4.5 Article

Prevalence, correlates and treatment status of alcohol use disorders in psychiatric patients in China

Journal

GENERAL HOSPITAL PSYCHIATRY
Volume 45, Issue -, Pages 70-75

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2017.01.002

Keywords

Alcohol use disorders; Alcohol dependence; Alcohol abuse; Prevalence; Cross-sectional survey

Categories

Funding

  1. State Key Program of the National Natural Science of China [81130020]
  2. National Key Basic Research and Development Program [2015CB553500]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the prevalence, associated factors and treatment status of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) in psychiatric patients in China. Methods: We asked 24,379 consecutive patients aged >= 18 years who presented at the psychiatric departments in eight hospitals in 2013 whether they had consumed alcoholic beverages in the previous month. Of the 2964 (12.2%) patients who answered yes and were then screened with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), 1304 (5.3%) screened positive (AUDIT >= 7) and, based on DSM-IV criteria, were diagnosed with AUDs by psychiatrists. The treatments prescribed for them were also recorded. Logistic regression was used to identify AUDs associated factors. Results: The prevalence of AUDs was 2.4% (95% CI: 2.2-2.6%). None of the patients diagnosed with AUDs had got medical treatment for preventing relapse. The risk factors for AUDs were middle-aged or elderly (OR = 1.86, 95% CI: 1.23-2.80), and consuming beverages with high degree of alcohol content (OR = 2.92, 95% CI: 2.11-4.06). Conclusions: The prevalence of AUDs in psychiatric patients in China was not high, but the rate of treatment was dramatically low, indicating the serious neglect of AUDs. Our study suggests an urgent need to improve the situation of unmet need for treatment of psychiatric patients with AUDs. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available