Bradley Katharine A, Kivlahan Daniel R, Zhou Xiao-Hua, Sporleder Jennifer L, Epler Amee J, McCormick Kinsey A, Merrill Joseph O, McDonell Mary B, Fihn Stephan D
Northwest Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence, Primary and Specialty Medical Care Service,VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA 98108, USA.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004 Mar;28(3):448-55. doi: 10.1097/01.alc.0000117836.38108.38.
Primary care providers need practical methods for managing patients who screen positive for at-risk drinking. We evaluated whether scores on brief alcohol screening questionnaires and patient reports of prior alcohol treatment reflect the severity of recent problems due to drinking.
Veterans Affairs general medicine outpatients who screened positive for at-risk drinking were mailed questionnaires that included the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and a question about prior alcohol treatment or participation in Alcoholics Anonymous ("previously treated"). AUDIT questions 4 through 10 were used to measure past-year problems due to drinking (PYPD). Cross-sectional analyses compared the prevalence of PYPD and mean Past-Year AUDIT Symptom Scores (0-28 points) among at-risk drinkers with varying scores on the CAGE (0-4) and AUDIT-C (0-12) and varying treatment histories.
Of 7861 male at-risk drinkers who completed questionnaires, 33.9% reported PYPD. AUDIT-C scores were more strongly associated with Past-Year AUDIT Symptom Scores than the CAGE (p < 0.0005). The prevalence of PYPD increased from 33% to 46% over the range of positive CAGE scores but from 29% to 77% over the range of positive AUDIT-C scores. Among subgroups of at-risk drinkers with the same screening scores, patients who reported prior treatment were more likely than never-treated at-risk drinkers to report PYPD and had higher mean Past-Year AUDIT Symptom Scores (p < 0.0005). We propose a simple method of risk-stratifying patients using AUDIT-C scores and alcohol treatment histories.
AUDIT-C scores combined with one question about prior alcohol treatment can help estimate the severity of PYPD among male Veterans Affairs outpatients.
基层医疗服务提供者需要实用的方法来管理那些酒精风险筛查呈阳性的患者。我们评估了简短酒精筛查问卷的得分以及患者既往酒精治疗的报告是否能反映近期饮酒所致问题的严重程度。
向美国退伍军人事务部综合内科门诊中酒精风险筛查呈阳性的患者邮寄问卷,问卷包括酒精使用障碍识别测试(AUDIT)以及一个关于既往酒精治疗或参加戒酒互助会(“既往接受治疗”)的问题。AUDIT的问题4至10用于衡量过去一年饮酒所致问题(PYPD)。横断面分析比较了在CAGE(0 - 4)和AUDIT - C(0 - 12)得分不同以及治疗史不同的风险饮酒者中PYPD的患病率和过去一年AUDIT症状平均得分(0 - 28分)。
在7861名完成问卷的男性风险饮酒者中,33.9%报告有PYPD。与CAGE相比,AUDIT - C得分与过去一年AUDIT症状得分的相关性更强(p < 0.0005)。PYPD的患病率在CAGE阳性得分范围内从33%增至46%,而在AUDIT - C阳性得分范围内从29%增至77%。在筛查得分相同的风险饮酒者亚组中,报告既往接受治疗的患者比未接受治疗的风险饮酒者更有可能报告有PYPD,且过去一年AUDIT症状平均得分更高(p < 0.0005)。我们提出一种使用AUDIT - C得分和酒精治疗史对患者进行风险分层的简单方法。
AUDIT - C得分与一个关于既往酒精治疗的问题相结合,有助于估计美国退伍军人事务部男性门诊患者中PYPD的严重程度。