Long C G, Williams M, Hollin C R
St Andrew's Hospital, Northampton, UK.
Addiction. 1998 Apr;93(4):561-71. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.1998.93456111.x.
To compare effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 5-week inpatient and a two week in- and day-patient regime.
Pre-post assessment of consecutive treatment referrals with follow-up at 6 and 12 months. In a sequential study design, 112 patients underwent a 5-week residential programme while a subsequent 100 patients underwent a 2-week in- and day-patient programme. To investigate the effect of changing programme delivery, patient groups from before and after the programme changes were compared.
Addiction treatment unit in an independent hospital.
One hundred and thirty-six males and 76 female patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of Alcohol Dependence Syndrome.
Self-report (Comprehensive Drinkers Profile: Follow-Up Drinkers Profile: SADQ), collateral report (Collateral Interview Form) and blood test (MCV & GGT) data were used to categorize patients into abstinent, non-problem drinker, drinking but improved and unimproved groups. Percentage of days abstinent, intensity of drinking, length of time in treatment, treatment cost and use of aftercare were also measured.
Abstinence or non-problem drinking was achieved by 55.6% of all patients at 1 year. Change in programme delivery did not affect outcome but treatment costs and mean length of stay for the revised programme were significantly reduced.
A two week in- and day-patient treatment was more cost effective than a 5-week inpatient treatment. Design limitations make these conclusions tentative pending a randomized controlled trial.
比较为期5周的住院治疗方案和为期两周的住院及日间治疗方案的有效性和成本效益。
对连续治疗转诊患者进行前后评估，并在6个月和12个月时进行随访。在一项序贯研究设计中，112名患者接受了为期5周的住院治疗方案，随后100名患者接受了为期2周的住院及日间治疗方案。为了研究改变治疗方案实施方式的效果，对方案改变前后的患者组进行了比较。
一家独立医院的成瘾治疗科。
136名男性和76名女性患者，根据国际疾病分类第十版（ICD - 10）诊断为酒精依赖综合征。
使用自我报告（综合饮酒者概况：随访饮酒者概况：SADQ）、旁证报告（旁证访谈表）和血液检测（平均红细胞体积和γ-谷氨酰转移酶）数据将患者分为戒酒者、无问题饮酒者、饮酒但有改善者和未改善者组。还测量了戒酒天数百分比、饮酒强度、治疗时间长度、治疗成本和后续护理的使用情况。
所有患者中有55.6%在1年后实现了戒酒或无问题饮酒。治疗方案的改变并未影响治疗结果，但修订后方案的治疗成本和平均住院时间显著降低。
为期两周的住院及日间治疗比为期5周的住院治疗更具成本效益。由于设计上的局限性，在进行随机对照试验之前，这些结论具有不确定性。
