Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36303216›Full record

ArticleSubstance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy2022

Alcohol use disorder and disability insurance in Switzerland: the attitudes and views of lawyers, insurance medical experts, and addiction-specialist therapists.

Helen Wyler, Anja Maisch, Thomas Berger, Ueli Kieser, Roman Schleifer, Michael Liebrenz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Helen WylerDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, University of Bern, Falkenplatz 16/18, 3012, Bern, Switzerland. helen.wyler@unibe.ch.
Anja MaischDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, University of Bern, Falkenplatz 16/18, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Thomas BergerDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Ueli KieserInstitute for Legal Studies and Legal Practice, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Roman SchleiferDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, University of Bern, Falkenplatz 16/18, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Michael LiebrenzDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, University of Bern, Falkenplatz 16/18, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccording to a landmark decision by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, people with a substance use disorder (SUD) are now eligible for disability benefits if their disorder impairs their ability to work. Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is one of the most common SUDs in Switzerland and is associated with high societal and economic costs. This study aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of the views of professional stakeholder groups regarding AUD and their opinions on the new legal precedent.

methodsSwiss social insurance lawyers, insurance medical experts, and addiction-specialist therapists (N = 79) answered an online questionnaire. Due to violations of the assumption of normality, non-parametric tests are reported in most cases.

resultsTherapists held significantly higher regard for patients with AUD than both lawyers and insurance medical experts. All three groups strongly supported a disease view of AUD but agreed significantly less that it was a disease like cancer, suggesting that AUDs might be seen as at least partially self-inflicted. Overall, moralist views of AUD received considerably less support than the disease view, with lawyers agreeing with moralist views more than therapists. All groups were well-informed and largely supportive about the new legal precedent. When asked about stipulating participation in medical treatment to mitigate damages associated with a claim, attending therapy was supported the most amongst the groups (80% of participants felt this was somewhat or fully appropriate), followed by a reduction in drinking quantity (58%), and abstinence (18%). In all three groups, we identified associations between certain views and opinions on AUD and support for the new legal precedent.

conclusionsWhilst there were differences between the stakeholder groups in their regard for and views of AUD, all three adopted a clear harm-reduction approach with respect to measures to mitigate damages associated with the insurance disability claim. A possible connection of this stance with the Swiss national drug policy in recent years is discussed together with limitations of the study and practical implications of the findings.

Indexed as

AlcoholismInsurance, DisabilityAlcohol DrinkingHumansLawyersSwitzerlandAddiction-specialist therapistsAlcohol use disorderDisability insuranceDisease model of addictionInsurance medical expertsLawyersMoralist/choice viewSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID36303216
PMCPMC9615404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.