Three (or more) alcohol-dependence symptoms but not clustered in the same 12 months: diagnostic orphans from a longitudinal perspective

Intensity of Daily Drinking and Its Relation to Alcohol Use Disorders

BACKGROUND

Daily drinking is an important public health concern and informative for evaluating diagnostic classification. In particular, daily binge drinkers might be considered as the prototype of some forms of alcoholism, as this drinking pattern may drive many alcohol use disorder (AUD) symptoms. However, daily drinking potentially captures a wide range of drinkers, including light-moderate daily drinkers who exhibit presumed control over their drinking behavior and might benefit from salutary effects on health. This study examined the heterogeneity of daily drinkers in detail.

METHODS

Data from the 2 waves of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions were used. Participants who reported drinking "every day" during the last 12 months were classified as daily drinkers. A series of regression and logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the association between daily drinking and various outcomes.

RESULTS

Daily drinkers were found to vary considerably from each other with respect to diagnostic status, level of consumption, demographic composition, and a range of drinking and health correlates. Further, a substantial number of daily binge drinkers were not diagnosed with AUD under the DSM-IV or DSM-5, although in most groups, the DSM-5 criteria diagnosed a larger percentage of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily drinkers represent a highly heterogeneous group, and the correlates of daily drinking depend on the usual quantity of daily drinks and the frequency of alcohol-related problems in a given sample. Moreover, AUD, defined both according to DSM-IV and DSM-5, did not capture more than 68% of daily binge drinkers. Given that daily binge drinking is an extremely high threshold for use, this finding may present a challenge for our current classification system.

A Cross-National Examination of Differences in Classification of Lifetime Alcohol Use Disorder Between DSM-IV and DSM-5: Findings from the World Mental Health Survey

BACKGROUND

The current study sought to examine the diagnostic overlap in DSM-IV and DSM-5 alcohol use disorder (AUD) and determine the clinical correlates of changing diagnostic status across the 2 classification systems.

METHODS

DSM-IV and DSM-5 definitions of AUD were compared using cross-national community survey data in 9 low-, middle-, and high-income countries. Participants were 31,367 respondents to surveys in the World Health Organization's World Mental Health Survey Initiative. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview, version 3.0, was used to derive DSM-IV and DSM-5 lifetime diagnoses of AUD. Clinical characteristics, also assessed in the surveys, included lifetime DSM-IV anxiety; mood and drug use disorders; lifetime suicidal ideation, plan, and attempt; general functional impairment; and psychological distress.

RESULTS

Compared with DSM-IV AUD (12.3%, SE = 0.3%), the DSM-5 definition yielded slightly lower prevalence estimates (10.8%, SE = 0.2%). Almost one-third (n = 802) of all DSM-IV abuse cases switched to subthreshold according to DSM-5 and one-quarter (n = 467) of all DSM-IV diagnostic orphans switched to mild AUD according to DSM-5. New cases of DSM-5 AUD were largely similar to those who maintained their AUD across both classifications. Similarly, new DSM-5 noncases were similar to those who were subthreshold across both classifications. The exception to this was with regard to the prevalence of any lifetime drug use disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large cross-national community sample, the prevalence of DSM-5 lifetime AUD was only slightly lower than the prevalence of DSM-IV lifetime AUD. Nonetheless, there was considerable diagnostic switching, with a large number of people inconsistently identified across the 2 DSM classifications.

The National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) Waves 1 and 2: review and summary of findings

PURPOSE

The NESARC, a "third-generation" psychiatric epidemiologic survey that integrated detailed measures of alcohol and drug use and problems has been the data source for over >850 publications. A comprehensive review of NESARC findings and their implications is lacking.

METHOD

NESARC was a survey of 43,093 participants that covered alcohol, drug and psychiatric disorders, risk factors, and consequences. Wave 1 of the NESARC was conducted in 2001-2002. Three years later, Wave 2 follow-up re-interviews were conducted with 34,653 of the original participants. Scopus and Pubmed were used to search for NESARC papers, which were sorted into topic areas and summarized.

RESULT

The most common disorders were alcohol and posttraumatic stress disorders, and major depression. Females had more internalizing disorders and males had more externalizing disorders, although the preponderance of males with alcohol disorders (the "gender gap") was less pronounced than it was in previous decades. A race/ethnic "paradox" (lower risk among disadvantaged minorities than whites) remains unexplained. Younger participants had higher risk for substance and personality disorders, but not unipolar depressive or anxiety disorders. Psychiatric comorbidity was extensive and often formed latent trans-diagnostic domains. Since 1991-1992, risk for marijuana and prescription drug disorders increased, while smoking decreased, although smoking decreases were less pronounced among those with comorbidity. A nexus of comorbidity, social support, and stress predicted transitions in diagnostic status between Waves 1 and 2. Childhood maltreatment predicted psychopathology. Alcohol and drug use disorders were seldom treated; attitudinal barriers (little perceived need, perceived alcoholism stigma, pessimism about efficacy) were more important in predicting non-treatment than financial barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding comorbidity and the effects of early stressors will require research incorporating biologic components, e.g., genetic variants and brain imaging. The lack of treatment for alcohol and drug disorders, predicted by attitudinal rather than financial variables, suggests an urgent need for public and professional education to reduce the stigma associated with these disorders and increase knowledge of treatment options.

Alcohol consumption and symptoms as predictors for relapse of DSM-5 alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol consumption levels and alcohol use disorder (AUD) symptoms may serve as easily quantifiable markers for AUD relapse after remission and might help prevention workers identify at-risk individuals. We investigated the predictive value of alcohol consumption and AUD symptoms on relapse.

METHODS

Data are from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study-2 (NEMESIS-2). We selected 506 people in ≥12-month DSM-5 AUD remission at baseline and assessed their status at 3-year follow-up. AUD symptoms and drinking patterns were assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0. Time since remission was assessed retrospectively at baseline and ranged from 1 to 48 years. Predictors for relapse were examined using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Cumulative AUD relapse rate was 5.6% at 5 years, 9.1% at 10 years and 12.0% at 20 years. Relapse was predicted by both medium (15-28/22-42 drinks weekly for women/men) and high (≥29/43) past alcohol intake, 6+ lifetime AUD symptoms, 'impaired control over use', and at-risk (≥8/15) current intake. The risk of relapse was especially high when medium or high past intake or 6+ lifetime symptoms coincided with current at-risk drinking.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a minority of people in DSM-5 AUD remission relapsed, but the risk of relapse increased substantially with the presence of at least one of the risk factors. Moreover, at-risk current drinking coupled with other risk factors substantially increased the likelihood of relapse. Therefore, current drinking may provide an adequate reference point for relapse prevention.

Predicting persistency of DSM-5 alcohol use disorder and examining drinking patterns of recently remitted individuals: a prospective general population study

AIMS

To establish the 3-year persistency rate of alcohol use disorder (AUD) and its predictors, and to examine drinking patterns of recently remitted individuals.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study-2 (NEMESIS-2) surveyed a nationally representative sample of adults (aged 18-64 years) at baseline (response = 65.1%) and 3-year follow-up (response = 80.4%).

PARTICIPANTS

People with AUD at baseline, as defined by DSM-5 (n = 198).

MEASUREMENTS

AUD, drinking patterns and mental disorders were assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0. Other predictors were assessed with an additional questionnaire. Predictors of persistency were examined with univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

The AUD persistency rate was 29.5% [95% confidence intervals (CI) = 20.0-39.0]. In the multivariable model, the older (25-34 and 35-44) age groups had lower AUD persistency [odds ratio (OR) = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.00-0.49 and OR = 0.14; 95% CI = 0.02-0.79, respectively] than the youngest age group (18-24). A higher number of weekly drinks and a comorbid anxiety disorder predicted AUD persistency (OR = 1.03; 95% CI = 1.00-1.07 and OR = 4.56; 95% CI = 1.04-20.06, respectively). Furthermore, remission was associated with a reduction of six drinks per week between T0 and T1 . It should be noted, however, that 35.8% (95% CI = 22.4-49.2) of people in diagnostic remission still drank more than the recommended maximum (more than seven/14 drinks weekly for women/men).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a minority of people in the Netherlands with alcohol use disorder as defined by DSM-5 still have the disorder 3 years later. Factors that help to identify people at risk of alcohol use disorder persistence are: younger age, a higher number of weekly drinks and a comorbid anxiety disorder. A substantial number of people recently in diagnostic remission still drink above the maximum recommended level.