Co-occurring psychiatric disorders are key determinants of disability in alcohol use disorder: a cross-sectional analysis in 157 recently detoxified patients.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Benjamin Rolland, Anna-Rita Galiano, Anjesa Veseli, François Bailly, Olivier Lejeune, Bernard Michelland, Louis Carrier, Monique Guénin, Christophe Icard, Louis-Ferdinand Lespine
{"title":"Co-occurring psychiatric disorders are key determinants of disability in alcohol use disorder: a cross-sectional analysis in 157 recently detoxified patients.","authors":"Benjamin Rolland, Anna-Rita Galiano, Anjesa Veseli, François Bailly, Olivier Lejeune, Bernard Michelland, Louis Carrier, Monique Guénin, Christophe Icard, Louis-Ferdinand Lespine","doi":"10.1093/alcalc/agag026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Disability is a central outcome in alcohol use disorder (AUD), yet little is known about its determinants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In the baseline data from the QUALIFACT multicenter prospective cohort study, which enrolled 157 recently detoxified patients with AUD between April 2021 and March 2024, Functional disability was assessed using the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Clinical, psychiatric, and patient-reported variables were collected, including Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5th edition (DSM-5) AUD criteria and the Alcohol Quality of Life Scale (AQoLS). To identify predictors of disability, we applied penalized linear regression with elastic net regularization, combined with nested cross-validation to ensure model robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five predictors were consistently selected in predictive models: major depressive disorder (β = 4.97) and psychotic syndrome (β = 4.85) showed the strongest associations with higher disability scores followed by the AQoLS \"Activities\" dimension (β = 0.76), while anxiety disorder (β = 0.23) and antisocial personality disorder (β = 0.19) showed smaller but significant contributions. Notably, no markers of AUD severity such as DSM-5 criteria were retained as predictors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Disability in AUD appears to be driven primarily by psychiatric co-occurring psychiatric disorders and patient-perceived functional limitations, rather than by traditional markers of AUD severity. These findings suggest that WHODAS 2.0 captures dimensions of impairment not reflected in DSM-5 criteria and highlight the importance of integrated care approaches addressing co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Future studies should validate these findings in larger and more diverse AUD populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":7407,"journal":{"name":"Alcohol and alcoholism","volume":"61 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alcohol and alcoholism","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agag026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Disability is a central outcome in alcohol use disorder (AUD), yet little is known about its determinants.

Methods: In the baseline data from the QUALIFACT multicenter prospective cohort study, which enrolled 157 recently detoxified patients with AUD between April 2021 and March 2024, Functional disability was assessed using the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Clinical, psychiatric, and patient-reported variables were collected, including Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5th edition (DSM-5) AUD criteria and the Alcohol Quality of Life Scale (AQoLS). To identify predictors of disability, we applied penalized linear regression with elastic net regularization, combined with nested cross-validation to ensure model robustness.

Results: Five predictors were consistently selected in predictive models: major depressive disorder (β = 4.97) and psychotic syndrome (β = 4.85) showed the strongest associations with higher disability scores followed by the AQoLS "Activities" dimension (β = 0.76), while anxiety disorder (β = 0.23) and antisocial personality disorder (β = 0.19) showed smaller but significant contributions. Notably, no markers of AUD severity such as DSM-5 criteria were retained as predictors.

Conclusions: Disability in AUD appears to be driven primarily by psychiatric co-occurring psychiatric disorders and patient-perceived functional limitations, rather than by traditional markers of AUD severity. These findings suggest that WHODAS 2.0 captures dimensions of impairment not reflected in DSM-5 criteria and highlight the importance of integrated care approaches addressing co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Future studies should validate these findings in larger and more diverse AUD populations.

同时发生的精神疾病是酒精使用障碍致残的关键决定因素:157例最近解毒患者的横断面分析。
背景:残疾是酒精使用障碍(AUD)的主要结局,但对其决定因素知之甚少。方法:在qualfact多中心前瞻性队列研究的基线数据中,使用12项世界卫生组织残疾评估表2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)评估功能残疾,该研究招募了157名近期解毒的AUD患者,时间为2021年4月至2024年3月。收集临床、精神病学和患者报告的变量,包括诊断与统计手册第5版(DSM-5) AUD标准和酒精生活质量量表(AQoLS)。为了识别残疾的预测因素,我们应用了带有弹性网络正则化的惩罚线性回归,并结合嵌套交叉验证来确保模型的稳健性。结果:预测模型一致选择了5个预测因子,其中重度抑郁症(β = 4.97)和精神病综合征(β = 4.85)与高失能得分的相关性最强,其次是AQoLS“活动”维度(β = 0.76),而焦虑障碍(β = 0.23)和反社会人格障碍(β = 0.19)对高失能得分的贡献较小,但具有显著性。值得注意的是,没有保留像DSM-5标准这样的AUD严重程度标记作为预测因子。结论:AUD的残疾似乎主要是由精神病学共同发生的精神疾病和患者感知的功能限制驱动的,而不是由AUD严重程度的传统标志驱动的。这些发现表明,WHODAS 2.0涵盖了DSM-5标准中未反映的损害维度,并强调了采用综合护理方法解决共存精神疾病的重要性。未来的研究应该在更大、更多样化的AUD人群中验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Alcohol and alcoholism
Alcohol and alcoholism 医学-药物滥用
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.60%
发文量
62
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: About the Journal Alcohol and Alcoholism publishes papers on the biomedical, psychological, and sociological aspects of alcoholism and alcohol research, provided that they make a new and significant contribution to knowledge in the field. Papers include new results obtained experimentally, descriptions of new experimental (including clinical) methods of importance to the field of alcohol research and treatment, or new interpretations of existing results. Theoretical contributions are considered equally with papers dealing with experimental work provided that such theoretical contributions are not of a largely speculative or philosophical nature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书