Exploring the Factor Structure of a Recovery Assessment Measure among Substance-Abusing Youth

Impact of a brief intervention to improve engagement in a recovery program for young adults with serious mental illness

OBJECTIVE

Serious mental illnesses (SMI) commonly emerge during young adulthood. Effective treatments for this population exist; however, engagement in treatment is a persistent challenge. This study examines the impact of Just Do You (JDY), an innovative intake-focused intervention designed to improve engagement in treatment and enhance personal recovery.

METHODS

The study used a parallel group randomized trial to examine if and how JDY improved recovery among 121 young adults with SMI from low-resourced communities referred to personalized recovery-oriented services (PROS). Measures of engagement (buy-in and attendance) and personal recovery in this pilot study were assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Participants in JDY reported more positive engagement outcomes; that is, relative to the control group they reported higher past two week attendance (b = 0.72, p < 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.56) and higher levels of buy-in to treatment (b = 2.42, p < 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.50). JDY also impacted young adults' personal recovery (b = 0.99, p < 0.05, Cohen's d = 1.15) and did so largely by increasing their level of buy-in to the treatment program.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that an engagement intervention for young adults that orients, prepares, and empowers them to be active and involved in the larger treatment program makes a difference by improving engagement and enhancing recovery. Data also support conceptualizing and examining engagement beyond treatment attendance; in this study what mattered most for recovery was the level of buy-in to treatment among young adults.

Context Matters: Home-level But Not Individual-Level Recovery Social Capital Predicts Residents' Relapse

The purpose of this study is to contribute to the literature on the prediction of substance use relapse, using sophisticated systems' approaches to individuals and their contexts. In the current study of 42 recovery homes, we investigated the construct of social capital from the perspective of both recovery home residents and the house level. A confirmatory factor analysis found a latent recovery factor (including elements of recovery capital, comprising resources such as wages, self-efficacy, stress, self-esteem, quality of life, hope, sense of community, and social support) at both the individual and the recovery house level. Next, using longitudinal data from homes, an individual's probability of relapse was found to be related to house rather than individual-level latent recovery scores. In other words, an individual's probability of relapse was primarily related to the average of the "recoveries" of his or her recovery home peers, and not of his or her own personal "recovery" status. The finding that resident relapse is based primarily upon the total recovery capital available in the homes highlights the importance of the social environment for recovery.

What matters: Factors impacting the recovery process among outpatient mental health service users

OBJECTIVE

Understanding factors that promote and hinder the recovery process for people living with serious mental illness remains of critical importance. We examine factors, including limited literacy, associated with mental health recovery among public mental health service users.

METHOD

This study uses data from a mixed-methods, service-user informed project focused on the impact of limited literacy in the lives of people with serious mental illness. Data from structured interviews evaluate perceptions of recovery as assessed with the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS). Regression models examine factors related to recovery controlling for sociodemographic factors, literacy, neurocognition, mental health status, perceived social support, and stigma.

RESULTS

Despite bivariate relationships between RAS and limited literacy, the full models suggest that other factors account for this relationship. These include mental health status, higher social support, higher self-reported community status, and higher stigma consciousness, as well as race for some models.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Our findings that social support and perceptions of community status are associated with higher scores on the RAS echo prior work demonstrating the importance of social connection and context in mental health recovery. Though literacy was not a predictor of recovery, further research should examine the relationship between literacy and recovery given the deep literature on literacy on health outcomes. In order to better support people in the recovery process it is important that more research is done to examine the complex relationship between stigma consciousness and recovery as well as understand the racial disparities that exist within the recovery subscales. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Recovery as Life Transformation: Examining the Relationships between Recovery, Hope, and Relapse

Models of holistic recovery that focus on wellbeing in recovery are emerging in the field of substance use treatment, but the literature shows little research on the mechanisms of change within these models. The authors present hope as significant factor. Although hope is a considered a vital factor of substance use recovery, empirical research on the relationships between recovery and hope is sparse. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to examine (a) the association between recovery progress on risk of relapse and (b) the mediating role of hope in the relationship between recovery progress and risk of relapse. Methods: Our cross-sectional study included a community sample of 412 U.S. adults. Using a structural equation model, we examined relationships among recovery progress, risk of relapse, and hope. Results: The mediation model indicated a significant negative relationship between recovery progress and risk of relapse. Furthermore, it demonstrated that hope partially mediates the effect of recovery progress on risk of relapse. Conclusions: The findings provide empirical support for holistic recovery models of recovery and prevention of relapse. Further implications of these findings are discussed.

Recovery assessment scale: Examining the factor structure of the German version (RAS-G) in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

BACKGROUND

The recovery framework has found its way into local and national mental health services and policies around the world, especially in English speaking countries. To promote this process, it is necessary to assess personal recovery validly and reliably. The Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) is the most established measure in recovery research. The aim of the current study is to examine the factor structure of the German version of the RAS (RAS-G).

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-six German-speaking clients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder from a community mental health service completed the RAS-G plus measures of recovery attitudes, self-stigma, psychotic symptoms, depression, and functioning. A confirmatory factor analysis of the original 24-item RAS version was conducted to examine its factor structure, followed by reliability and validity testing of the extracted factors.

RESULTS

The CFA yielded five factors capturing 14 items which showed a substantial overlap with the original subscales Personal Confidence and Hope, Goal and Success Orientation, Willingness to Ask for Help, Reliance on Others, and No Domination by Symptoms. The factors demonstrated mean to excellent reliability (0.59-0.89) and satisfactory criterial validity by positive correlations with measures of recovery attitudes and functioning, and negative correlations with measures of self-stigma, and psychotic and depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results are discussed in the light of other studies examining the factor structure of the RAS. Overall, they support the use of the RAS-G as a means to promote recovery oriented services, policies, and research in German-speaking countries.