Department of Neuropsychiatry, Graduate School of Medicine, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan.
Major in Clinical Psychology, Graduate School of Psychological Sciences, Hiroshima International University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Neuropsychopharmacol Rep. 2024 Sep;44(3):512-520. doi: 10.1002/npr2.12449. Epub 2024 May 21.
This study aimed to identify subgroups of alcohol use disorder (AUD) based on a multidimensional combination of alexithymia, depression, and diverse drinking behavior.
We recruited 176 patients with AUD, which were initially divided into non-alexithymic (n = 130) and alexithymic (n = 46) groups using a cutoff score of 61 on the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Subsequently, the profiles of the two groups were compared. Thereafter, a two-stage cluster analysis using hierarchical and K-means methods was performed with the Z-scores from the TAS-20, the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report Japanese Version, the 12-item questionnaire for quantitative assessment of depressive mixed state, and the 20-item questionnaire for drinking behavior pattern.
In the first analysis, Alexithymic patients with AUD showed greater depressive symptoms and more pathological drinking behavior patterns than those without alexithymia. Cluster analysis featuring alexithymia, depression, and drinking behavior identified three subtypes: Cluster 1 (core AUD type) manifesting pathological drinking behavior highlighting automaticity; Cluster 2 (late-onset type) showing relatively late-onset alcohol use and fewer depressive symptoms or pathological drinking behavior; and Cluster 3 (alexithymic type) characterized by alexithymia, depression, and pathological drinking behavior featuring greater coping with negative affect.
The multidimensional model with alexithymia, depression, and diverse drinking behavior provided possible practical classification of AUD. The alexithymic subtype may require more caution, and additional support for negative affect may be necessary due to accompanying mood problems and various maladaptive drinking behaviors.
本研究旨在根据述情障碍、抑郁和不同饮酒行为的多维组合,确定酒精使用障碍(AUD)的亚组。
我们招募了 176 名 AUD 患者,最初使用多伦多述情障碍量表(TAS-20)的 61 分截断值将其分为非述情障碍(n=130)和述情障碍(n=46)组。随后,比较了两组的特征。然后,使用 TAS-20、快速抑郁症状自评量表日本版、12 项抑郁混合状态定量评估问卷和 20 项饮酒行为模式问卷的 Z 分数进行两阶段聚类分析,采用层次聚类和 K-均值方法。
在第一次分析中,患有 AUD 的述情障碍患者表现出比无述情障碍患者更严重的抑郁症状和更多的病理性饮酒行为模式。以述情障碍、抑郁和饮酒行为为特征的聚类分析确定了三个亚型:集群 1(核心 AUD 型)表现出突出自动性的病理性饮酒行为;集群 2(晚发型)表现出相对晚发性饮酒和较少的抑郁症状或病理性饮酒行为;集群 3(述情障碍型)以述情障碍、抑郁和病理性饮酒行为为特征,表现出更多的应对消极情绪的能力。
具有述情障碍、抑郁和不同饮酒行为的多维模型为 AUD 提供了可能的实用分类。述情障碍亚型可能需要更多的关注,由于伴随的情绪问题和各种适应不良的饮酒行为,可能需要对负面情绪进行额外的支持。