Initial Preference for Drinking Goal in the Treatment of Alcohol Problems: I. Baseline Differences Between Abstinence and Non-Abstinence Groups
Initial Preference for Drinking Goal in the Treatment of Alcohol Problems: I. Baseline Differences Between Abstinence and Non-Abstinence Groups
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/alcalc/agp096
复制
发表时间：
2010-03-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Slegg, Gary P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Heather, Nick;Adamson, Simon J.;Slegg, Gary P.
研究方法：从与进入试验的客户（N = 742）的讨论中，筛选人员注意到客户是否以禁欲为目标“可能是”或“可能不是”。由此形成的两组之间的差异进行了探讨，在基线评估和逻辑回归分析与预先存在的特征作为自变量。结果：在所有UKATT网站，54.3%的客户端表示偏好禁欲和45.7%的非禁欲的客户端之间的单变量比较。在单变量比较中，倾向于禁欲的客户显着（P < 0.01）更可能：（i）女性，（ii）失业，（iii）报告饮酒量更大，但频率更低，（iv）在评估前2周内已解毒，（v）报告更多酒精问题，（vi）处于改变的行动阶段，（vii）报告饮酒的负面预期更大，（viii）报告更多的精神和身体不健康，（ix）报告较少的饮酒社会支持和（x）对他们在诱人的情况下抵制大量饮酒的能力更有信心。在Logistic回归模型中，最强的预测目标偏好的性别，饮酒模式，最近的戒毒和社会支持drinking.Conclusion：这些研究结果的影响，最好考虑与研究结果从一个同伴的文件报告与每个目标偏好的治疗结果。
Methods: From discussions with clients entering the trial (N = 742), screeners noted whether clients were aiming for abstinence 'probably yes' or 'probably no'. Differences between the two groups thus formed were explored by univariate comparisons among client characteristics recorded at baseline assessment and by logistic regression analysis with pre-existing characteristics as independent variables.Results: Across all UKATT sites, 54.3% of clients expressed a preference for abstinence and 45.7% for non-abstinence. In univariate comparisons, clients preferring abstinence were significantly (P < 0.01) more likely to: (i) be female, (ii) be unemployed, (iii) report drinking more heavily but less frequently, (iv) have been detoxified in the 2 weeks prior to assessment, (v) report more alcohol problems, (vi) be in the action stage of change, (vii) report greater negative expectancies of drinking, (viii) report greater mental and physical ill-health, (ix) report less social support for drinking and (x) be more confident of their ability to resist heavy drinking in tempting situations. In the logistic regression model, the strongest predictors of goal preference were gender, drinking pattern, recent detoxification and social support for drinking.Conclusion: The implications of these findings for service delivery are best considered in conjunction with findings from a companion paper reporting treatment outcomes associated with each goal preference.