Jessica L Bourdon, Sidney Judson, Taylor Fields, Sabrina Verdecanna, Nehal P Vadhan, Jon Morgenstern
{"title":"Self-Reported Sobriety Labels: Perspectives from Alumni of Inpatient Addiction Treatment.","authors":"Jessica L Bourdon, Sidney Judson, Taylor Fields, Sabrina Verdecanna, Nehal P Vadhan, Jon Morgenstern","doi":"10.2147/SAR.S470780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a lack of consensus in the addiction field as to how to refer to alumni of residential treatment who no longer use substances or who reduce their use. In the literature, this label and broader identity are typically discussed in technical (amount and frequency of use) or social terms (environment and social network changes).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current paper seeks to simplify the discussion by focusing on personal labels without complex technical or social considerations. Alumni of an inpatient addiction treatment facility were asked how they refer to themselves regarding their sobriety status post-discharge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-nine patients were contacted 3 months post-discharge from a residential inpatient addiction treatment (men = 67%; <i>M</i>age = 47.75 years). The patients completed a post-discharge assessment that was conducted by a trained research assistant over a 20-minute video call. The current study focused on a \"sobriety label\" measure in which patients indicated what they want to be called. Patients also explained why they chose their answer in an open-ended question.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most patients identified as <i>in recovery</i> (<i>n</i> = 29; 59.18%) followed by <i>a sober person</i> (n = 7; 14.29%) and four other responses. No alum selected the <i>in remission</i> option, which is notably a common way to refer to patients who no longer use substances.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current study adds a critical patient/alumni perspective to the existing body of literature and serves as a call to action for researchers to add a similar \"sobriety label\" measure to future assessments, studies, and batteries in effort to bring consistency to the labels, definitions, and identities that are published. This methodology of understanding how this population identifies will create uniformity in future literature and decrease the stigma surrounding addiction.</p>","PeriodicalId":22060,"journal":{"name":"Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11283828/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/SAR.S470780","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: There is a lack of consensus in the addiction field as to how to refer to alumni of residential treatment who no longer use substances or who reduce their use. In the literature, this label and broader identity are typically discussed in technical (amount and frequency of use) or social terms (environment and social network changes).
Objective: The current paper seeks to simplify the discussion by focusing on personal labels without complex technical or social considerations. Alumni of an inpatient addiction treatment facility were asked how they refer to themselves regarding their sobriety status post-discharge.
Methods: Forty-nine patients were contacted 3 months post-discharge from a residential inpatient addiction treatment (men = 67%; Mage = 47.75 years). The patients completed a post-discharge assessment that was conducted by a trained research assistant over a 20-minute video call. The current study focused on a "sobriety label" measure in which patients indicated what they want to be called. Patients also explained why they chose their answer in an open-ended question.
Results: Most patients identified as in recovery (n = 29; 59.18%) followed by a sober person (n = 7; 14.29%) and four other responses. No alum selected the in remission option, which is notably a common way to refer to patients who no longer use substances.
Conclusion: The current study adds a critical patient/alumni perspective to the existing body of literature and serves as a call to action for researchers to add a similar "sobriety label" measure to future assessments, studies, and batteries in effort to bring consistency to the labels, definitions, and identities that are published. This methodology of understanding how this population identifies will create uniformity in future literature and decrease the stigma surrounding addiction.