Do you really drink a single glass of wine a day? A cross-sectional study on self-reported and next-of-kin observed alcohol consumption

ABSTRACT

Objective

To evaluate the difference between self-reported and patients’ relative’s appreciation of alcohol consumption for patients with risky alcohol use.

Methods

Patients with risky alcohol use, admitted to general internal medicine wards, completed a questionnaire on drinking habits at hospital admission and 3 days later. The questionnaire contained the preceding week’s number of standard units (SU) alcohol consumption and the AUDIT C screening tool. A close relative completed a similar questionnaire about the patient’s drinking habits. The difference between self-report and proxy observed consumption was tested through Wilcoxon signed-rank test; differences in AUDIT C score were tested through paired t-test.

Results

Between March 2017 and May 2019, 46 patients were included. There was a significant difference between median self-reported (23.9 SU/week; IQR: 13.0–39.0) and relative’s (46.3 SU/week; IQR: 25.3–70.0) estimations of consumption (median difference of 12.4 SU/week; IQR 0–33.4, p < .001), and mean self-reported (6. 9; 95% CI:6.0–7.8) and relative’s (8.9, 95% CI: 8.0–9.7) estimations of the AUDIT-C Score (mean difference of 2.0; 95% CI: 1.1–2.8, p < .001).

Conclusions

Relative’s reported alcohol consumption is around two-fold higher than self-reported. Taking a history from a close relative could strengthen the confidence in the actual drinking habits of a patient.

KEYWORDS:

• Alcohol
• self-report
• AUDIT-C
• under-reporting
• consumption

Supplemental data

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14659891.2024.2351015

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Contributorship statement

D.E and D.G were involved in design of the study. D.E. wrote the manuscript with help from D.G. and G.J.

D.E, M.W, D.G, and G.J were involved in data collection. C.D was involved in data analysis and statistical report. D.G and G.J were involved in supervising the project, editing of the manuscript and study design. All authors reviewed the manuscript and contributed to the final version.

Data availability statement

Deidentified participant data are available upon reasonable request. (Contact details see corresponding author). Reuse is permitted upon request.

Ethics approval statement

The study was approved by the ethics committees of Berne and Vaud-Neuchâtel. (Project ID 2016–01977)

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the science fund of the clinic for internal medicine, Spitalzentrum Biel (public fund).