Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, The Yale Stress Center, New Haven, Connecticut 06519, USA.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2010 Aug;34(8):1376-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2010.01221.x. Epub 2010 May 17.
Alcohol addiction may reflect adaptations to stress, reward, and regulatory brain systems. While extensive research has identified both stress and impulsivity as independent risk factors for drinking, few studies have assessed the interactive relationship between stress and impulsivity in terms of hazardous drinking within a community sample of regular drinkers.
One hundred and thirty regular drinkers (56M/74F) from the local community were assessed for hazardous and harmful patterns of alcohol consumption using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). All participants were also administered the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) as a measure of trait impulsivity and the Cumulative Stress/Adversity Checklist (CSC) as a comprehensive measure of cumulative adverse life events. Standard multiple regression models were used to ascertain the independent and interactive nature of both overall stress and impulsivity as well as specific types of stress and impulsivity on hazardous and harmful drinking.
Recent life stress, cumulative traumatic stress, overall impulsivity, and nonplanning-related impulsivity as well as cognitive and motor-related impulsivity were all independently predictive of AUDIT scores. However, the interaction between cumulative stress and total impulsivity scores accounted for a significant amount of the variance, indicating that a high to moderate number of adverse events and a high trait impulsivity rating interacted to affect greater AUDIT scores. The subscale of cumulative life trauma accounted for the most variance in AUDIT scores among the stress and impulsivity subscales.
Findings highlight the interactive relationship between stress and impulsivity with regard to hazardous drinking. The specific importance of cumulative traumatic stress as a marker for problem drinking is also discussed.
酒精成瘾可能反映了对压力、奖励和调节大脑系统的适应。虽然大量研究已经确定压力和冲动性是饮酒的独立风险因素,但很少有研究评估社区中定期饮酒者样本中压力和冲动性之间的危险饮酒的交互关系。
当地社区的 130 名定期饮酒者(56 名男性/74 名女性)使用酒精使用障碍识别测试(AUDIT)评估了危险和有害的饮酒模式。所有参与者还接受了巴瑞特冲动量表(BIS-11)作为特质冲动的衡量标准,以及累积压力/逆境检查表(CSC)作为累积不良生活事件的综合衡量标准。标准多元回归模型用于确定整体压力和冲动性以及特定类型的压力和冲动性对危险和有害饮酒的独立和交互性质。
近期生活压力、累积创伤性压力、整体冲动性、非计划性冲动性以及认知和运动相关冲动性均独立预测 AUDIT 评分。然而,累积压力和总冲动性评分之间的相互作用解释了大量的方差,表明大量的不良事件和高特质冲动评分相互作用会影响更大的 AUDIT 评分。在压力和冲动性子量表中,累积生活创伤子量表对 AUDIT 评分的方差解释最多。
研究结果强调了压力和冲动性之间关于危险饮酒的相互关系。还讨论了累积创伤性应激作为问题饮酒标志物的具体重要性。