Rasch analysis of the illness management and recovery scale-clinician version

Assessing the Psychometric Properties of the Illness Management and Recovery Scale: A Systematic Review Using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN)

The Illness Management and Recovery Scale (IMR-S) is based on the IMR program, developed to assess the recovery process for people with severe mental disorders by considering the perceptions of clients and clinicians involved in it. The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of the IMR-S so as to determine the reliability and suitability of its scores for evaluating recovery. Two coders searched five databases for studies, published between January 2004 and May 2023, that describe the psychometric assessment of the IMR-S. Studies were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. Finally, 46 papers were included. Methodological quality was very good for most of the studies that provide information on internal validity, and limited for those that report on responsiveness. Measurement properties were positive for convergent validity and measurement error. The quality of evidence was high for structural validity studies. Although this study only includes research published in English and may have overlooked certain psychometric properties evaluated in studies published in other languages, our findings suggest that the IMR-S is a valid and reliable instrument, demonstrating its potential to offer guidance for clinical practice.

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of Illness Management and Recovery Scale-Patient form

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to provide the Turkish version of the Illness Management and Recovery Scale-Patient (IMRS-P) form and to determine its psychometric properties.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This is a descriptive and correlation study. The sample of this study consisted of 75 people with schizophrenia. Translation and content validity, confirmatory factor analyses were used to test the validity and reliability of the scales.

RESULTS

The content validity index was found to be 0.93. The scale had a three-factor structure, which subscales were 0.69 for recovery, 0.69 for management, and 0.35 for substance. The Cronbach's alpha was determined as 0.76.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The Turkish version of the IMRS-P form is a valid and reliable scale for Turkish patients.

Illness management and recovery: one-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial in Danish community mental health centers: long-term effects on clinical and personal recovery

BACKGROUND

Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) is a curriculum-based rehabilitation program for people with severe mental illness with the short-term aim of improving illness self-management and the long-term aim of helping people achieve clinical and personal recovery.

METHOD

Participants with schizophrenia or bipolar disorders were recruited from three community mental health centers in the Capital Region of Denmark and randomized to receive group-based IMR and treatment as usual or only the usual intervention. All outcomes were assessed at baseline, postintervention, and the one-year follow-up. Long-term outcomes were categorized according to clinical recovery (i.e., symptoms, global functioning, and hospitalization) and personal recovery (i.e., hope and personal agency). Generalized linear mixed model regression analyses were used in the intent-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 198 participants were included. No significant differences were found between the IMR and control groups in the Global Assessment of Functioning one year after the intervention, nor were there significant differences in symptoms, number of hospital admissions, emergency room visits, or outpatient treatment.

CONCLUSION

The present IMR trial showed no significant effect on clinical and personal recovery at the one-year follow-up. Together with the results of other IMR studies, the present study indicates that the effect of IMR on symptom severity is unclear, which raises questions regarding the impact of IMR on functioning. Additionally, IMR did not affect personal recovery. Although more research is needed, the results indicate that the development of other interventions should be considered to help people with severe mental illness achieve a better level of functioning and personal recovery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01361698 ).

Chinese version of the Recovery Self-Assessment scale: psychometric evidence from Rasch analysis and reliability estimates

BACKGROUND

The Recovery Self-Assessment (RSA) is a popular and well-validated instrument for assessing recovery-oriented service around the world.

AIMS

This study aims to develop a Chinese version of the RSA, which assesses the recovery orientation of hospital-based mental health services.

METHODS

We conducted forward and backward translations of the RSA and modify the translated Chinese based on comments by content experts. We recruited 350 people with mental illnesses who regularly attend hospital and community mental health services. The participants completed the Chinese Recovery Self-Assessment Service User version (CRSA-SU) and convergent measures on hope and mental well-being.

RESULTS

The Rasch analysis supported five of the six factors in the instrument and suggests that the "Life Goal" factor could be further split into two factors. We identified three misfit items (items 6, 12 and 17) that could be considered for removal. Both the internal consistency and test-retest reliability are between satisfactory and very good within each subscale, with the exception of the Choice subscale. The seven subscales had low positive correlations with measures of hope and mental well-being, which supported the convergent validity of CRSA-SU.

CONCLUSIONS

The results supported the factor structure, reliability and validity of the CRSA-SU.

Consumer factors predicting level of treatment response to illness management and recovery

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify consumer-level predictors of level of treatment response to illness management and recovery (IMR) to target the appropriate consumers and aid psychiatric rehabilitation settings in developing intervention adaptations.

METHOD

Secondary analyses from a multisite study of IMR were conducted. Self-report data from consumer participants of the parent study (n = 236) were analyzed for the current study. Consumers completed prepost surveys assessing illness management, coping, goal-related hope, social support, medication adherence, and working alliance. Correlations and multiple regression analyses were run to identify self-report variables that predicted level of treatment response to IMR.

RESULTS

Analyses revealed that goal-related hope significantly predicted level of improved illness self-management, F(1, 164) = 10.93, p < .001, R2 = .248, R2 change = .05. Additionally, we found that higher levels of maladaptive coping at baseline were predictive of higher levels of adaptive coping at follow-up, F(2, 180) = 5.29, p < .02, R2 = .38, R2 change = .02. Evidence did not support additional predictors.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Previously, consumer-level predictors of level of treatment response have not been explored for IMR. Although 2 significant predictors were identified, study findings suggest more work is needed. Future research is needed to identify additional consumer-level factors predictive of IMR treatment response in order to identify who would benefit most from this treatment program. (PsycINFO Database Record

A systematic review of clinician-rated instruments to assess adults' levels of functioning in specialised public sector mental health services

BACKGROUND

Functioning is one of the key domains emphasised in the routine assessment of outcomes that has been occurring in specialised public sector mental health services across Australia since 2002, via the National Outcomes and Casemix Collection. For adult consumers (aged 18-64), the 16-item Life Skills Profile (LSP-16) has been the instrument of choice to measure functioning. However, review of the National Outcomes and Casemix Collection protocol has highlighted some limitations to the current approach to measuring functioning. A systematic review was conducted to identify, against a set of pre-determined criteria, the most suitable existing clinician-rated instruments for the routine measurement of functioning for adult consumers.

METHOD

We used two existing reviews of functioning measures as our starting point and conducted a search of MEDLINE and PsycINFO to identify articles relating to additional clinician-rated instruments. We evaluated identified instruments using a hierarchical, criterion-based approach. The criteria were as follows: (1) is brief (<50 items) and simple to score, (2) is not made redundant by more recent instruments, (3) relevant version has been scientifically scrutinised, (4) considers functioning in a contemporary way and (5) demonstrates sound psychometric properties.

RESULTS

We identified 20 relevant instruments, 5 of which met our criteria: the LSP-16, the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, the Illness Management and Recovery Scale-Clinician Version, the Multnomah Community Ability Scale and the Personal and Social Performance Scale.

CONCLUSION

Further work is required to determine which, if any, of these instruments satisfy further criteria relating to their appropriateness for assessing functioning within relevant service contexts, acceptability to clinicians and consumers, and feasibility in routine practice. This should involve seeking stakeholders' opinions (e.g. about the specific domains of functioning covered by each instrument and the language used in individual items) and testing completion rates in busy service settings.

Illness management and recovery in community practice

OBJECTIVE

To examine provider competence in providing Illness Management and Recovery (IMR), an evidence-based self-management program for people with severe mental illness, and the association between implementation supports and IMR competence.

METHOD

IMR session recordings, provided by 43 providers/provider pairs, were analyzed for IMR competence using the IMR Treatment Integrity Scale. Providers also reported on receipt of commonly available implementation supports (e.g., training, consultation).

RESULTS

Average IMR competence scores were in the "needs improvement" range. Clinicians demonstrated low competence in several IMR elements: significant other involvement, weekly action planning, action plan follow-up, cognitive-behavioral techniques, and behavioral tailoring for medication management. These elements were commonly absent from IMR sessions. Competence in motivational enhancement strategies and cognitive-behavioral techniques differed based on the module topic covered in a session. Generally, receipt of implementation supports was not associated with increased competence; however, motivational interviewing training was associated with increased competence in action planning and review.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

IMR, as implemented in the community, may lack adequate competence and commonly available implementation supports do not appear to be adequate. Additional implementation supports that target clinician growth areas are needed. (PsycINFO Database Record