Family alcohol use, rather than childhood trauma, is more likely to cause male alcohol use disorder: findings from a case-control study in northern China

Abstract

Objective To explore the influence of childhood trauma and family alcohol use on male alcohol use disorder. Methods We conducted a case-control study using Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) and a structured interview involving 129 men with alcohol use disorder and 129 healthy male volunteers. The two groups were compared in terms of childhood trauma, parental drinking behavior, and attitudes toward childhood drinking. Results Patients showed higher scores of CTQ than controls on childhood trauma experiences, including on the subscales of physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and emotional neglect. Higher proportions of patients than controls had fathers who drank seven or more times a week, and had mothers who were opposed to childhood drinking. Conversely, a smaller proportion of patients than controls had fathers who opposed childhood drinking. Patients were more likely than controls to have been induced to drink as children. Logistic regression analysis identified three risk factors for alcohol use disorder: induced drinking during childhood [odds ratio (OR) 6.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.56–14.51], the father’s weekly alcohol consumption during the respondent’s childhood (OR 4.40, 95%CI 2.94–6.58) and history of smoking (OR 3.39, 95%CI 1.48–7.77). Conversely, more years of education were a protective factor against alcohol use disorder (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78–0.99). Conclusions Men whose fathers drank frequently during their childhood and were encouraged to drink may be at increased risk of alcohol use disorder in adulthood. In fact these factors of family alcohol use appear to increase risk of alcohol use disorder among adult men more than exposure to childhood trauma does.

Magnitude and determinants of alcohol use disorder among adult population in East Asian countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…As per our inclusion criteria, we excluded studies of adults with psychiatric or other mental health problems. Therefore, 14 peer-reviewed articles (31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis; 9 of them were suitable for analysis of the 1-year prevalence of AUD, 6 for analysis of the lifetime prevalence of AUD, 9 for analysis of the prevalence of alcohol abuse, and 8 for analysis of the prevalence of alcohol dependence.…”

“…The sample size of the included studies ranged from 258 to 36,157 participants, and they were published from 2005 to 2021. Most of the studies (32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44) were cross-sectional, although there was one case-control (31), one cohort (37), and one comparative cross-sectional study (38). Most of the included studies were from China (31,32,35,39,(42)(43)(44), followed by Korea (33,38,41), Japan (34,40), Taiwan (37), and Hong Kong (36).…”

“…Most of the studies (32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44) were cross-sectional, although there was one case-control (31), one cohort (37), and one comparative cross-sectional study (38). Most of the included studies were from China (31,32,35,39,(42)(43)(44), followed by Korea (33,38,41), Japan (34,40), Taiwan (37), and Hong Kong (36). The highest and lowest prevalence rates of AUD were reported in China, at 16.2% (32) and 1.05%, respectively (42).…”

“…The NOS was used to assess the quality of the included studies. The quality ratings ranged from 6 to 8 stars for cross-sectional studies (32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44), seven for case-control studies (31) and six for cohort studies (37). The most common problems were an unsatisfactory response rate, failure to compare respondents and non-respondents (38, 41), and a lack of CIs for the determinants of AUD (32,37).…”

“…Five studies (31,34,35,39,42) were not considered in the analysis of the 1-year prevalence of AUD: four of them (31,34,35,39) did not report the prevalence rate, while the remaining study, which was conducted in China (42), reported it on the basis of the DSM-5 (which has different diagnostic criteria to the DSM-IV).…”