Confounders | Unclear risk | Any differences in baseline between the groups were not reported. |
Data collection methods | Unclear risk | Patron intoxication was measured at baseline and one month after intervention, by breath test in invited and consenting patrons. 664 tests were made at baseline, one patron refused. 658 tests were made at follow‐up (360 in experimental, 298 in control), there were no refusals. |
Withdrawals & dropouts | Unclear risk | None reported. |
Intervention integrity | Unclear risk | Forty staff in 'key positions' from experimental bars were trained. |
Duration of follow‐up | Unclear risk | Follow‐up data were collected one month after intervention. |