Stephen A Maisto1, Corey R Roos2, Kevin A Hallgren3, Dezarie Moskal4, Adam D Wilson2, Katie Witkiewitz2. 1. Department of Psychology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York. samaisto@syr.edu. 2. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 3. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 4. Department of Psychology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The construct of relapse is used widely in clinical research and practice of alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment. The purpose of this study was to test the predictive validity of commonly appearing definitions of AUD relapse in the empirical literature. METHODS: Secondary analyses of data from Project MATCH and COMBINE were conducted using 7 definitions of "relapse" based on drinking quantity within a single drinking episode: any drinking; at least 4/5 drinks for women/men; at least 4.3/7.1 drinks for women/men; at least 6/7 drinks for women/men; at least 6 drinks; at least 7/9 drinks for women/men; and at least 8/10 drinks for women/men. Relapse was used to predict alcohol consumption, related consequences, and nonconsumption outcomes (quality of life, psychosocial functioning) at the end of treatment and up to 1 year posttreatment. RESULTS: Regression analyses indicated within-treatment relapse definitions significantly predicted end-of-treatment alcohol consumption and alcohol-related consequences. Heavy drinking definitions were generally more predictive than the any drinking definition, but no single heavy drinking definition was consistently a better predictor of outcomes. Relapse definitions were less predictive of longer-term alcohol-related outcomes and both shorter- and longer-term nonconsumption outcomes, including health and psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSIONS: One particular definition of relapse did not consistently stand out as the best predictor. Advances in AUD research may require reconceptualization of relapse as a multifaceted dynamic process and may consider a wider range of relevant behaviors (e.g., health and psychosocial functioning) when examining the change process in individuals with AUD.
BACKGROUND: The construct of relapse is used widely in clinical research and practice of alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment. The purpose of this study was to test the predictive validity of commonly appearing definitions of AUD relapse in the empirical literature. METHODS: Secondary analyses of data from Project MATCH and COMBINE were conducted using 7 definitions of "relapse" based on drinking quantity within a single drinking episode: any drinking; at least 4/5 drinks for women/men; at least 4.3/7.1 drinks for women/men; at least 6/7 drinks for women/men; at least 6 drinks; at least 7/9 drinks for women/men; and at least 8/10 drinks for women/men. Relapse was used to predict alcohol consumption, related consequences, and nonconsumption outcomes (quality of life, psychosocial functioning) at the end of treatment and up to 1 year posttreatment. RESULTS: Regression analyses indicated within-treatment relapse definitions significantly predicted end-of-treatment alcohol consumption and alcohol-related consequences. Heavy drinking definitions were generally more predictive than the any drinking definition, but no single heavy drinking definition was consistently a better predictor of outcomes. Relapse definitions were less predictive of longer-term alcohol-related outcomes and both shorter- and longer-term nonconsumption outcomes, including health and psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSIONS: One particular definition of relapse did not consistently stand out as the best predictor. Advances in AUD research may require reconceptualization of relapse as a multifaceted dynamic process and may consider a wider range of relevant behaviors (e.g., health and psychosocial functioning) when examining the change process in individuals with AUD.
Authors: Lee Ann Kaskutas; Thomasina J Borkman; Alexandre Laudet; Lois A Ritter; Jane Witbrodt; Meenakshi Sabina Subbaraman; Aina Stunz; Jason Bond Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 2.582
Authors: Raymond F Anton; Stephanie S O'Malley; Domenic A Ciraulo; Ron A Cisler; David Couper; Dennis M Donovan; David R Gastfriend; James D Hosking; Bankole A Johnson; Joseph S LoCastro; Richard Longabaugh; Barbara J Mason; Margaret E Mattson; William R Miller; Helen M Pettinati; Carrie L Randall; Robert Swift; Roger D Weiss; Lauren D Williams; Allen Zweben Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Erin J Campbell; Jeremy P M Flanagan; Leigh C Walker; Mitchell K R I Hill; Nathan J Marchant; Andrew J Lawrence Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2018-12-03 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Janice C Froehlich; Emily R Nicholson; Julian E Dilley; Nick J Filosa; Logan C Rademacher; Teal N Smith Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2017-07-10 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Katie Witkiewitz; Adam D Wilson; Matthew R Pearson; Kevin S Montes; Megan Kirouac; Corey R Roos; Kevin A Hallgren; Stephen A Maisto Journal: Addiction Date: 2018-08-24 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Jacob A Levine; Becky K Gius; George Boghdadi; Gerard J Connors; Stephen A Maisto; Robert C Schlauch Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Kate M Lillie; Kelley J Jansen; Lisa G Dirks; Abram J Lyons; Karl C Alcover; Jaedon P Avey; Katherine Hirchak; Jalene Herron; Dedra Buchwald; Dennis M Donovan; Michael G McDonell; Jennifer L Shaw Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2020 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 4.647
Authors: Andreas Zetterström; Markku D Hämäläinen; Maria Winkvist; Marcus Söderquist; Patrik Öhagen; Karl Andersson; Fred Nyberg Journal: Front Digit Health Date: 2021-12-07