Table 1.

Characteristics and findings of studies on non-age specific treatment.

Study	Years data collected	Samplea	Mode of treatmentb	Outcomes of interest	Method	Findings
Weins, Menustik, Miller and Schmitz45	1978–1979	N = 87 adults w/AD Age: 65+, male M = 69, SD = 3.2 female m = 68, SD = 2.2 % female: 32 % Cauc: 99 % AfAm: 0 % Asian: 1	IP; chemical aversive counter-conditioning to alcohol plus other therapy; booster S 2–3 weeks post discharge, then over following year M days in tx: ~19 over the year (14 days IP)	Study success = total abstinence, not even 1 drink, 1 year post tx	Post-test only. Self report, staff observation, collateral reports, and patient charts; Time point: 1 2 groups studied over 2 years for study replication	78 patients completed initial treatment. 34 completed 6+ reinforcement S. 65.4% patients were totally abstinent for 12+ mo.
Janik and Dunham37	1977–1979	N = 2,600 Age: 21–60+, M = NR, SD = NR 3 groups: 21–39, 40–59, 60+ (Ns of each: NR) % female: NR % Cauc: NR % AfAm: NR	OP; Quantified as hours of OP tx; provided by 550 programs nationwide	Quantity-frequency index; impairment index (eg, difficulty sleeping, missing meals); patient’s assessment of severity of alcohol problems; counselor’s assessment of severity of alcohol problems	Post-test only. CTYA, discriminant analysis using administrative data with a follow up survey. Time points: 2 Time span: 180 days post intake	Only age related finding: middle-aged group was more severe on counselor assessment of alcohol problems and impairment
Carstensen, Rychtarik and Prue44	1979–1981	N = 16 V IP tx completers Age: 65–70 M = NR, SD = NR % female: 0 % Cauc: NR % AfAm: NR	IP; 28-day rehabilitation program. Used “social learning model”; “behaviorally oriented” (p. 308)	% abstinent for at least 6 mo. prior to interview; early vs. late onset rates of abstinence; participant characteristics that distinguish abstinence vs. non-abstinence.	Post-test only. Telephone interviews 2–4 years post-discharge. Collateral interviews. Time points: 1	Descriptive results only. 50% abstinent; 38% drinking problematically; 13% reduced drinking since entering program. Late onset did slightly better than early onset. No demographics distinguished abstinent vs. non-abstinent groups
Rice, Longabaugh, Beattie and Noel38	1984–1986	N = 229 Age: 18–50+ M = NR, SD = NR 3 groups: YA: 18–29, n = 53; MA: 30–49, n = 134; OA: 50+, n = 42 % female: 31 % Cauc: NR % AfAm: NR	OP; 20 weekly S. All groups included 2 intro S, 2 booster S. 3 txs: CBT—16 S; Relationship enhancement (RE)—6 CBT S, 8 partner S, 2 didactic S; vocational (VE)—6 CBT S, 4 partner S, 4 vocational S	% days abstinent; % days of heavy drinking	RCT. Post-hoc CTYA. Randomly assigned to tx. Telephone interviews each mo.; in person interview every 6 mo. Time points: 6? Time span: 6? mo.	Only OA demonstrated condition differences. For OA, CBT was significantly better over VE (for both outcomes). No difference between CBT and RE
Lemke and Moos47,48	NR, but prior to 1997 when results first reported	N = 1,296 V Matched age groups (n = 432 in each): YA: 21–39; MA: 40–54 OA: 55–77 M = NR, SD = NR % female: 0 % Cauc: 71 % AfAm: NR	IP; 12 mixed-age alcohol tx programs at VAs nationally; 4 12-step oriented; 4 CBT oriented; and 4 eclectically oriented	Daily alcohol intake; positive expectancies; situational confidence and coping. Scores from each of these were aggregated into “discharge status”, with higher scores = better outcomes. Maximum alcohol use (heaviest day); drinking problems, BSI; continuing care; motivation; cognitive functioning; social support	CTYA—matched group design. Evaluation project of VA programs. Time points: 4 Time span: 5 years post tx entry. First report at discharge	No group differences on outcomes. OA received less practical help while in tx. Main predictors of higher discharge status: Marital status, cognitive functioning, motivation for treatment (OA lower than other groups), specialized services, social support. 1 year follow up: OA—Lowest problems among 3 groups; Lower distress than MA group; 59% received OP; 51% attended self help; 30% received psych care (lowest among 3 groups). 5 year follow up: OA had lowest problems and distress among groups
Lemke and Moos48	NR, but prior to 1997 when results first reported	N = 570 V Age: 22–55+ M = NR, SD = NR Matched age groups (n = 190 in each): YA: 22–39; MA: 40–54; OA: 55+ % female: 0 % Cauc: 73 % AfAm: NR	IP; 63 community residential facilities (CRFs) contracted with VA	Typical alcohol use; maximum alcohol use (heaviest drinking day); AD; alcohol problems; BSI; health status; tx services; continuing care services	CTYA—matched group design. Evaluation of VA programs. Follow up by mail and/or telephone interviews. Time points: 3 Time span: 4 years	No age group differences in outcomes, treatment services, or formal and informal continuing care. Greater engagement, length of stay, and supportive relationships predicted less drinking, fewer drinking problems and psychological distress. Continuing care also predicted positive outcomes
Oslin, Liberto, O’Brien, Krois and Norbeck41	NR	N = 44 V w/AD Age: 50–70 M = 58, SD = 6.8 % female: 0 % Cauc: 36 % AfAm: 64	OP; 50 mg of NTX/day vs. placebo. Total possible 12 weeks in tx. M weeks in tx: 10; simultaneously attended group therapy	Relapse = return to clinically significant drinking (5+ drinks per occasion; drinking 5+ days per week; coming to tx with positive BAC)	RCT. Time points: 5 Time span: 12 weeks	17 did not complete study—due to relapse/drop out; noncompliance; transportation or work problems. 68.2% achieved abstinence. No significant group differences on abstinence or relapse rates. In context of alcohol exposure, NTX group half as likely to relapse
Oslin, Pettinati and Volpicelli42	NR	N = 183 adults w/AD Age: 21–75, M = NR, SD = NR; YA: 21–54, n = 143; OA: 55+, n = 40 % female: 27 % Cauc: 74 % AfAm: NR	OP, 100 mg daily NTX and BRENDA (weekly counseling, 20–30 minutes w/NP); 7 day placebo lead in; 2 thirds randomized to NTX	TLFB; Drinkers inventory of consequences; ASI; SF-36; primary outcome = relapse to clinically significant drinking ≥ 5 in a single day	RCT. Post hoc CYTA. Focused on first 3 mo. of tx (out of 9). Time points: 2 Time span: 3 mo.	OA significantly greater adherence to medication and tx attendance than YA. 42.5% were abstinent during trial, 42.5% relapsed (NS compared to YA). Potentially greater medication effect for OA, trend only
Gordon, Conigliaro, Maisto, McNeil, Kraemer and Kelley35	1995–1997	N = 45 at-risk drinkers in PC; Age: 65+, M = ~73, SD = NR % female: 13 % Cauc: 69 % AfAm: 29	BI; 3 conditions: Motivational enhancement (ME, feedback, consequences, goal-setting; 1 S, 45–60 min, 2 15 min boosters, n = 18); brief advice (BA, 1 15 min S, n = 15); standard care (SC, n = 12)	TLFB; no. days abstinent; no. total drinks per month; no. drinks per drinking day; no. of drinking days	RCT. Post hoc CTYA. Randomized at individual level to 1 of 3 conditions. Time points: 6 Time span: 12 mos.	All conditions had significant decrease in drinking over time. No significant differences between conditions or age groups. Trend effect of ME and BA over SC
Satre, Mertens, Arean and Weisner39,40	1994–1996 (years admitted to program); Follow up through 2001	N = 1,204 HMO participants Age: 18–81, M = NR, SD = NR; YA: 18–39, n = 736; MA: 40–54, n = 379; OA: 55+, n = 89 % female: 36, 30, 24 % Cauc: 73, 74, 93 % AfAm: 12, 15, 2	OP; Day hospital or “traditional” OP program. Day hospital was 4× more intense in first 4 weeks, then more similar after. 8 week tx total, then 1 of year aftercare	ASI score. Abstinence (in last 30 days). SCL-66 subscale (psychiatric distress); Readmission	Partial randomization to 2 types of tx. Post hoc CTYA. Telephone and in-person interviews. Time points: 3 Time span: 5 years 77+ % follow up rate through year 5 in all age groups	6 mo.: OAs had longer LOS; Tx services: Abstinence rates equivalent across age groups. Predictors of abstinence were not age related: married, no dependence, lower hostility, abstinence goal, longer LOS 5 years: predictors of abstinence were only “age related” as in fewer YA had: female gender, longer LOS, friends not supportive of drug/alcohol use

Abbreviations:

^aSample—M, mean; SD, standard deviation; Cauc, Caucasian; AfAm, African American; NR, not reported; V, veterans; PC, primary care; AD, alcohol dependence; YA, young adults; MA, middle-ages adults; OA, older adults;

^bMode of Treatment—BA, brief advice; BI, brief intervention; OP, outpatient treatment; IP, inpatient treatment; M, mean; S, session(s); tx, treatment; VA, Veterans Affairs; CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy; NTX, naltrexone;

^cTLFB, Timeline follow back; BSI, Brief Symptom Inventory; ASI, Addiction Severity Index; BAC, blood alcohol concentration; no., number;

^dCTYA, comparison to young adults; RCT, randomized controlled trial, randomized comparison trial; mo., month(s);

^eLOS, length of stay; tx, treatment; S, session(s); no., number; mo., month(s).