Skip to main content
. 2008 Dec;49(6):763–771. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2008.49.763

Table 3.

Drinking status, after-care participation, change in marital and employment status of telephone contact group (n=347) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 mo after the end of intensive treatment and no contact group (n=84) at 24 mo after end of intensive treatment

Telephone contact group
No contact group
3 mo
6 mo
12 mo
24 mo
24 mo
Drinking status with regard to initial cohort, including non-respondents n = 197 n = 167 n = 109 n = 116 n = 84
Response rate from the initial cohort (n = 347): 56.8 48.1 31.4 33.4 30.5
No alcohol use – question 1 (%)* 48.4 40.3 27.1 27.7 24.4
No alcohol use – question 2 (%) 49.3 42.1 27.7 30.3§ 24.4§
Alcohol use in respondents who relapsed in comparison with baseline: n = 29 n = 27 n = 15 n = 20 n = 17
     equal (%) 23.8 16.7 28.6II 14.3II
     lower (%) 76.2 77.8 100.0 64.3 71.4
     greater (%) 5.6 7.1 14.3
After-care participation of respondents (%):
     group membership 47.0 48.2 45.9 45.5 40.9
     psychotherapy or psychiatric treatment 11.9 13.1 13.8 12.4 15.9
     none 40.1 38.7 40.4 42.1 43.2
Change in marital status of respondents (%):
     unchanged 81.8 85.3 84.8 81.0** 82.8**
     finding a partner 14.6 14.1 11.4 14.9 13.8
     losing a partner 3.6 0.6 3.8 4.1 3.4
Change in employment status of respondents (%)
     Unchanged 84.4 83.3 85.3 82.7†† 68.2††
     Better – getting job or promotion 13.1 13.0 12.7 12.7 21.2
     Worse – losing job or lower status 2.5 3.7 2.0 4.5 10.6

*Are you still completely abstaining?

†χ21 = 0.29, P = 0.590.

‡Have you ever relapsed since the end of the intensive treatment?

§χ21 = 8.79, P = 0.118.

IIχ22 = 1.05, P = 0.591.

¶χ22 = 0.71, P = 0.702.

**χ22 = 0.12, P = 0.941.

††χ22 = 5.84, P = 0.054.