目的：將酒癮（酒精依賴）患者分類，並追蹤兩年的預後。方法：以1993年7月 至 1994 年 12 月期間，符合 DSM-IV 酒癮的診斷，而曾經在北部某精神科專科教學醫院住 院的 184 位患者為對象， 在住院期間以 Cloninger 的理論方法收集其背景資料； 並在 1997 年 3 月至 5 月透過與病患及家屬的電話訪談，追蹤他們的預後。 結果：本研究總共 追蹤 163 位病患（反應率為 88.6% ）。用�曊陘尷R將這�敼w者分為兩�憿A分別稱為甲型與 乙型。其中，甲型的酒癮者，飲酒成為習慣的年齡較大，酒精的相關問題比較少；乙型的酒 癮者則飲酒成為習慣的年齡較低，酒精的相關問題比較多，過去有犯罪記錄者也較多，又有 很明確的家族遺傳史。在 163 位的病患中，有 15.3% 是穩固的完全的緩解者（己超過兩年 ），34.3% 是屢戒屢喝的狀態（出院至評估期間仍然在喝，但曾經至少一個月未達酒癮或酒 精濫用程度者），28.2% 仍處於酒癮的狀態，22.1% 則已死亡。結論：酒癮的分類是可行的 ，但本研究所使用的方法，顯示兩型酒癮的預後並沒有顯著的差異，這樣的結果需要繼續的 研究予以驗證。

　　　　　Objectives: To classify male alcoholic patients according to drinking history, behavior and family history of alcoholism and to determine how such classification relates to two-year outcome following a detoxification and rehabilitation program. Methods: All patients who met DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence and had been admitted to our psychiatric hospital for a detoxification and rehabilitation program during the period from July 1993 to December 1994 were included in the study. On admission, each patient was interviewed and data on drinking history and behaviors considered in the variables of Cloninger's theory of typology of alcoholism were collected. From March to May 1997, the drinking status of these patients was followed up by telephone interview of the patient and the significant others. Results: One hundred and sixty three cases were identified and were enrolled in the study. Two major types of alcoholism were classified according to cluster analysis based on drinking history, behavior and family history of alcoholism. Subjects with a late onset of habitual drinking and few alcohol-related problems were categorized as type I. Subjects with an early onset of habitual drinking, a high number of alcohol-related problems, extensive criminal record or who were associated with a family history of alcoholism were categorized as type Ⅱ. After two years, 15.3% of cases remained in sustained remission, 34.3% suffered periodic relapse and recovery, 28.2% remained alcoholic and 22.1% were dead. Conclusion: Type Ⅱ alcoholic patients had a better two-year outcome than type I, but the difference was not statistically significant. Further study is needed to assess differences in the risk factors by recovery among types of alcoholic patients in order to improve the design of rehabilitation program.