Citation

Kurtz NR, Googins B, Howard WC. J. Stud. Alcohol 1984; 45(1): 33-45.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1984, Rutgers Center of Alcohol Studies)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

6422165

Abstract

The research on the success of occupational alcoholism programs (OAPs) was reviewed. One measure of the success of OAPs has been a change in drinking behavior. This may seem like the most relevant measure but there are questions about its reliability because researchers usually depend on subjects' self-reports and do not define their criteria for successful outcome well. In addition, attempts by employers to dictate the drinking habits of their employees may be difficult to justify. Varying rates of success on this measure have been reported. Subjects have generally been able to control drinking in the long term, but it is suggested that their control erodes over time. A second measure of the success of OAPs has been work performance, as revealed by absenteeism, disciplinary actions, accidents, sick and injured days taken, turnover rate and job efficiency. Studies of this measure have been hindered by employers' poor record keeping and by the difficulty of developing standard measures of outcome success. In general, studies with weaker research designs have shown more improvement on this measure. A third measure has been the cost efficiency of OAPs, as revealed by direct savings for employers resulting from OAPs such as decreases in absenteeism and indirect savings such as increased accuracy of work. This measure seems to be the one most relevant to employers' profit motives. Studies of cost efficiency have had ambiguous findings. A fourth measure has been the penetration rate--the extent to which an OAP reaches its target population. This measure has never been studied successfully. A problem with all the studies reviewed has been their poor design (a lack of control groups, follow-up periods that were too brief and problems with selection of subjects), which raises serious questions about their validity. The obstacles to measuring outcome success were also discussed--poor documentation by employers, lack of access to subjects and reluctance on the part of employers and treatment staff to allow studies.

Language: en