A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Tailored Primary Care Program to Reverse Excessive Alcohol Consumption

Article Figures & Data

Table 1. Baseline Characteristics of Patients with Hazardous and Harmful Alcohol Consumption

Characteristic	Control Group (n = 366)	Intervention Group (n = 346)	P
Age, years (mean ± SD)	49.0 (16.0)	46.0 (16.6)	.02^*
Sex
Male	71.3	68.1
Female	28.7	31.9	.36
Household composition
Lives alone	22.2	18.4
Lives with partner, children, or both	77.8	81.6	.24
Education
Basic	21.8	22.1
Intermediate	45.5	45.3
High	32.7	32.6	1.00
Smoking status
Nonsmoker	70.5	59.1
Smoker	29.5	40.9	<.01^*
Comorbidities
Presence of chronic somatic comorbidity without psychiatric comorbidity	70.5	65.9	.28
Presence of psychiatric comorbidity without chronic somatic comorbidity	16.9	19.7	.49
Presence of both chronic somatic and psychiatric comorbidity	12.6	14.5	.59
Attitudes toward alcohol use
Less alcohol use improves health (yes)	84.8	85.1	.91
Less alcohol use is not enjoyable (yes)	59.1	53.8	.17
Less alcohol use complicates relaxing (yes)	28.4	33.3	.17
Importance of changing alcohol use
Important	12.7	14.9
Neutral	49.0	42.1
Unimportant	38.3	43.0	.18

Table 2. Baseline Characteristics of Practices Providing Care to Patients with Hazardous and Harmful Alcohol Consumption

Characteristic	Control Group (n = 34)	Intervention Group (n = 36)	P^*
Practice type
Solo practice	55.1	40.5
Group practice	44.9	59.5	<.01
Level of urbanization
Large city (>100,000 inhabitants)	24.0	18.8
City (30,000–100,000 inhabitants)	55.7	24.6
Small urban (5000–30,000 inhabitants)	20.2	56.6	<.01

Table 3. Changes in Level of Alcohol Consumption

AUDIT Category	AUDIT Measurement				P
	At Baseline		At 2-Year Follow-up
	Control Group (n = 366)	Intervention Group (n = 346)	Control Group (n = 249)	Intervention Group (n = 217)
Safe to moderate alcohol use	—	—	47.0	35.5	.01^*
Hazardous alcohol use	89.9	91.6	47.4	58.5	.02^*
Harmful alcohol use	10.1	8.4	4.0	4.6	.31
Possibly dependent alcohol use	—	—	1.6	1.4	.84

Table 4. Reduction of Alcohol Use to a Safe Level and the Relationship with Multiple Patient and Practice Characteristics

Characteristic	Univariate Associations^*		Multiple Analysis^{^†}
Characteristic	OR (95% CI)	P	OR (95% CI)	P
Age	1.01 (1.00–1.02)	.07	1.02 (1.01–1.03)	<.01
Sex	1.69 (1.13–2.55)	.01	2.00 (1.26–3.19)	<.01
Household composition	1.06 (0.64–1.77)	.81
Education
Basic	Reference category
Intermediate	0.88 (0.54–1.45)	.62
High	0.80 (0.48–1.36)	.41
Smoking status	0.64 (0.42–0.96)	.03
Comorbidity
Presence of chronic somatic comorbidity without psychiatric comorbidity	Reference category
Presence of psychiatric co-morbidity without chronic somatic comorbidity	0.63 (0.31–1.30)	.21
Presence of both chronic somatic and psychiatric comorbidity	0.57 (0.27–1.21)	.14
Attitudes toward alcohol use
Less alcohol improves health	0.55 (0.32–0.96)	.03
Less alcohol is not enjoyable	0.71 (0.48–1.04)	.08
Less alcohol use complicates relaxing	0.53 (0.35–0.81)	<.01	0.58 (0.37–0.90)	.02
Importance of changing alcohol use
Unimportant	Reference category
Neutral	0.82 (0.55–1.22)	.34	0.67 (0.43–1.05)	.08
Important	0.42 (0.22–0.80)	.01	0.39 (0.19–0.80)	.01
Practice type	1.06 (0.73–1.53)	.77
Level of urbanization
Large city	Reference category
City	1.13 (0.66–1.92)	.65
Small urban	1.74 (1.04–2.93)	.04

↵* Data were calculated using multilevel logistic regression analysis to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each patient and practice characteristic independently.
↵† A prediction model was calculated using a backward stepwise regression procedure, starting with all patient and practice characteristics and then eliminating all variables that did not contribute (P > .1) to the model.