Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the profiles and impact of affective temperaments, together with social and clinical backgrounds, including affective symptoms, in patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD).
METHODS: This study included 314 low-risk drinkers and 257 patients with AUD. To assess affective temperament, we used the short version of the temperament evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego. To evaluate depressive and mixed symptoms, the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology self-report Japanese version and 12-item questionnaire for the quantitative assessment of the depressive mixed state were used. We compared the profiles of affective temperaments as well as social and clinical backgrounds, including affective symptoms, between the two groups and further performed logistic regression analyses to explore the factors contributing to AUD.
RESULTS: Our analysis showed higher cyclothymic, hyperthymic, and irritable temperament scores and lower depressive temperament scores in patients with AUD than that in nonclinical drinkers. Regarding other social and clinical backgrounds, patients with AUD were less educated and employed and more experienced depressive and mixed symptoms. Logistic regression analysis identified hyperthymic temperament as a positive contributor and depressive temperament as a negative contributor to AUD.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated potential bipolarity in patients with AUD, as manifested by a more hyperthymic temperament in contrast to less depressive temperament. Despite their self-perceived adaptive temperament profiles, patients showed poorer social outcomes and more affective symptoms. This gap may be partly explained by a lack of insight unique to AUD psychology, which potentially disturbs problem recognition.
METHODS: This study included 314 low-risk drinkers and 257 patients with AUD. To assess affective temperament, we used the short version of the temperament evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego. To evaluate depressive and mixed symptoms, the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology self-report Japanese version and 12-item questionnaire for the quantitative assessment of the depressive mixed state were used. We compared the profiles of affective temperaments as well as social and clinical backgrounds, including affective symptoms, between the two groups and further performed logistic regression analyses to explore the factors contributing to AUD.
RESULTS: Our analysis showed higher cyclothymic, hyperthymic, and irritable temperament scores and lower depressive temperament scores in patients with AUD than that in nonclinical drinkers. Regarding other social and clinical backgrounds, patients with AUD were less educated and employed and more experienced depressive and mixed symptoms. Logistic regression analysis identified hyperthymic temperament as a positive contributor and depressive temperament as a negative contributor to AUD.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated potential bipolarity in patients with AUD, as manifested by a more hyperthymic temperament in contrast to less depressive temperament. Despite their self-perceived adaptive temperament profiles, patients showed poorer social outcomes and more affective symptoms. This gap may be partly explained by a lack of insight unique to AUD psychology, which potentially disturbs problem recognition.
摘要：
目的：本研究旨在探讨情感气质的概况和影响，连同社会和临床背景，包括情感症状,酒精使用障碍（AUD）患者。
方法：本研究包括314名低风险饮酒者和257名AUD患者。要评估情感气质，我们用的是孟菲斯气质评价的简短版本，比萨,巴黎,还有圣地亚哥.为了评估抑郁和混合症状，使用了抑郁症状自我报告的快速清单日文版和12项问卷，用于对抑郁混合状态进行定量评估。我们比较了情感气质的概况以及社会和临床背景，包括情感症状,并进一步进行logistic回归分析以探讨影响AUD的因素。
结果：我们的分析显示，胸腺亢进,AUD患者的易怒气质评分和抑郁气质评分低于非临床饮酒者。关于其他社会和临床背景，AUD患者的受教育程度和就业水平较低,经历的抑郁和混合症状较多.Logistic回归分析确定了高胸气质是AUD的积极因素，而抑郁气质是AUD的消极因素。
结论：我们的研究结果表明AUD患者存在潜在的双极性，表现为较高的性情与较低的抑郁性情相反。尽管他们自我感知的适应性性情，患者表现出较差的社会结果和更多的情感症状.这种差距可能部分原因是AUD心理学缺乏独特的洞察力，这可能会干扰问题识别。
方法：本研究包括314名低风险饮酒者和257名AUD患者。要评估情感气质，我们用的是孟菲斯气质评价的简短版本，比萨,巴黎,还有圣地亚哥.为了评估抑郁和混合症状，使用了抑郁症状自我报告的快速清单日文版和12项问卷，用于对抑郁混合状态进行定量评估。我们比较了情感气质的概况以及社会和临床背景，包括情感症状,并进一步进行logistic回归分析以探讨影响AUD的因素。
结果：我们的分析显示，胸腺亢进,AUD患者的易怒气质评分和抑郁气质评分低于非临床饮酒者。关于其他社会和临床背景，AUD患者的受教育程度和就业水平较低,经历的抑郁和混合症状较多.Logistic回归分析确定了高胸气质是AUD的积极因素，而抑郁气质是AUD的消极因素。
结论：我们的研究结果表明AUD患者存在潜在的双极性，表现为较高的性情与较低的抑郁性情相反。尽管他们自我感知的适应性性情，患者表现出较差的社会结果和更多的情感症状.这种差距可能部分原因是AUD心理学缺乏独特的洞察力，这可能会干扰问题识别。
